Air RB NEEDS Change NOW

Game Discussion Realistic Battle
,
1

Air RB for top tier as we know is pretty ancient, not much has changed from when the MiG-21 Fishbed and F-4 Phantom use to roam the highest brackets and this isn’t acceptable.

Throughout the years minor changes have been dwindling through like the multipathing height reduction, missile overhaul and major FM changes but this isn’t enough and especially as the December update approaches in mere weeks (or the teaser for it at least).

With the Firebirds update we’ve as a community have noticed many things which may exacerbate the future of top tier as we know it, the current situation with 16 vs 16 battles hasn’t been fixed as the semi-new “participate in smaller battles” option is near useless and doesn’t work majority of the time. In addition with the current map scale furballs become a more common issue.

We’ve continuously received half-baked fixes like mentioned above and with the current trajectory of top tier this will likely become worse.

Have fun imagining F-22s and SU-57s in the current 16 vs 16 environment with unflarable missiles and stealth would also be useless due to the spotting system

So I’ve decided to make this thread in order for us to discuss changes and adjustments for top tier to levy this issue and here are my current ideas:

Spotting Removal from Air RB & Implementation of AWACS and Datalink in Replacement | 12.7+

Spotting is a flawed, unreliable and even occasionally a bias system depending on map and other factors (pre-Firebirds update) and should be entirely removed from Air RB (“realistic” is quite literally in the game modes name lmao).

In replacement we should get the implementation of AWACS and datalink between the AI vehicle and other playable vehicles (you and your team) with support of such feature (if your vehicle has support for it) - this should only apply for 12.7 matches and above (ARH zone), the spotting system should remain for lower BRs.

Functionality: AWACS would provide a 18km bubble around every player controlled vehicle and if an enemy entered this 18km bubble then you’d spot them (on a individual level) with green symbology similar to TWS but in a diamond form. If you’re either behind cover, outside the 18km bubble or the AWACS radar cannot spot you then you’ll remain unspotted.

Destroying an enemy AWACS system should grant you between 10k to 30k SL/RP (variable) and remove the the 18km bubble function and all others which come with the AWACS aircraft effectively making the enemy team blind (like in Ground RB whenever you fly an aircraft and there’s bandits up) - you’d have to rely on your own aircrafts radar.

The AWACS system should be placed far outside of missile reach and any aircraft within a 100km radius of the AWACS should be spotted for the entire team to see, the AWACS should be placed 200km - 250km away from usual engagements (high risk high reward, your team would surely win if the AWACS goes down on the enemies side).

This would also allow stealth aircraft like the F-22 to retain their stealth features as they’d need to be much closer for the AWACS to spot them than usual aircraft allowing for the seamless addition of 5th generation aircraft and other 4.5 generation aircraft with low observability.

  • I support this specific idea
  • I’m against this specific idea
0 voters

Forced Smaller Matches

Self-explanatory, this should’ve been a feature a long time ago when the R-27ER was introduced, forced smaller games numbering between 8 vs 8 to 10 vs 10.

  • I support this specific idea
  • I’m against this specific idea
0 voters

Larger & More In-depth Maps

Larger maps in preparation for missiles like the PL-15 and Meteor which would still be relevant now, more missions like AWACS hunting, AI aircraft elimination (like bomber formations) and airfield destruction - 350km+/- distance between both major airfields minimum.

  • I support this specific idea
  • I’m against this specific idea
0 voters

Historical/Realistic Teams & Balanced Teams By Vehicles | Not Priority

Realistic teams should return like Russia and China vs the West with more or less vehicles for balance or other means which you can suggestion in replies, still something which I’m thinking about and isn’t really a important idea.

  • I support this specific idea
  • I’m against this specific idea
0 voters

And lasty…

Carrier Rework & Ship Hunting

Carrier Rework - This is a long thing coming, vehicles which operate from carriers like the F/A-18, J-15, SU-33, Rafale and MiG-29K need aircraft carriers to serve a purpose, a new role should be added in War Thunder named “Carrier Vehicle” which allow only these vehicles baring such name to spawn on them.

