I would love an additional modifier, but there shouldn’t be any reductions.
But they are able to. A heavy bomber has guns on it for a reason. By using them, you are protecting yourself so you can do what you were meant to do.
If it was unintended, why is it allowed and possible? Gunshipping on bombers never works. Some fighters absolutely can play the role of an attacker, and vice versa.
Needlessly complicated, and doesn’t fix anything wrong with the game.
Culling rewards is bad no matter what. Why should a bomber be forced to earn pennies because it defended itself on it’s way to do what it was meant to do.
So I am forced to earn nearly nothing because I chose the wrong plane? What kinda weird logic is that?
You are advocating for the game to be made 10x worse and 10x more toxic.
God no. Pummeling defenseless bots in an AIR COMBAT mode is not a good way to decide the outcome. We are here for PvP not PvE. As it currently stands, air RB is a brainrot festival where the premium aircraft grind and is generally skilless. I would NOT like to see this made even worse by killing bots becoming the main objective.
Because this is an air combat mode. There is a place for these aircraft in the game, it is called GROUND RB. As people have been saying aout the A-10 and such, they are intended to be ground attackers, not meta defining threats in an air battle mode.
With most of the playerbase just bombing, being premium aircraft and unskilled pilots, teamwork will not end up working. In current air RB, having a team that works together is extremely rare and only ever happens in the very late stages of the game.
Air RB. It is in the name what the objective is, being air combat.
Go to sim, this has already been violently shot down in another topic.
I took the effort to defeat all of my enemies. As all of the enemy players are defeated, i have won the game. I should not need to waste my time on useless objectives or leave the game and lose.
Go play sim if you dont want markers. Spotting is already bad enough.
They werent intended to be good for air combat. Go use them in ground or naval.
There is no connection. A6M5 is so overtiered because bad players attempt to turnfight it. F4U-1A is generally just piloted by very bad players who will attempt to turn with the first thing they see.
Markers are great for game health. Removing them just generally makes paying attention to large amounts of enemies even harder. This is also pretty huge in missile tiers, where removing spotting you screw over everything with bad/no radar or rwr.
I can kind of see the benefit of no markers, I personally really like it in GRB - well, most of the time. I’m mature enough to know this is a fringe case, but my eyesight is a bit fucked even with glasses, which only somewhat fix my nearsightedness. It’s a weird case since I’m not BLIND without them, in fact I can se relatively well for a decent enough distance, but it has funny issues in WT specifically - regardless of if I’m on my potato laptop that needs to run on ULQ or on my PC that can run the highest settings, I tend to not be able to see unmarked planes well unless they’re either skylining with high contrast (green plane blue sky) or literally within a kilometer of me and moving erratically - even then, a lot of the time I struggle spotting them and the only help is if I catch a glimpse of that white shit coming off the wings when you turn (English isn’t my native language, sorry).
It’s usually fine for me in GRB, it feels fair since engagements are close anyway and I have my ways to be competent if I hop into CAS, but in ARB I’d be damn near entirely incompetent because I can not see a damn thing. I’ve even had issues of mistaking point blank destroyed tanks for live ones in GRB - either I’m even more blind than I think and my brain is substituting what it think I SHOULD be seeing with what I’m, well, NOT, or my brain is otherwise completely fried. Either way, no markers in ARB would make me entirely useless, and your idea would be pointless if they were something you can toggle bc who the hell wouldn’t toggle them on, eyesight issues or no?
Sorry for the rant and bad formatting. Eyes are starting to, uh, idk itch or whatever. Dry ass mfrs. I might have to start buying eye drops. My left one even gets blurry sometimes so I’m just rushing to type this.
I’m not sure how a gamemode where i can enjoy fighter gameplay is a bad thing? Again why am i playing AIR BATTLES to kill bots and not actual human players?
Because as usual, lord snail can’t balance anything.
How does my opinion on air RB relate to ground???
Because like i said, low BR, bad pilots. They will try to turn with anything. Gaijin balances based on a vehicles efficiency in battle, and when you have lots of trash pilots and few good ones, stats are skewed to the lower end.
Aha, so my F-104S ASA at 11.3 can just eat shit and die? oh well… Markers are also especially important in missile tiers, ESPECIALLY when AIM-9M and AAM-3 comes into play. 16 vs 16 also absolutely kills any possibility of removing markers. MAYBE just MAYBE massive backlash in Spanish’s thread about changing markers is now hidden.
Good. It is an air superiority mode. I’m tired of seeing perfectly good fighter aircraft rocketing and bombing bases. Waste of team slots, just useless players who will do nothing and die. Furthermore, where is the fun in spawning, blowing up a base, dying and repeating? These pilots who bomb only learn to bomb, meaning when they make it to rank 8, they are bombing in an F-16.
I am not sure how you don’t understand that fighter gameplay is still the core of our suggestions.
While I don’t agree with everything @GoneToTheAether said, I agree with them that we have serious problems in ARB.
Because you are pushing for completely removing strike aircraft from ARB, thus the only place they can play is GRB, further ruining that gamemode??? I think that GRB sucks because of CAS. If we fix ARB so that all aircraft are usefull in air realistic battles maybe we can fix GRB next.
