I wouldn’t call “totally at the mercy of fighters, sardine can maps, idiotic shared spotting, and having objectives which barely if at all matter to match outcome” “useable” by any means. A better description would be they “exist,” and are playable in a technical sense, but they are far from “useful” to their teams in 99% of matches.
Attackers and bombers deciding matches on their own is and was just as bad as Air PvP doing the same. Hence why I proposed limiting each of the three objectives to no more than half the ticket bar. Nobody can seem to agree on which should be the most important - fighter mains bellowing their cries of “but muh skill” versus diehard history buffs who point out air superiority only acted as an enabler for CAS and bombing will never resolve well. Hence I said “to hell with both of you” and proposed taking away the sole importance for match outcome from both camps to make them get along.
This is because in prop tiers, markers place unfair advantages on certain plane traits over others (climb rate, turn radius, instakill guns), and in higher ranks, radar-based spotting makes markers simply redundant.
That would only hold water if nonfighters were solely AI set-pieces on maps, and player units were just purebred fighters.
If an entire plane class’s main purpose is just to be tasty bait to initiate hairballs, it may as well not exist in the game at all.
I found the old airfield destruction funny, but recognized long ago that it was just as stupid as PvP auto-winning games is. Same with CAS rushing all the ground units dead in 5 minutes. Teamwork between different plane classes will never be encouraged so long as each goal can win games all on its own. Which means nonfighters become usually dead weight, and on the rare occasion one isn’t, it gets whined into oblivion until it is.
If WT was designed to be PvP only, we would only have fighters as playable vehicles.
Now if only you could somehow inject this line of thought into the crowd asking for tank-only mode…
The only people it would hurt are the “toxic fighter mains” who look down on nonfighters as “skill-less trash.” The people who feel insulted when you even suggest that requiring more than PvP alone to win a match here.
It would help everyone else. Which thankfully is the majority of the playerbase.
The biggest question would be “how do you balance a plane class whose main job is to do something in preferably absence of enemy air resistance?”
This is where a large part of the idea on limiting each objective to 50% of the ticket bar stems from. After air superiority is secured, nonfighters still have an important job to do. What is not known is how exactly would you “balance” the enemy team being totally annihilated and thus there being no resistance left.
The popular RB EC mode solves this by allowing endless respawns, so neither side fully runs out of planes.
How a single spawn mode would allow such, I have no real idea other than just run with it.
How is wanting fighters to share the importance a bad thing? We have sometimes half of several tech trees of planes that are meant to focus on PvE, saying it should never be important condemns all such planes to uselessness or abuse with nothing in between.
And there are no other game modes where such machines properly belong.
Bombers only “work” in Simulator due to retaining mouse aim gunners and 3rd person gunner camera while fighters wobble all over the place. This is really just abuse of mismatched game mechanics forcing bombers to “work.” EC also generally lasts long enough to allow bombers to do their job properly.
Combined Ground/Combined Naval modes are NOT a “proper” place for dedicated nonfighters. In both cases, a fighter with bombs is infinitely more survivable in the face of air defenses, both on the ground/water and in the air. Which means dedicated attackers and bombers are still shafted, being funny at best and useless at worst.
Why would you ever use a Helldiver instead of an F6F-5 to sink a player ship in Naval? Lower BR, better payload, much faster, and much more capable of defending itself/dodging flak.
Why would you ever use a Helldiver instead of a Corsair to bomb a player tank? Again, lower BR, better payload, much faster, and also better capable of defending itself.
And the Helldiver is somewhat like a fighter, even. The comparison gets astronomically worse if you replaced that with say, a PBJ-1…
Problems arose in years past when bombing and CAS could consistently end rounds before PvP could. It was the reverse of what is going on today - PvE objectives were making PvP irrelevant.
Hence why I arrived at the conclusion “to put an end to this argument, neither of the two can be allowed to end rounds on its own, since they’ll never agree anyways.”
No offense man - but i am not sure if you know what you are talking about.
The SM 92 is indeed an excellent high alt and turnfighter - able to outturn most good turning aircraft (incl. Typhoons, XP-50 & Co.) - but why do you think it should be classified as a fighter???
The AD-2/4 plus the AM-1 can be flown effectively if their pilots avoid vertical dogfights - and all 410s are basically free kills in Air RB if their enemies avoid headons…
And the B7A2 is an excellent fighter - it has zero problems with Yak-3s and other agile and nimble fighters if they are not Spits, A6Ms or Ki-61s. And the B7A2 has a bombsight and was developed as multi-role bomber (torp/dive/horizontal) - whilst the SB2C has like the Brigand not even a bombsight.
As explained above - a bomber defines itself via a bombsight. Basically all JP carrier based bombers had the option to be used as level bombers - therefore they needed and had bomb sights - the USN had not these options, their hardware was either a dive- or a torpedo bomber…
They can be useful, just not able to end the game by killing bots.
No, we are not removing markers.
Ok, so a teams superior skill shouldnt win them the game? More of you just saying we need to emphasize PvE over PvP.
I mean, the point of fighters is to shoot down attackers and bombers, and you just want them to pound bots in peace?
How? Markers are good for the game. I get to pick my engagements and (most of the time) not have to deal with some guy i didnt see coming out of nowhere and killing me.
Id be happy removing airspawns from all bombers if you just want it gone from these.
