A better simulator!

Game Discussion Simulator Battle
1

I am sure many players would like to play the game in simulator mode. but:
There are some limitations that make most players in War Thunder game not familiar with simulator type battles.

  1. In simulator battles, there is a huge airspace, most of which is not used, so that it often turns out to be a situation of flying in an almost completely empty sky, which causes instant boredom and much less tension as you see in realistic and arcade battles.

  2. There are many situations in which you will only meet with robots and not real opponents (again due to the lack of players in the platform) and meeting with real players happens rarely, therefore most players prefer a ground attack while air-to-air battles are almost completely forgotten.

  3. The boredom created in such air battles means that only players who fly in a virtual group manage to experience a drop of the straw while a single player did not find it interesting because of the infinite space that causes a single player to be swallowed up by the map.

  4. Compared to arcade battles, the player has to pay much more lions each time entering the battle (depending on the chosen tool), which discourages most players from participating in the battle for fear of losing cash.

  5. In simulator battles it is more difficult for new players to understand the goals of the battle and the lack of knowledge in addition to the difficulty that the battle takes a long time to end causes many players to get discouraged and leave the battle before it ends.

  6. Another thing that causes players to be absent from the battle is that they don’t see the end of the battle (takes a long time) compared to the arcade / realistic battle that ends in a maximum of 20 minutes.

  7. Another thing that causes simulator battles not to be used:
    The access to the battle is done in a comprehensive and complicated way that gives the player the feeling of entering an informal battle and in my opinion if the War Thunder developers arrange the servers similar to arcade and realistic battles (quick entry and maximum players) this will add a lot of life to the simulator battles.

From here and to the end, I want to send my thanks to the Raam War team who invest endlessly for their players (it goes without saying).
I want to emphasize that there may be mistakes in my report (I would appreciate it if you could write to me).
I’m not writing this to complain about War Thunder but to give an attitude in something that I thought could be improved.
I would appreciate any response from your community and we will meet in battle!!!

A better simulator!!

3 Likes
2

hello, you’re actually right on all points.
but I think not on one. the airspace is not huge. but there are too few “air” mission objectives. the A point, intercept attacker, intercept bomber, intercept recon plane and fight against player planes. there is a lack of dynamics on empty spaces with few players. but I personally prefer rooms that are not overcrowded with players. … that’s a matter of taste.

in any case the useful action reward system has a very negative effect on the mode.

Which Br. do you mainly play?

2 Likes
3

If you are asking on which server then I mostly fight in arcade battles and not because I have fun being there but more because on the realistic server I am limited to one use per battle so if I get knocked down I have to wait a long time to get flashlights.
But I do like the mechanics of a pro fight more.
In addition, I play less in battle simulator because I can’t recognize the purpose of the battle and also because as a single player I can’t feel the battle experience and the intensity that are more present in arcade and realistic battles.
By the way, thank you very much for responding to my report (it makes me feel good)

4

I agree with you however there are a few points that are necessary for this mode to remain a simulation. I am a fan of air simulator and I mainly play in simulation mode with high-tier aircraft, this must be taken into account for the context of my answer

there is a huge airspace, most of which is not used

In my opinion it is necessary that the size of the maps in simulation mode be large: no conflict in the world sees planes taking off 150km from each other to intercept each other. For me the maps should be even larger because the planes present at the highest tier can fire missiles at a range of nearly 100km, which is almost the length of the map.
For the fact that the card is empty, it is. But it’s also the same thing in an irl situation, there is never a large formation of fighter or bomber crisscrossing the sky and there are constant dogfights, modern air combat boils down more to a fight between radars and the adversary’s approach tactics to defeat him

The boredom created in such air battles means that only players who fly in a virtual group manage to experience a drop of the straw while a single player did not find it interesting because of the infinite space that causes a single player to be swallowed up by the map.