Which is universally accepted to be a bad balancing technique.
Couldn’t be further from the truth. It would be called Fighter realistic battles in that case.
Have you read our original suggestion? It would make it so that bombing is not useless as you say. It would give people who like these planes and this playstyle an actual place in ARB. They wouldn’t be second class citizens anymore.
I don’t think people who do that are having that much fun. That’s what we are trying to fix that. They are probably grinding to reach top tier, in hopes there is fun to be had there. Can you blame them? The grind is atrocious.
This is mainly what I disagree with you on. I think we can better design the gamemode so that such “toxic behavior” is not the best course of action. I believe you are jumping the gun with “0.1x for actions outside your role” and similar.
Counterpoint, and I see this a lot in Ground RB - without markers, people simply don’t know that they’re about to pull up on a Zero and will full send the fight, which will inevitably result in their demise.
This is especially true if they’re in a decently agile plane like a Yak or Spitfire.
Surprise matters more than “hold camera-stare-backward/target tracking cam:enemy button while facerolling on keyboard to prevent enemy gun solution” is why I think it leads to much better air combat, more engaging fights in general, and less third-partying in said fights.
I absolutely agree. Using the P-51 or P-47 feels way better in GRB. For me at least.
What we have focused in our original post is high tier, where there are no airspawns (well either everyone gets them or no one does). For low tiers I would also remove airspawns for stirke aircraft/attackers. Strike aircraft and attackers that can function well as fighters have no reason to have an airspawn, and this does lead to abuse.
The problem lies in that if these ground pounders (that are actually ground pounding) want to ground pound they can’t do it with fighters flying around them. So Gaijin gave them airspawns so that they can reach their targets before they get intercepted.
I would make it so that such aircraft go after their fighter teammates and can go in for their targets only after their leading fighters have achieved air superiority in front of them.
I made a quick mockup. Thick lines in the backs are airfields, crosses are bomb/strike targets, arrows are fighters and crossed arrows are strike aircraft.
Here’s how team distribution would look like before any merges. Let’s focus on the left third of the battle field.
If our fighters lose strike aircraft can divert and support a nearby group. In our mode taking out all targets would require multiple flyouts anyway, since we imagine we would have respawns.
Here’s how that could look like. Notice that the blue arrow on the left is gone, indicating that blue fighters lost.
We are playing planes that were designed for war.
We need BIG maps, big enough to the point that you need to fly high to avoid running out of fuel.
We need proper objectives. Preferably a front line, with ground targets, long range SAMS, SEAD and multiple bases. Moving front line,
We need longer games, 20 min is not REALISTIC. NOT EVEN ENOUGH TIME TO CLIMB.
We need AWACS
This has all been done in DCS years ago. Just copy it and make a light version. We don’t need to air refuel and fly for hours, but it’s a bit ridiculous right now.
Devs I beg you, make it REALISTIC so the name fits.
imagine using helis to ressuply SAMS on the front
imagine using strike aircraft to hunt the enemies SAMS,
imagine using SAMS and SPAA on an actual front to protect AI from strike aircraft
imagine playing a tank in an actual platoon
imagine flying CAP wiht a fighter and doing BVR
imagine flying helis at treetop to get behind enemy lines to hunt logistics
imagine playing an AWACS
the possibilities are endless and the potential is infinite. But here we spawning 50km from each other and fur balling like brain dead bots for 5 min praying to god that you get a kill before the furball consumes you
Yes, current EC maps and missions suck. It’s the same as normal mid sized maps for the most part. It might be slightly better because teams can spread out more, and bombers can go and bomb in peace, but it is more of the same.
Great idea, haven’t thought of that one. Could be limited to utility helicopters so that attack helis don’t steal that objective since they are faster. Not like these is much room in attack helis for cargo anyway.
Objectives in games exist for one reason: To force players to encounter other players, and have a fight. That’s it.
Whether this is AI units or bomb bases in Air RB, or cap circles in Ground, or caps/convoys in Naval, it’s all the same. A light with which to attract the moths that are players. This is the core of all PvP game design. Domination or Hardpoint in CoD, Capture the Flag or Oddball in Halo, or any other example, it’s all the same thing.
I enjoy flying all aircraft types, but any time I see a suggestion that boils down to “I want to PvE without being interrupted”, it’s something that can simply be tossed out. Because that’s contrary to the core design intent of a PvP game.
People who don’t play top tier ARB are welcome to keep their opinions to themselves. Top tier ARB is what this thread is about, as we stated in the first sentence of our post. You have no point of reference, and by commenting how our solutions are “needless” is very ignorant, as you haven’t even experienced the problems yourself.
That wasn’t meant for you. I was frustrated with that other person calling our ideas and effort “needless”. I didn’t spend hours on this for someone who barely plays the gamemode to call my efforts needless or worthless.
While you may not play top tier you gave us your view of similar problems at lower tiers, as well as some specific ones.
@BleedingUranium I don’t think you were speaking with malice, but rather it was your lack of experience with ARB in general. I still think it’s quite rude to call someone’s ideas and suggestions “needless” when you don’t even understand why we are suggesting them.