No, it doesnt. It is a good way to increase situational awareness.
I seriously need to know how a skill based win condition is a stupid idea. You learn NOTHING and gain NOTHING from shooting at harmless bots.
Behold, the atrocious reality of no-markers gameplay. For emphasis, this is backlit by a sunset, and with a haze in the background, and at the start of the match when everyone is somewhere reasonably predictable. The pinnacle of ideal conditions.
And even here, at a mere ~6km (aka the edge of engagement range), everyone is still a pixel.
Cool. You know where the engagement is, and can clearly see the targets with the most energy. work your way down from there. All your complaints with no markers are answered for
The point of fighters is to kill attackers and bombers yes, but why bother flying attackers and bombers when the scale is tipped so far in one direction. Yes, if your team loses air superiority you should expect to get shot down sooner or later. The way it is now you virtually have to fly into the furball to attack said ground targets, while every fighter in a 15km radius knows exactly where you are and what plane youre in.
I think fighters should be forced to actively hunt for and destroy attackers and bombers by finding them at multiple different seperated ground attack areas and not just point and click at them because “markers say theres a vulnerable plane over here with no support”.
If you dive to the deck after an attacker i think you should be running the risk of there being an allied fighter somewhere around that you cant see waiting to pounce on you for doing so. The existence of markers just gives you the all clear. Its glorified arcade battles.
Regardless, we wouldnt even be needing to have this discussion if theyd just bring back air RB EC, that way people who like how it is now can keep playing it and people who want the slightly more difficult mode can play EC. Why they removed it is beyond me, couldve even just kept it at rooms like SB
If you can see it and get into a good position before you attack, guess what? It does not really matter if its a K-4 or a P-51H. And if you must find out, you can check the BR of the match and the battle log.
If this idea wants to “promote teamwork” then its the fighters job to escort an attacker.
And my experience with ever shooting at bots as a striker (for SL wagers) actually leaves you relatively safe (at 6.0BR at least), due to most players knowing better than to dump all their energy for some attacker.
So i essentially get forced to throw my advantages away because there arent markers? Absolutely not.
There is a good reason i dont fly arcade. It is skill free, everything is a UFO, and just overall trash and not enjoyable past biplane tiers.
I play RB for realistic flight performance, skilled gameplay and a generally enjoyable PvP experience. I will NOT go to arcade.
Oh, so i could just be losing all my energy for a plane that might not even be there?
AGAIN, markers are GOOD and enable COUNTERPLAY. I could see some random plane in the distance, he is flying towards me, and i dont know how to start the fight, because it could be a Spitfire, P-47 or even a Zero.
Further assuming marker removal affects missiles, you are simply just ruining toptier because AIM-9M exists.
Battle log doesnt help because i cant see his username. You are clueless.
Knowing range and aircraft type is how you determine a good position to start? You are also forgetting you have to look even harder to see your enemies, and are at a much higher risk of getting jumped.
The problem is that prop Air RB and Jet Air RB have basically the same functionalities and mechanics; there are just minor differences (af aaa, air spawn for certain planes, etc.).
So if you talk about layout, game objectives or game play changes all BRs are affected.
As stated in my post #100 - your suggestion make a lot of sense regarding immersion and enhanced game play - but for things that affect all BRs (like weather or markers) you have to live with deviating opinions or views of prop players - if you like it or not.
So alone this markers discussion is pure nonsense - there will be no hard cut at a certain BR so that they vanish. @BleedingUranium has explained why they are there - this explains also why they won’t vanish.
Increasing immersion and realism starts with basic things.
Reducing this artificially stabilized behaviour of aircraft whilst using mouse aim to a way more realistic response like with using a joystick would be a start. I get sick when i see rookies on “point and click” adventures without any clue how hard it is to bring guns on target even with Simplified Flight Controls.
So reducing the accuracy of mouse aim and flight stabilization whilst still allowing the majority to use a mouse would be a start.
What do you want with a highly sophisticated game play with AWACS & Cruise Missiles if you still have this highly sterile and soulless steering mechanism?
Knowing what plane is coming at you does enable counterplay yes, it enables easymode counterplay like playing a chess game vs a bot. "Oh, theres a spitfire 10km away at my alt? Im just gonna avoid him until im sufficiently above him. Or say youre in a spit and see a fw190 at your alt far away, ofcourse youre just going to B line it straight for him. Its simplifies tactics to a rock paper scissors brain dead game. With no markers youre forced to be a fair bit more cautious in your aproach and feel out the area around you before you make any moves.
But, as i said before in a previous comment, i wouldnt even be needing to have the argument with you if they just implemented RB EC. Id happily go fart around over there and stop annoying everyone with my ideal game mode suggestions and leave this as is. Unfortunately gaijin thinks it ruins their grinding model or some other bs, so they know people want it, they just refuse to implement it because “game design hard”.
You can pull up my stat card if you want, im probably the most dogshit player youve ever seen.
Nevertheless these are my ideas and i think theyd be good either in this gamemode, or, to your preference, in a seperate distinct gamemode (RB EC)
Considering you are actually making arguments that are somewhat logical to improve the game (even if we dont share similar views), You probably arent that bad. Maybe average or something.
It is actually pretty damn hard to be worse than some pilots, believe it or not, which is kinda funny.
