By reducing player count you’re also reducing total RP/SL that can be gained in a match.
This is a problem if you aren’t reducing the play time at the same time.
1 Like
I mean that’s more a byproduct of the rafale being straight up stupid and unfair to fight, if it got nuked down to reasonable levels, it wouldn’t be problematic.
True, and I def wish they would cut the “Rewards tied to match time” mechanic, it’s frustrating.
This is very true
And that’s the thing, the gamemode should incentivize getting frags for better progression instead of just rushing towards bases. 8v8 is a step towards it, yet it should be alongside changes related to the mode’s economy, so people get incentives from game design (8v8, engagements with deeper strategies) to learn how to position themselves, use their weapon systems and, eventually, get good enough.
As said above, below average players doesn’t necessarily benefit from isolated engagements, they either fail on positioning, spotting or weapon system to choose, or all of the prior combined. A significant amount of the playerbase manages to get one frag or two at most because of how chaotic 16v16 or even 12v12 is, and that gets the economy rolling so far.
I have to agree on this, but I wanna stop briefly on the “shorter matches = more matches” point, as the activity % takes a huge blow on short games, resulting on deflated rewards.
1 Like
Yeah… it can vary heavily.
Because i’ve had 16v16 matches that didnt necessarily last that long and i’ve had others that got dragged out for ages.
I suppose its a matter of averages rather than on a per match basis.
So i think honestly, it would need a test event to actually see what the real world results would be.
Though I do still think a reduction to 12v12 as the default, with opt in for 8v8 and 16v16 would be the best solution
Frankly though, it isn’t really a problem at the moment, but this might be a consideration that Gaijin will have to make following the proper implementation of stealth and Fifth-generation aircraft (SU-57, F-22A, F-35A)
at which point activity time shouldnt be an issue because it will just be 5th gens aimlessly wandering about trying to find each other most of the matches, which is why I really hope stealth is heavily mitigated
1 Like
I think leaving the 16v16 for lower tiers like below 10.0 or 11.0 and implementing 10v10 for the BR’s where radar missiles become more common would work alongside that. I have a lot of friends (who are more average then me) that can’t stand top tier air due to being overwhelmed but have no issues below 12.0 .
Maybe.
When I do play lower BRs, I think the mass of players can almost be worse at times, but… and here is the big thing. The map sizes make sense for sub 10.0, which is probably why it doesnt feel as bad.
The time it takes for a subsonic jet let alone a prop, to travel around the current map sizes is somewhat meaningful, at top tier it is not, and thats without factoring in weapon range ontop of that.
So I think it could all lead back to map density/sizes rather than team sizes
Really depends A LOT on the platform too. It’s easier to fly a rafale at top tier than a 14.0 hornet for example.
yea but regardless of map size at top tier you have to consider missile saturation won’t change even with map 50% bigger as most of the missiles have enough range to reach out and bother people at 40-50km.
Yeah, and thats just the inherrent nature of modern fighter combat. Which I dont personally mind, if anything I prefer BVR over WVR.
But in something like a Harrier, its gunna be a few minutes before im even thinking about firing a missile, let alone actually doing it.
in a Typhoon im planning my first shot within seconds of spawning in.
If the maps were 256x256… there might actually be a meaningful delay
1 Like