Hallo GAijin, es ist eine der dümmsten Ideen in den Avia Simulation die Itos auf die Flugfelder zu platzieren!!! Wenn Ihr das macht dann ab den höheren BR mein Vorschlag so ab 'BR12 oder höher damit eure BR11 Premiumflugzeuge die eure Spieler für echtes GELD kaufen auch in diesen Modus spielbar wären! Danke!
Hello GAijin, it is one of the stupidest ideas in Air Simulation to place the Itos on the airfields!!!
If you do that, then at least only at the higher BR—my suggestion would be from BR 12 or higher—so that your BR 11 premium aircraft, which your players buy with real MONEY, would still be playable in this mode!
Thanks!
What in the copium? Also no
1 Like
It was just a suggestion; as far as I’m concerned, the ITOs should be removed completely…
Why are you so concerned for base AA if your supposed to just bomb forward bases if you don’t have AGMs?
Sie können mehr Hilfe auf der deutschen Seite der Foren erhalten!
As an avid mud mover in Air Sim. The Stronger air defences are a good thing, and I dont necessarily have issue with the BR theyve been inserted in. The problem is the implementation and the lack of adjustments to the wider game.
First, the state of SPAAs of any kind in ASB.
- They react too quickly
- They are too accurate
- They have a tendency to be able to see through terrain.
So an overall overhaul of the AI code would go a long way towards mitigating them without removing them from being a threat. Which they should be.
Also further future mechanics such as:
- Flying under the radar
- ECM
- ARM
Could all make for an interesting couterplay
There are also wider game issue that need to be addressed, such as the lack of proper lofting mechanics (currently its a bodge using CCRP, but we are missing most HUD symbology really needed for it) and the ability to more easily target AFs via the map (and even to a lesser degree, make it easier to target bases too). The combination of these changes would mean that it would be far more consistant to use lofting attacks to engage an AF just like IRL. Combine with SEAD and AFs because a really interesting part of the wider gameplay (also could include deep strike targets too)
With their increased range too, a large area of the map has become a dangerous no fly zone, so the argument for larger maps has only been increased greatly
The final issue is the lack of game adaptation. Specifically, there are many maps where bases are located too close to the enemy AFs, with the previous air defences, this was managable, but with the new ones, there is serious concern that valid targets might simply be too hard to attack, maybe impossible to attack, which is just bad. So the final fix is just to move some bases further away from the AFs and into more sensible locations where they arent entirely under the umbrella of more than 1 AFs (looking at Denmark with a few bases that would spawn in range of 4 different AFs.
So to conclude. I like the idea of making PvE targets more challenging, it needs to be done, also, spawning camping and Zombers were an issue, this should ideally mitigate those problems, but Challenging and frustratingly hard is a fine line and at the moment, I think its on the other side of that line and they need to improve various aspects of the game to bring it back to Challenging, once there. I want them to add more SAM sites around the map, add defences to regular bases, add deep-strike mission objectives, etc etc, make PvE as hard, Dynamic and varied as PvP. As it should be.
2 Likes
On some maps, those bases can actually be located right next to or even between AFs, it is actually a genuine issue. For example Denmark, there is about 1/3 of bases (at least on redfor side) spawn well within range of the ITOs and several actually spawn within range of more than 1 AF. So to attack them, youd have to run the gauntlet between mutliple AFs
ITOs aren’t too hard to dodge – basic defensive maneuvers usually get the job done. Basic notching, evasive maneuvers, and staying low are all viable. As always, stay fast and don’t fly straight.
If you’re bombing them, the good thing is that the bases don’t move – just use the “switch mission bombing target” keybind to cycle to your desired airbase/bombing target. From there, set your sight to “Bombs (auto)”, follow the sight, and use CCRP.
SPAA in general only has a limited range – stay above 18,000 feet or around 5000 meters to be out of their effective range.
The only map I’ve run into any issues with ITOs on is Dover Strait due to its inherit cramped nature. Even still, you shouldn’t be sticking around enemy bases longer than you need to.
If you have an absolute need to hit players on runways, precision guided munitions work best – TV guided AGMs, laser guided munitions, etc. A handful of AAMs work too, so long as they’re heat seeking and the enemy is unaware. Denial of takeoff/landing works in a pinch but don’t rely on it! It’s generally frowned upon.
At the end of the day, air sim is going to try to be just that – a simulator. You’ll have to be creative, because in real life, enemies won’t just let you waltz onto their airfields.
1 Like
I agree. Whenever I play Denmark, that whole area just becomes a sort of no-fly zone. There’s not much of a reason to go there anyways, since no airfields are within justifiable proximity to any real rewards there.
On the flip side, whenever I play on the northern (“redfor”) side of the map, I don’t really go over to the east much either. This can also be an issue since often there aren’t even eastern airfields like there are in lower tiers.
The result is almost a dividing line between east and west on the map, where they only really mix if there are bases or capture points. You’d be hard-pressed to find someone on the “wrong” side, because very few in my experience play sim for the air-to-air combat.
Maps like Denmark don’t really need 5 airfields. I rarely see anyone attack them anyways, which would be the main concern with ending games early. Even still, I have maybe seen runways destroyed once or twice, total. One of these was in a squad where we deliberately tried to take down enemy airfields with coordinated SEAD/strike operations. As far as I’m concerned, Denmark can do just fine with less runways.
I guess an argument could be had for teamwork between SEAD and strike roles, but at that point, why not just bomb the airfields themselves for a similar reward? It’s good practice against SPAA but there’s no real reason for it to be so complex. Something should change, but I know sim isn’t exactly on the top of Gaijin’s priority list, with all due respect to the devs :)
Edit: In hindsight, this is a little off-topic, but it does offer some kind of solution to the worsening problem.
1 Like
Yep, I agree
1 Like
Never fall for the Denmark slop
Maybe win some fights and chase your enemy a bit more
Hi,
If you want to write in German you can use the link bellow:
Otherwise, please write in English only.
thank you.