Personally I enjoy doing solo missions where I set myself the objective of destroying convoys of vehicles on the ground.It is possible to have fun alone in this game mode, although I admit that being with other players in voice gives much greater immersion.

the player has to pay much more lions each time entering the battle

It is necessary that the spawns have a certain cost, currently the only barrier that prevents players from farming by abusing the boosters of the simu mode is the cost that this represents (currently for br between 10.0 and 11.0, we see waves of players bombing airfields with F-4s and F-111s to complete the tasks of the Saber of Justice event)

In my opinion, what would make the simulator mode more enjoyable would be:

  1. Bigger maps :

Larger maps would make the simulation mode much more immersive, I am talking about maps whose dimensions would be more than 200 km on each side, these maps would allow players to benefit from the vertical aspect of the map (not razing the ground permanently ), to require good fuel management (not to be in post-combustion permanently) and would also make it possible to no longer have a problem with spawn kill, the fuel starting to be limited for the return from the aerodrome opponent

  1. High Value Target

The mechanics of bases to be destroyed have been present since the beginning of the game, it is an interesting mechanic which allows you to carry out a more or less realistic “bombardment”. However, the addition of high-value targets could be interesting, these could be areas (cities, factories, etc.) strongly defended by truly threatening ground-to-air defense sites (Patriot, Sa-2, heavy Flak, etc.). In addition, high-value targets could be added in the air domain, with AWACS or tankers.

  1. Helicopter and drone addition

The addition of helicopters in the aerial simulation game mode would be a major change in the way of flying in the game, forcing the planes to no longer stick to the ground to avoid being shot down and finally giving an interesting game mode for helicopter players. It would be the same for drones, the models are already in play, their implementation would not even be complicated. Their addition would be interesting whether as bots or as a vehicle controlled by a player

  1. Add more realism

For a simulation mode, it is a shame that we do not yet have a start in a parking lot with the need to have to taxi to the takeoff runway, that the plane spotting mechanic is not implemented on the planes surveillance so that they finally serve a purpose. In the same way it would be nice if the bots present on the maps corresponded to the right nations (I made a bug report, don’t hesitate to support it : Problems with Bots in air Simulator // Gaijin.net // Issues), at the right times, it would be more normal to see raids from F -4 in top tier than B-57 raids and that they do not crash on takeoff like in Afghanistan because the flight model does not take into account the environment and it crashes one after the other on the side of the mountains. The list of things to correct to make it a good simulator is long in my opinion but not unachievable

2 Likes
5

I really liked the order you made in things and I think you are absolutely right.
But don’t you think that World War II simulator battles need more player density?
For example, I see a big abdel in action that exists in arcade battles and simulator battles (for World War and not for modern battles) and it happens to me many times that the battle is simply empty (that is, 4 players in total on a large map) and it is harder to find the dog fights even though I’m sure there are.

You sound like one of my professionals, so could you also explain to me why it takes so long for the battle to end?
And I saw that it is possible to decide from which base to start and I am interested in why players choose to start from the far base?

2 Likes
6

don’t you think that World War II simulator battles need more player density

The player density will be difficult to change for the simulator mode: it is a long game mode which does not provide enough rewards to really attract a lot of people. On the other hand, there are solutions to fill the maps. I had discussed it with another player and we had imagined larger and more realistic bomber waves on a map like Dover Strait where large formations of B-17s could cross to destroy enemy positions, the survival of these squadrons could be important for each team’s tickets. This option would increase the plane density in the game.

The only way to increase player density in this mode would be to make it more attractive through the rewards it offers with bigger rp and sl boosters

why it takes so long for the battle to end

The objective of a battle in simulator mode is not to be short, the objective is to get as close as possible to a real combat situation, and it therefore takes time to reach an objective, carry out the task at hand and return to land. The time limit for a simulator battle is set at 3 hours but can be reduced in the event that one of the two teams no longer has tickets. This duration allows you to achieve several objectives during the same battle (you can start as a bomber, then choose a ground attacker and finish as a fighter)

why players choose to start from the far base

The players who choose to take off from the most distant airfield are those who choose the altitude, it is much more difficult to be intercepted when flying at 15k ft by fighters flying at low altitude. The further back we appear on the battlefield, the higher we can be when we reach the middle of the map. This is particularly used by heavy bomber players as it allows them to go up and avoid going down.

sound like one of my professionals

Thanks, but I’m not a professional at all, I’m an air simulation fan trying to improve this part of the game

2 Likes