The game machanics are pretty much outdated. But instead of a major overhaul they still working with these useless small fixes. The bases in ARB needs new targets and differents locations to bomb, also missions to reward the cordination between fighters and bombers.
6 Likes
Base respawn faster in mid BR (6.0) weirdly.
100%
Ironically, the most well designed Air RB map is one with asymmetrical objective based (BF Conquest style) elements. I can’t recall the name, but it’s a snow map that which appears around 3.0 – 6.0 with three bridges, three capture points and ground units that are not shown on the map and only appear when spotted.
Unfortunately, as is the case with every map, the rewards do not correlate to the objectives (with bases rewarding far SL/RP more than destroying the columns of tanks/vehicles) and the ticket bleed/objectives are out of sync with the match length.
Ultimately, Gaijin needs to wake up and address that AirRB map/gameplay design needs a serious QoL review/rebuild and that all of these silly/pedantic tweaks to a decade old game mode built for 1940’s aircraft is laughably myopic given the capabilities/ordinance and speed of modern aircraft.
2 Likes
It looks like you talk about “Operation Uranus” the only snow map with bridges as targets/game objectives i am aware of. What confuses me is that you mention not shown ground units. And tbh Operation Uranus is highly unbalanced as on one side strike aircraft spawn around 2.5 km away from enemy columns so it is quite easy to get around 20 ai ground kills within few minutes whilst being unmolested if not some enemy Wyvern cross your path.
The only map i am aware of “hidden” ground units is imho New Guinea - there are only useless (regarding tickets) ship targets for Japanese bombers shown on the map - and for US/UK bombers only the Japanese carriers are visible - a rare no bases map like Saipan and Iwo Jima. All other ground targets with ticket impact are located around grids E and F near the coast and are shown only if you go low down to ~ 2.000 meters.
Imho the best map regarding influence of pilots attacking PvE is still Stalingrad - with some experience you can influence the result of the match with just killing a few ground units either to support the advance of own ai troops or to deny enemy columns to reach and conquer A, B or C point - if you are able to survive 25 minutes…
Yes, the spawn location/height of strike aircraft on Operation Uranus is a mess – as they are on most maps. Which again, speaks to the lack of detail/attention Gaijin has on actual game / map design.
My point on Operation Uranus is more related to the uniqueness of the map/gameplay/objective design. While you’re correct that the (current) likely outcome is heavily influenced by the ridiculous spawn location of strike aircraft, the ingenuity and creativity of destroying a bridge to slow/prevent a tank convoy from crossing or softening up fixed artillery/pillbox locations so ground forces can accomplish an objective shouldn’t be an afterthought in game design/mechanics — and rewards — compared to flying towards the nearest red circle and dropping bombs.
5 Likes
Here i fully agree, it is obvious that on newer maps the interactions of ai activities are not really considered as integral part of the map / game play objectives allowing experienced players to determine the outcome of the matches with a few smart decisions which are not connected to base bombing.
-
Even the if newer maps are often amazing regarding the look and options to fly to targets (like through deep canyons) you find mainly just on very old and very low tier maps alternatives to bomb anything that is not a base which has a similar reward than bombing a base and is suited to make a difference regarding ticket impact and match result.
-
Slowing down enemy columns by attacking them or even stop them by killing bridges which denies them to reach their mission goals is implemented on some older maps, but attacking those targets actually requires that the player sacrifices mission score points (and ofc SL/RP income) compared to bombing a base - and on very low tier maps with non-respawning bases and “killable” airfield it is up to the pilot to determine in each match which targets make more sense.
-
I am not sure if you have realized that gaijin has also changed the effects if you bomb a bridge with a column directly driving on it. Some years ago you were rewarded with the points for killing the bridge and all enemy vehicles on it - but since a few years just with the points for the bridge kill; passing ai vehicles simply vanish without rewarding you with the kills and points.
-
I actually miss some old maps (like the old version of Sicily, or the first Ruhr map with 3 respawning bases) which allowed experienced bomber pilots to influence the outcome and which were offering adequate returns compared to the taken risks.
-
It is sad that newer players never have the chance to score 3.500 points with killing 12-14 medium tanks with just 2 SC 1800 drops on Sicily (and killing 50% of enemy ticket in less than 3-4 minutes) or attacking the tank cluster at grid D4/5 on Ruhr with 2.200 - 2.400 points with one SC 1800…
But even if those maps would be still active today - you needed a hell of experience to get there fast enough (and ofc to get out unharmed) and a lot of pilots were not even aware of those opportunities.
So again it boils down to the absence of adequate returns and game impact for taking the risk to choose a non-fighter aircraft in Air RB…
4 Likes
Whaaaa, other people don’t play the game the way I’m playing the game! That means they’re playing it WRONG! HOW DARE THEY ENJOY THE GAME!!! STOP HAVING FUN!!!
1 Like
You can play a game wrong and still have fun. Small kids do it all the time.
1 Like
Better still - bring back the 3 bases that do not respawn, - let us bomb the airfield again!
3 Likes
This happened to me today. 9 planes attempting to bomb bases, and only 4 bases; of course, the Wyverns arrived first, and the rest, the slow and heavy bombers (me), didn’t survive long enough until the respawn. How is that fair? Why am I being penalized for not having a faster or heavily-armed premium aircraft with the ability to compete for objectives, even against my own teammates?
Addressing that map design is rather poor and that taking high risks is not adequately rewarded has nothing to do with your post - I can not connect anything you wrote with my reply to a very interesting post.
I mean either you try to add something more constructive based on facts and try to follow the rather complicated topic or you try to understand how Air RB works. In any case - using capital letters in a post is rather rude so i see no benefit for me to deal with your very strange conclusions.