New modern AI carriers from the years between 1990s to present day should also be implemented for Britain, USSR and China (and more depending on the nation the map is based off).

Ship Hunting - Introducing of more ordinances and more modern ships for the higher BRs of War Thunder, reward the destruction of ships with decals and other rewards when they’re destroyed in a high quantity over many matches and grant a large sum of SL or RP on top of that - more modern ships would also have the capability to defend themselves and fire missiles back at aircraft.

  • I support this specific idea
  • I’m against this specific idea
0 voters

Drop some ideas down in the replies and some feedback would be nice, these are only ideas and not actual suggestions as of now and I’d like this thread to be used for how Air RB could be changed in the future or present time - changes have been made through recommendations in replies, if you’ve got any promising ideas drop them below.

22 Likes
2

Forced Smaller Matches would really escalate how sweaty is top tier gameplay right now, it definately is not the answer, and certainly not a reasonable way to follow.

The answer is the same as GRB: bigger maps, followed by more spread/diverse objectives to make use of the available ordnance. Even some sim maps could be really handy in the way of said solution.

All that said, i can agree on the rest of points. Urgent modifications to ARB are necessary, regardless of my potential liking.

5 Likes
3

In addition to that, limit 7.0-10.7 matches to 12v12 or 14v14, and limit 11.0-12.3 to 10v10. I’ve had a few sub 16v16 matches at multiple BRs since the update, and they’ve been quite nice. The only downside is that less useful vehicle classes/players impact the overall team more.

There also needs to be multiple spawn points on those maps too, or some way to force players to spread out more. EC maps in RB were a mistake because they just added more dead time before you get into combat.

3 Likes
4

Those exist in ARB, but they add nothing new to the gameplay except extra time flying, and it is especially impacful at lower BRs.

I agree that 6v6 is too low, but I don’t see the harm in trying out 10v10 matches.

5

Gaijin desperately needs to rework and modernize Enduring Confrontation (EC) and add back RB EC.

It’s insane that we are still stuck with these beta game modes for Air. They needed this years ago.

They dont even bother answering questions on this or addressing this issue at all.

9 Likes
6

It’s insane that we are still stuck with these beta game modes for Air

It genuinely just baffles me, War Thunder is a massive game with insane potential and the fact this is being left untouched is genuinely just bizarre.

We need more objectives which actually reward you as a player and the current map size doesn’t help this issue at all.

6 Likes
7

*and space

It can definately be tested for further development and rewards calibration, below 10v10 and games would really become a torture, as reward rates may plummet in comparison to what we have today.

8

Forced Smaller Matches would really escalate how sweaty is top tier gameplay right now, it definately is not the answer, and certainly not a reasonable way to follow

Maybe we could first introduce the larger maps with more missions then see how that’d play out then resort to forced smaller teams if nothing changes - I do NOT want to see furballs with AIM-9Xs and R-74Ms in the future lmao.

5 Likes
9

It can definately be tested for further development and rewards calibration, below 10v10 and games would really become a torture, as reward rates may plummet in comparison to what we have today

Yeah I’ll change the team size idea to 8 vs 8 to 10 vs 10 instead and rewards should be amplified for the amount of less players in each match.

2 Likes
10

Notice how we’re not even close to those missiles, lol. We may have platforms with the capability of using such missiles, but there’s no real plans on adding such stuff even at medium term.

11

Notice how we’re not even close to those missiles

The current pace of vehicle implementation is ludicrous, last year we had the F-16 and MiG-29 (if I recall) join the game and we’re already looking at the introduction of the Eurofighter and Rafale.

It wouldn’t be a shocker if we get the AIM-9X or R-74M by late 2025 or early/mid 2026.

