Gaijin aren’t going to force players to play in smaller battles. If there aren’t enough people in the queue with the option on your not going to get one. They could advertise it better and make it clearer but I’m not sure it would change anything. I think most people like larger battles.
3 Likes
16v16 has been among the biggest complaints from players recently and it’s almost unanimously disliked. And if people really prefer more chaotic and target-rich gameplay then Arcade is the perfect option for them.
1 Like
That’s what you think. You have no evidence to support this. People who are happy don’t complain, only people who are unhappy. So you only see one side, content players are just playing the game.
5 Likes
It could be the same issue they had with night battles when they first gave the option to join them and it wasnt connecting people correctly. I dont see why the immediate reaction to something not working properly is to call the developer liars and the option is fake. Have you filed a bug report or done anything useful to help solve the issue other than running to the forums and being over dramatic with fake accusations?
It is not among the biggest complaints, but probably the one you are focused on. I have not seen anyone in game chat complaining about having to many people to shoot at. Not being able to cope with large engagements and needing smaller groups to play against custom battles is perfect option for those players.
There are too many people with skill deficiency that would rather the game be made easier for them, than learn better skills to meet the demand of the game they want to play. Next people are going to ask for no win or lose and everyone gets participation trophies because they cant stand to loose and they think they are better at something than what they are.
1 Like
Yes, hence why some would prefer 16v16. Smaller team sizes would raise the skill ceiling a significant amount.
1 Like
no it wouldn’t. Iit would make for faster battles and less RP being made and then people would have a whole new thing complaining that they nerfed RP gain since people playing in smaller matches would end sooner with less targets to shoot at and less rp and sl to be made. Smaller groups of planes doesn’t equate to raising skill level, it reduces situational awareness since there are less targets to worry about and less rewards to be made, but im sure you will just complain about slower progression and less rp and sl being made and want more changes that make small matches make the same rp and sl that full battles make.
BS, the main reason matches end so quickly is the snowball effect right when the killing starts. It would be reduced if the number of players is lower.
2 Likes
depends HEVILY on BR. in anything above rank VI your point would be more inclined to be true. on lower BR’s i think he is leaning more in the right direction.
so with less planes and the snowball effect starts then, that wold equal faster end to the game since there are less planes… you argument is completely flawed.
I know right, their argument makes no sense. Less enemies means less possible kills for the team. 1 or 2 players can get in quickly for eg, wipe a small team and other players aren’t even in the fight yet.
then they will start complaining that they arent getting enough rp from 6v6 and its gaijins fault because they nerfed it and trying to make the game harder, yada yada yada. I hope the money they make from WT is good, because all the community does is complain, cry, and accuse them of being greedy, and anti consumer. They ask for something, they get it, then they complain that they got it and saying its too hard and want a mode that removes what the community wanted in the first place. There really is no making this community happy, it seems the only happiness they have is complaining.
I’ve been having smaller matches at 12.0 ish but i can agree that id like them more often
it does exist just rare, honestly 3rd get should only get 12v12 at most and 4th gen 6v6 at most, not only it will makes matchmaking more faster it also makes the game less fucked up because AMRAAM spam
3 Likes
This is nonsense, same is this:
Situational awareness increases with smaller team sizes - less enemies means less threats, quite simple.
Imho you are entitled to have an opinion, but i see zero indicators that you have the necessary skills or produced results shown in your service record which would back up your rather strange claims.
No offense man, but you have barely a 1:1 long term K/D in Air RB and short term with 1.3 is solely a result of your usage of F-14s and nothing to write home about. I mean without spamming F-14s (and spamming Phoenixes) it is hard to find any of your aircraft with a positive K/D.
So posting such things:
Is imho a correct observation.
To make this clear:
Smaller teams leverage the experience advantage of experienced players vs rookies as they can assess their relative and absolute positioning vs enemies way easier - so the decision making process (threat assessment, target prioritization) in battles is far easier.
In total contrast to larger teams as too many opponents kills the necessary situational awareness - it doesn’t matter for props or jets. That’s why rather decent pilots prefer smaller team sizes, whilst a rookie prefers larger lobbies as their chances for a lucky shot or to catch an enemy off guard will increase - all they have to do is to find a worse pilot.
So the large amount of rookies / untrained pilots in 16 vs 16 is actively supporting steam rolling effects - skill doesn’t matter if you play either 8 vs 2 or 2 vs 8 after the first few minutes.