2 Likes
Fully agree, but imho this reply of a fellow player might be the right answer:
And ofc i do agree that having Wyverns in your team is a mixed bag - either they create the issues you described or they make your life easier if they use theIr airspawn in a fighter role to farm enemy bombers or rush into the enemy climb zone and thereby pulling enemy interceptors lower…
Better luck next time!
Edit:
Dude - we met on Frontline Kuban today. Free run, 2 out of 3 non respawning bases and a killable airfield left, all enemies low. You had 15 x 500 lbs loaded in your halifax and threw 11 of them on a single non-respawning base??
In the BR range below 5.0 this is an absolute overkill - 3 are 500s are on these maps enough to kill a base, so you dropped 5.500 lbs to get rewarded with 351 points and 0.372 tons dropped for the basekill instead of using your load of 3 tons of TNT to kill the last 2 bases and drop 2 tons on the enemy airfield? What went wrong? Fat Finger?
You call the PVE aspect of air battles selfish while wanting everyone to only play fighters and “contribute” to winning instead of being “useless”. In other words, you’ve made a hypocritical statement and then projected your own selfish desires onto everyone else and equated everything different from what you do as having no value like a preschooler would do.
1 Like
I strongly recommend to read my posts more carefully and try to understand the content with regards to the topics “usefulness” or “contributions to win a match”.
Alone the part “wanting everyone to only play fighters” proves that you have severe problems to understand complex statements and that you are not able to draw correct conclusions. Actually it is the opposite, and as a matter of fact i never claimed this.
I mean you talk to somebody who plays mainly bombers and attackers and not fighters and i claim that respawning bases killed the main purpose of bombers by killing the win condition “airfield kill” and you produce such nonsense like in the last 2 posts…
As another guy earlier you failed to understand that my goal is to strengthen bomber game play, to restore the usefulness of all plane classes in all BRs and that i am totally against this TDM game play set up by gaijin.
I am actually impressed that you were able to put 2 buzzwords in one sentence (“hypocritical” & “projected”) but you simply proved that you can’t compensate your lack of reading comprehension just with opinions and buzzwords.
Your goal is irrelevant, same with what you actually play. The content of the post to which I replied matters. Dismissing base bombing and attacking ground targets as
And then equating it to
Which is a main talking point about ground striking in general mainly used by fighter mains on Adderall who, if they’re not constantly in a dogfight with 3 other people, get bored instantly.
You can say that your actually opinions are to fix the game objectives in air battles, and I’d agree with you. But your earlier reply had no trace of that sentiment in it. The complaining about the extended respawn time is valid feedback and can be fixed by either reducing the respawn timer or completely overhauling the objectives for strike aircraft and bombers.
I can say that during my time last update when the respawn timer was shorter, I saw a lot more impact from the team in general as fighters with bombs and other strike aircraft were able to dump their bombs sooner and would be more likely to then engage in dogfights leading to more teamwork and a better overall experience. Ever since the update, teamkilling has become a lot more common as the number of bases is extremely limited (20) and gaijin has yet to put a strike aircraft limiter in matches at top tier like they did with bombers.
1 Like
Fine for me.
I mean you refer to post #128 which can be seen on a stand alone view as misleading regarding intentions.
It looks like i expected too much by assuming that 3rd party readers have the the ability to connect this statement to much older posts like #93 or #110 which are describing the problems of bombing / game objective highly detailed.
One purpose of such long threads is that previous statements are part of your view on things and they don’t have to be repeated in infinite loops.
Especially #110 (open the spoiler) is the very long version of my opinion on this issue - i simply assumed that you read them before you felt the need for sending out post #152 and #158 which were totally contradicting to my views.
Even if we have now obviously a common understanding regarding the need of a complete overhaul of Air RB - your quote “your goal is irrelevant” simply kills in conjunction with your posts #152 and #158 the need for further exchanges.
Why? As long as you don’t try to understand persons with different/deviating opinions you simply show that you are not interested in them. Without being interested in underlying motivations or goals you can’t identify the gap between what people say and what they actually think and come to the right conclusions. Effective and fruitful discussions rely on the willingness to understand deviating opinions and underlying drivers like personal goals in order to adapt your own view on things by changing your perspective.
So if you want to have a discussion but you are not interested in their motivations, select stand alone comments without considering context and content of statements as s whole and combine them with a rather rude attitude and direct (hypocritical) and indirect (like a preschooler) insults you simply show that you are not interested in a real discussion or a debate.
I have no fun in bombers anymore as I had before this changes to bases respawn time. Destroy 20 bases was my favorite special task to do in air rb. Now it is pain. For example a Tu-4 before was able to destroy even 5 bases in one round. If not shot down by enemy jet fighters. Now if il-28 and canberras won’t take everything, I have to wait for ages for a respawn and if they will spawn they will be taken by attackers. Imagine what if more Tu-4 is flying in the same match. How is this supposed to be fun? The base bombing mechanic in the game should be reworked for something more user friendly.
1 Like
The Essen map has a train depot on it that would make a very nice bomber target.
My suggestion has finally been approved. Please be sure to share your thoughts and vote on the issue here so we can possibly get this to actual developers attention!
2 Likes
Or… you could improve the way you get your point across rather then keep complaining how your posts are misunderstood. You are clearly smart guy with huge passion for the game, but you need to either work or your communication skills, and I don’t mean vocabulary and gramma, or find a courage to admit when you are wrong which is sign of confidence and helps to move on with the topic.
I know we started off the wrong foot and likely you will take that as a dig but feedback is a gift.
I do agree with many points you made in most recent posts and ultimately I think we are on the same side.
1 Like