2 Likes
12

Incredibly well put together post, voted for each and will justify my votes when I’m back at my laptop 👍

4 Likes
13

That’s my personal bet, it’s a minimum of 3-4 updates away, so there’s a decent threshold for Gaijin to calibrate their introuction in a minimally decent environment.

Yeah, that’s deeply related to the business model. They don’t care about ordnance as much as they care of having the vehicles itself ingame, my rationalization goes along that line. There’s a good chance this xmas we’ll get the F/A-18 and a soviet marine counterpart like the MiG-29K or something like that. There’s also a chance we’ll get some early version of the Typhoon/Rafale, but that sounds unlikely by the moment, as no leaker has ever mentioned them, we’ll have to wait until devblogs.

But back on the topic, the pace of vehicle implementation has kept the game on trend ever since 2022, and i don’t think Gaijin dislikes staying on top spots. We can only hope they focus some time on gameplay rather than offering popular platforms.

1 Like
14

But back on the topic, the pace of vehicle implementation has kept the game on trend ever since 2022, and i don’t think Gaijin dislikes staying on top spots. We can only hope they focus some time on gameplay rather than offering popular platforms

They’ll eventually will be forced when there won’t be more vehicles to implement, Gaijin needs to diverting some of their attention and even if it’s small onto game modes again or the current implementation rate of vehicles will be fatal for the company.

Typhoon/Rafale, but that sounds unlikely by the moment, as no leaker has ever mentioned them

Pretty sure the Typhoon got delayed till next year and most likely early 2025 but I’m pretty sure a early gun less Rafale was leaked not too long ago for France but I may be wrong.

15

It works just fine, people simply don’t want it. Just because it gets mentioned non stop in an echo chamber doesn’t mean the majority of players actually want it, and it has been shown as such by the amount of these smaller matches actually happen, and you cannot use the excuse that people are unaware of it because Gaijin implemented a popup that was forced upon you to let you know it existed. It is a bad idea, doesnt solve the issues that people have with the mode and forcing it on people would harm the overall health of the game.

3 Likes
16

It works just fine, people simply don’t want it. Just because it gets mentioned non stop in an echo chamber doesn’t mean the majority of players actually want it

Yeah because Gaijin was pressured into adding the feature by nobody, it wasn’t like hundreds of people were vocal about the addition of Fox 3 missiles with the 16 vs 16 environment. But yeah, nobody clearly has a issue with it (sarcasm).

Nearly every single person I’ve came across supports the idea for smaller matches whether that’s 10 vs 10 or 6 vs 6. The idea of 32 player matches in small maps should’ve been a no brainer for Gaijin but it took many complaints for it to be noted.

Gaijin implemented a popup that was forced upon you to let you know it existed

And there are popups for premium time yet you don’t see flocks of people purchasing them, many people instinctively close things as it’s usually seen as a hassle and level 5 Jimmy wouldn’t be any wiser.

1 Like
17

We had a broken spotting system with the Firebirds update and that day I had the best battles in toptier for a long time.

18

The issues with EC maps in RB is that there’s only the one airfield to spawn at- if you had 3 like in sim or more it would radically change the dynamic, with no other changes.

You could also make objectives more impactful for the win/loss rather than the team deathmatch we have now. I’m not sure how I feel about that, but the mode certainly needs to be worked with…

Basically, just EC but actually updated for the era and make it an actual gamemode. Make the airfields less cheesy and add SAM sites or something.

I think no shared spotting would be interesting, maybe just a flat 20km spot of everything around you and only dots beyond that

19

I don’t know if it really works fine, but I know there are many players don’t know it exists.
I think most of the players don’t care.

Think about the thousands of players and how many use this forum…
They consuming the game and that’s it.

1 Like
20

Hundreds in a community of hundreds of thousands.

Refer to what I said about echo chambers. Noone likes to admit they are in one, but it is pretty evident to people outside them.

Because it costs money to buy premium, this isnt a comparison.

1 Like