People say the XP-50 is op when the BTD-1 gets twice to 20mm ammo and spawns at high level bomber spawns. Soooo unfair to long range/frontline bombers. Plus you don’t even have to take payload and can still climb above the bombers too.
Sorry this is nonsense.
- It spawns at tactical bomber alt (=3.5 km and 1 km below strategic bombers)
- Every experienced pilot is fully aware of that the plane can’t climb above 5 km due to the severe loss of engine power. You can simply fly away from a BTD if you are above 5.5 km.
- There is no outclimbing of strategic bombers - even a Sterling can get to a “safe” altitude before they merge. This is not valid for tactical bombers on the 4 very small “Frontline” maps, so stuff like fully loaded Do 217s or B-25s can be easily intercepted.
You might look up the player “Aerial operative” - he is and was always on top of the KpB ratings with this thing - but not with bomber kills. He managed to find the “handling” sweet spot of the BTDs and had (always) 3 kills in it - ofc with his main strategy = forced headons of enemy fighters in their climbing phase.
1 Like
Fair.
EXPERIENCED, not many bomber players are experienced a 4.0. I’ve used the BTD a decent bit, and I didn’t care enough to find out where the engine power dopped off and I use it. I doubt average people look into it.
Most of the time they don’t climb, they stay at their spawn altitude. I have had a few climb a bit but not figh enough for me to not be able to fire at them.
You are correct that experienced players with some knowledge about engine power dropoffs can counter play you well, but most people don’t ever try.
I’m okay with the bonus reward for doing the planes’ intended jobs part. However x0.1 is too much for the planes killing targets outside its chosen role - just leave it x1. Think about some aircraft that has been designed or intentionally nerfed by gaijin unable to fullify their intended jobs at the first hand lol… The A-5C can’t even finish a base on its own. F-4C air superiority role being shit unless a full downtier. The J-7D being a clown at 11,0. That sort of thing.
2 Likes
I agree that the 0.1 and 10 multipliers are extreme, but they do serve an illustrative purpose, different values, say (0.5 and 2) (0.33 and 3) (0.25 and 4) (0.2 and 5), could be nice middle grounds, bc as we all know, “The Snail giveth, and the Snail taketh away”, so while the original suggestion calls it a “penalty” it would be more accurate to say that “this is the trade-off. UPFRONT. avoiding a shadow economy nerf/change later” for rewarding players for playing to their aircraft’s strengths/intended use. In short:
IT SHOULD BE IMPACTFUL ENOUGH TO SWAY PLAYERS INDIVIDUAL OBJECTIVES, BUT NEITHER OPPRESSIVELY PUNISHING FOR ‘UN-OPTIMAL/UNINTENDED’ PLAY NOR SHOULD IT BE SO ENTICING THAT PLAYERS STOP ENGAGING WITH OTHER ELEMENTS IN THE BATTLE SPACE.
As for those complaining about markers, the presence or removal of, they should remain in some form for accessibility, however currently they are far too powerful, a possible change: planes within a few km’s have a flashing dot above or next to them, to point out the existence of an enemy, that was not shared to allies unless they are in wingtip-to-wingtip formation, (fighter pilots Irl use hand signals to communicate under radio silence, that can be your roleplay for this limitation), would be an incredibly good change to gameplay.
This would massively limit 3rd parties ability to negate the progression of a dogfight.
Especially infuriating if the 3rd party arrives as their ally is about to lose from an advantageous position/circumstance. That is, for the one killed by the third party, right before they have got the kill from a disadvantage, not much takes more skill right?
While still allowing for IFF withing visual combat range. Top tier combat ranges can exceed this perfectly fine, as by the time the engagement range exceeds the range that markers would/should presented, most if not all aircraft have IFF equipped radars/rwr for longer range missile engagements.
This prevents (or at least reduces) the common occurrence of having someone in a losing position but not yet out of the fight from running at another aircraft several km’s away, that is either currently engaging enemies themselves, engaging other objectives, or in the process of rearming/repairing, if they are spotted by someone from outside “marker distance” fair game, but someone in the heat of a dogfight shouldn’t be rewarded, from a losing position, for simply pointing their plane at that red dot, waaay over there, and hoping that they last long enough to get a consolation kill, that doesn’t really promote learning, skillful or engagement gameplay does it?
A bit more fidelity could be used for fine tuning by the devs, for instance the most important information currently shown is “Distance, Aircraft, and how quickly Distance is changing”, knowing that a plane IS there, is more than enough to start reacting, not knowing what they are flying, not knowing how quickly they are closing to or separating from you, puts more emphasis on the players ability to both react to unexpected threats quickly, and the patience of methodically stalking a target and executing an attack pass.
Regardless of any change to markers UDS (Universal Dot Scaling) ABSOLUTELY NEEDS TO BE IN GAME RIGHT NOW. As currently much like ULQ in ground battles, it provides such a massively unfair advantage to players with lowered graphics settings, that is not in any way accounted for, yes even in ARB currently players sometimes don’t show markers under certain circumstances, more noticeable later into games, as there are less sources of remote spotting, and when flying in the sun or in ground clutter.
Thanks for coming to my Ted™ talk.
2 Likes
Each match is hosted on a server and the amount of players you can put into that match isn’t a direct correlation to how much capacity that server is using. This is much simplified, but think of it as moving 2 people in 1 car or moving 4 people in 1 car. You aren’t using twice the gas in the later scenario, it’s more “efficient.”
