Yeah…no: what I said is you cannot scream realism about one side and say nothing about the other–it’s not balanced. This is like the third time I’ve explained this to you here…but as we so often find, the same tankers who howl about liberties for aircraft are deeply protective of GFs’ liberties.
Your outrage at my calls for equatable realism goes a long way toward proving that that is what offends you.
Now that you’ve been called out on that silly chatter, you’re backtracking…that’s just embarrassing.
At least own up to what you’re going to say or don’t bother in the first place.
Well it explains what little you know about ground vehicles. ADATS and other missile throwers already have arming distance on the missiles. Equatable treatment, like ya right.
Finished trying to explain a simple solution to the suicide bombing, but you obviously care little for problem solving and trying to make the game better.
My knowledge is more than adequate, you just missed the boat: I was still talking about on your original post, dismissing your quip to literally tie work on two items together. That’s disorganized and unnecessary.
Should both all vehicles get realistic limitations? Sure, if that’s what WT players truly want…listening to the crowd, there’s a lot of doubt.
Your ‘solution’ is likely a convoluted and needy response to a lousy, losing ‘tactic’.
Again: suicide bombing is already a loss for the perpetrator because of how SP costs work. That’s when they succeed, nevermind when they fail.
The opposite is true actually, lmao
While others have wasted years backing fruitless pursuits (such as TO), I have encouraged more productive actions like SPAA earnings changes (here and for years before), encouraging SPAA use (dispelling the derision) and even laying out the framework of the Fighters First concept (albeit informally). Years ago, I also pushed heavily against teamkillers too.
If TO advocates weren’t so dedicated to ignoring guidance from more moderate and pragmatic individuals like myself, we might have even seen that realized too…but that’s not how it went down.
I suspect he doesn’t use SPAA much or just not well.
Maybe I need to die more during battle. Seems counter productive needing to die more to increase score?
Certainly battle activity enters into it, but given the role of SPAA you don’t go out and plink tanks unless you have a death wish.
They don´t earn money when you play SPAA and sit behind a hill.
This arcade game is designed for action. ANY kind of supportive gameplay is punished on purpose / design. For example holding flanks, AAA etc. No action, “boring” game, less people buying stuff.
REALISTIC is just a PR marketing buzz word (a brilliant one).
Improving rewards will not change player habits. However, rewards for SPAA in their role should be increased as currently air on air is rewarded more (from what I can tell).
Lead markers for RB?
I play SPAA a bit more then the average. If indicators are needed to encourage players to play SPAA something is wrong. In the beginning it can be difficult to get the feeling for the aim … but when you took the big step foward it is so rewarding. … isn’t the essence of playing a game to have fun and get better at it? What is the next then? See-through-Tanks where you can see always the modules?
I think we should encourage players in learning to play SPAA. Trial and error. What you learn through this will get you further then getting an indicator which leads you on the pass of the no-brainer.
Playing SPAA is become difficult against helicopters like the KA-50/52 that is hunting SPAA first before going for the tanks. I don’t see much people can spawn SPAA first without any reason unless you expect helicopter rush in rank 5-7 battles.
Another reason is SPAA not populare compare to tanks and that SPAA is nerf very hard and totally useless against planes and jets. Some nations SPAA is not even worth to grind while you want to play the tanks but no the SPAA.