A fellow player described the 16 vs 16 mess more directly:
AirRB NEEDS less people - #6 by ApodyktycznyCham
No offense man, but this whole argumentation from you and @Ravanos assumes that less targets means less SL/RP.
You simply forget that the number parity in 16 vs 16 and 6 vs 6 is the same. In addition you assume that the average pilots would be able to have a positive K/D and a KpB ratio >1.0 - this is far away from reality.
In other words: RP & SL incomes requires the ability to score a kill - if the average Air RB player would have this skill, nobody would bomb bases.
On top of that - if i watch my son playing “missile thunder” - the game setup of Air RB was made for props and Cold War / 2gen jets. It is a joke if i watch with him replays seeing a single aircraft swarmed by up 4-8 missiles simultaneously - so even if you are skilled enough to notch most of them - sooner or later you get hit by a missile coming out of nowhere.
Smaller teams would simply reduce the RNG factor.
Just scroll down this thread:
400 posts dealing with 16 vs 16 - highly experienced (and actually successful) pilots see 16 vs 16 as skill, reality and immersion killer.
Edit: Flagged by trolls, awaiting forum mod review…
3 Likes
Precisely. And since everyone and their mother is playing brs 10.0+ most of the time I don’t see the classic “longer queue times” as an issue
1 Like
LMAO really you want to base things off of stats? So i went through the tech tree fast to get to the top so i didnt spend a lot of time in each br until the f-14 was at the end of the line. I dont play the game in any kind of seriousness or competitive nature, this has no effect in the accuracy of my statements.
My Su-25 has a kd of 3.02
My F-16C has a kd of 1.08
My Ah-6m has a kd of 1.51
My a-10 has a kd of 4.52
What does these stats tell you? Nothing… do you know why these stats mean absolutely nothing? They dont tell you what was an npc and what was a live player. I can go into air RB with every level of br and pad all my stats to increase my KD on every single plane just by killing the npc planes that spawn. I play mixed battles more so i have ground kills with most planes and helicopters. Stats only give numbers they dont tell a story. It doesnt disprove anything that ive said.
There is no real difference in 16 v 16 or 8v8 or 6v6. the only difference is faster games. You will not be magically better at 6v6 than you would be at 16 vs 16. If you cant learn to adapt to the current situation asking for an easier mode will not improve skills it will keep you at a lower skill level. This statement has nothing to do with stats just facts of how skill develops, with difficulty not easier conditions.
I dont think you have the life or game experience to understand how wrong you.
No one talks in WT 99% of the time, and there is no team play, unless they are friends or the rare squad play. Most people watch YT then try to jump into games and copy what they see online.
What do you think is going to be the strategy is going to be with smaller games… Everyone knows that people are going to run to the bases so 3 people go to each set of bases and wait for the base bomber to come through, shoot them down, game over in 5 min. Base bombers dont get any points, and the one person doing air to air may get one kill.
Oh yea this really shows how lack of skill i have
oh yea cant forget this one
yea im completely useless with anything but the f-14
2 Likes
There’s like 3 contradictions in that paragraph alone.
2 Likes
Just in order to show your inability to read your own stats correctly:
Air RB: Long Term (LT) & Short Term (ST = last 4 weeks):
Matches played: 2.292 LT / 837 ST
Win Rate: 50% LT / 54% ST
Player kills: 1.845 LT / 861 ST
Own deaths: 1.828 LT /664 ST
K/D: ~ 1:1 LT / 1,3:1 ST
KpB: 0,82 LT / 1,04 ST
This is all shown if you select “Air RB” in your service record. You need to hover with your mouse above the column KpB to see the actual player kills.
Don’t get me wrong - this is not about “stat-shaming” - i was simply wondering why a rather experienced player puts out such nonsense claims like in your case.
You might be able to use your aircraft in Ground RB way more successfully vs Ground units, but this is an Air RB thread - and only Air RB and Air-to-Air kills matters here. So if you refer to Air RB - you are flat wrong, otherwise you would be able to able to prove the contrary with your Short Term stats.
I really appreciate your open words like:
I dont play the game in any kind of seriousness or competitive nature
But that this not mean that if you post rather strange opinions nobody will question them.
Whatever you say man, with such claims there is simply no need to have further exchanges.
Have a good one!
3 Likes
I think you two should dool.
I guess it isn’t actually “everyone” in the community who wants this, despite the visibly vocal groups we’ve seen around. Who ever could have guessed this outcome, when the internet has only been around for several decades…
1 Like