Server capacity is the same. Hence, why we are being shoved into 16v16s and smaller team sizes was reluctantly added as only an option and “smaller” only means 12v12.
Gaijin really want to shove as many people as possible into matches as long as that experience those players get is passable. It has been, but that is slowly changing…causing the need for Gaijin to introduce new gimmicks such as S-300 and Grad targets to make things more exciting without making them better, because making them better eats away at the bottom dollar.
2 Likes
You car analogy is wrong. This isn’t how this works.
You are actually using twice the gas in the later scenario, probably even more. Multiprocessing has been figured out decades ago.
1 Like
Your whole post is nothing more than a wild guess - you can’t ignore the fact that basically all changes in “non-simulator” modes were made to eliminate the skill factor in the game play.
So whilst the Ground RB players are forced to play mostly on CQC maps, Air RB players are confronted with random results just due the sheer number of players / enemies within matches.
Both led to steamroll effects which kills (together with BRs & the MM) the effect of individual skill - as you can be skilled like hell but if you either play 8 vs 2 or 2 vs 8 after a few minutes, game results became a random event.
Skill doesn’t matter that much in the 16 vs 16 setup.
4 Likes
i mean youve got a serious issue with folks just running for a base or ground units and then just crashing or being cannon fodder and not trying to engage, at all.
teams now focus on running away rather than any meaningful engagements, and touching on top tier the 16v16 missile sliming madness is just that. the skill as been ripped out ARB and GRB update, by update
3 Likes
Who would have predicted that adding ARH missiles to all nations with current team deathmach will result in disaster. OH WAIT! Like half of community that asks for RB EC, duh…
But snail knows better.
4 Likes
Groundpounding is stale. You are mowing down harmless bots instead of actually using your brain to fight sentient humans.
BnZ fighters are still perfectly valid and viable in the current meta of props. Again, realism =/= gameplay balance. On top of that, if you want to hunt hardly visible dots, simulator is around the corner.
And you are still forgetting the nature of many players when they dont have a monumental advantage is to run away, climb away, or dive.
Strafing bots still isnt the point of PvP air combat.
There werent a lot of ai targets, so i see no connection. It was probably due to forcing at least one of the teams to land on carriers, which bombers and heavier attackers cannot do.
I really feel the easiest fix for most of the problems in top tier is as simple as adding a 2v2 and 6v6 tab. it would solve so much. 16v16 would still be a thing but a competitive game you could play with your friends is always going to be a hit. I feel games like For Honor only exist because of their 1v1 2v2 modes. if war Thunder added it, it would bring so much to game and really I could even see a lot of dcs players returning to war Thunder just for a chill competitive jet game. no game really has that and it would make new players want to play and old players come back for something new while really not changing a thing.
2 Likes
A fine line between these two in War Thunder.
6 Likes
boom n zoom outwith the prop era and eary jets is all but gone due to compression, look at the swifts for example, fantastic jets for BnZ yet an f104, mig19 or mig21 will run them down with impunity.
strafing bots is not the point of PvP combat but WT is PvPvE its a mixture hence why there are objectives and bots in the first place.
Also I must add, people now adays no matter the BR seem to be fleeing any and all forms of engagement, I play the wyvern at now 4.3 and I can run folks down, but the amount of people who instantly turn away and try to flee from me is beyond belief, rather than use the skills of their plane be it a Bf109 or a mustang. they just turn and try flee because they dont want to engage.
or at higher BRs in the gripen, hell even the F8E people just run rather than try to engage and force me into a losing position, same with allies, they just flee. the furball only seems to happen at now 13.0
3 Likes
It’s a bit weird that furballs happen more at the BVR BRs than they do at lower BRs, considering that actual BVR is literally just launch, guide, defend, repeat
Could it be, that people actually prefer WVR/CQC over BVR?
1 Like
I really like the idea of changing stuff, sadly gaijin changing a whole gamemode isn’t gonna come soon (it might tho)
I like the idea of heli in ARB battles, finally another mode where we can grind
I think the most essential part is more target for non fighters, currently there’s only 4 bases and they take a while to spawn, when you have 6 planes that want to grind them, and all planes can kill one or two base, it’s really annoying, if they made bases had a much bigger HP pool and a bit more of them it would be a little better to farm
Gaijin changed a lot since the review bombing so the chances of them looking at this post isn’t 0, i do hope they make something new one day, the current modes are all quite boring
3 Likes
I see we like the same brand of hopium.
I feel like a point a lot of people skip over or miss is that not only do we need more things for non fighters to do, we need those things to matter. This will probably lead to more people being accepting of players bombing, since they are contributing to the match.
4 Likes
It is strange, all these jets with radar and missiles designed for over 40km engagements and everyones just wanting to get in close with IR missiles (now amraams) and run away again.
I try keep about 10km from me and every oponent if possible now to give me time to menuever.
Even adding two more bases, spreading the players out and dropping it to 12, or 10 man teams would solve that issue.
imagine two air fields, on a map a bit larger, with 2 or 3 folks wanting to bomb, and 6 bases. they could and people could intercept them etc etc.
They should just re-enable the destruction of airfields in higher tiers and maybe buff the HP further as the BRs go up
Don’t have the destruction of the main airfield instantly end the game though. That way there would be a meaningful goal for the strikers and bombers to pursue, but also a way for the enemy to still win if they play smart if their airfield is at risk
1 Like