CAS problem

Game Discussion Realistic Battle
224

AI AAA and bigger maps only makes the problem appear less not fix it for people wanting just to play tanks. We already talked about it.

Do we want to solve the issue or sweep it under the rug?

TO solves the issue by default as people who just want to play tanks could play it and in combined mode only people who like combined aspect of the game would remain. It would solve some issues with balance of the teams.

SBMM solves the issue of different players skill, meaning that it would be less likely that team would meet a pro who can destroy them without them being able to do much about It.

AI AAA would be either too good or to bad, meaning that it would either make people liking the air aspect of the game angry (as they would no longer be able to do what they see as fun/look at the helipad AA case) or too bad meaning people could just ignore It.

Bigger maps only make flight to the battlefield longer so people instead of dying in „x” time to planes would die in „1.2x” time. People who like air aspect of the game already don’t like it how long they need to fly in prop planes above 6.7 - so aleady an issue that doesn’t solve anything for people wanting to just plan tanks.

New objectives for air would only matter for people who don’t want to attack players and You have to remember that there would be limited number of them. Again the same case as with bigger maps/longer flight time.

You can always explain how what I have said would not be the case. I would love to discuss it.

4 Likes
225

I’ll maintain my position, that your ‘discussion’ is nothing less than dictation, and the dogpiling and mockery that has gone on for so long, which has almost become an accepted norm, has destroyed any aspect of discussion that there was to have on this topic.

This is actually what I said so far back that it’s not funny… The Anti-CAS contingient, will be abusive at the drop of a hat, labelling anyone who dares to object a CAS-main, with every insinuation that they have no skill, or are just so abusive of the playerbase that they’re the worst person ever alive.

And that’s where this dogpiling starts to become a problem, when it genuinely overflows.

226

So we need to end it here as You don’t want to discuss points made and just play a victim and destroy the topic.

I tried to have a discussion explaining different approaches to the issue and how they would impact the gameplay and the „problem” we are discussing in this topic.

1 Like
227

You’re the one saying that, but as you can see, you’ve only come in to say that my suggestions would be shit, on the back of what I have said regarding that very mentality you espose in all of these threads about the nagative, dismissing anything that could be an option, just for your suggestions alone…

Discussion goes both ways, but for you, it doesn’t… It’s just the mode, and the matchmaker you want, because you know how everything else wouldn’t be done, because you villify the other players, and opponents…

You added this after I formed the above, it further cements that you are the issue with this forum and genuine actual engagement when you are facing me…

And your dogpiles are actually so abusive and ignorant that you just want an echo chamber.

After all, that’s why you make out that I am the one that destroys the topic… You’re projecting.

228

I haven’t called them that, just said how it would impact the gameplay and the „problem” that is being discussed in this topic.

If You know that what I have said is not true You can always explain it so we can discuss it instead of getting angry that someone dares to not agree with You.

Before it was posted.

229

No, you’ve just come in here to say that it all won’t work… Yea, great contribution to the discussion… You PROVE what I said about the fact of this end of the thread…

But how do YOU know that these things I suggest won’t work? That’s the thing IT’S A TWO WAY STREET HERE…

You’re lying here, as you posted your one line, then put the second portion to make out you were tollerant and accepting.

230

Definitely not angry, just disappointed that this is what ‘’‘discussion’‘’ has become on this forum, which is supposed to be moderated…

231

I have explained It above, again if I haven’t said the truth You can always explain It and say how it would work.

Before You have posted Your post. This is what I was saying and happened (or my browser glittched)

232

No, I said my piece, and this constant making out like you’re discussing anything is just for show…

The fact that I say anything and you immediately have to come in like you’re a dictator is the issue… There is no discussion with you, and the inevitible ‘You can PM me’ line is an abuse tactic.

233

So again:

If You don’t want a discussion I can’t do anything about it.

Have a good day!

2 Likes
234

Stop trolling, because it’s clear you’re only in this end of the thread to provoke.

If you can’t take on board my stances, as per usual, then there is no discussion with you, and you merely want to make out that I am the unreasonable person here.

235

Gonna just quote it here:

So if at any time You would change your mind and actually want a discussion, it is here.

Hope it would help to not destroy the topic any further and make actually discussion and points made not visible

1 Like
236

Please stop escalating this any further.
this is valid for both of you, @ULQ_LOVER and @FlyingDoctor

1 Like
238

This game is over a decade old and some patterns can be observed. We keep using the same old modes and by looking at the changes to modes over the years, it’s obvious they aren’t being worked on regularly.

This tells me it’s highly unlikely for Gaijin to massively change and rework a mode.

I’m not doing that, I’m just telling you that Gaijin doesn’t really have a track record of doing things you suggested.

Just look at how many premium aircraft they’ve added over the years in comparison to premium AAs. They definitely know where the money is, so focusing that makes sense from a business standpoint.

As I said, your idea is good on paper, but Gaijin stopping everything just to add dozens of competitive AAs to fill the gaps isn’t likely to happen. They might add those in the next several years but that’s way too slow, and I’m pretty sure by that time more gaping holes would be created, so it becomes an endless circle.

That argument looks good until you realize it’d take Gaijin years to fulfill that, which is a long time considering we’ve already spent years in this unbalanced state.

You need to realize those are big changes that’d require a lot of work to implement and balance. We already know how much Gaijin likes to spend their time on altering their modes.

I don’t really want to wait years and years for those ways to be added and suffer until then. You’re acting like all of that is already mostly done and we’re few weeks away from all that being implemented. Sad truth is that we’re years away from that.

TO would solve those issues much faster and easier while more or less being plug-and-play.

3 Likes
240

the temporary solution is simple for high tier cas, just remove any fnf a2g that outrange top tier spaa until we have fnf spaa with equivalent range, so any fnf a2g currently should have 7km max range

241

To be honest, I get tired of the dogpiling and the mockery, for the sake of statchecking and continuing the argument against the person rather than the actual discussion of the points raised…

That’s how this always ends up because of that select few…

Just look at Motorola now putting up a page of why my suggestions won’t get put in, yet they’re putting forth something that’s been put forth for 6 years now, without change…

Telling me, suggestions that we’ve made as counters to this want for a special mode, and the continuing back and forth telling everyone that ONLY this special mode and labeling are acceptable, that MY suggestions, WON’T be brought in because ‘gaijin’…

It’s just projecting and literal gatekeeping…

Solve it…

I’m tired of commenting in threads and having these select few dogpiling and making out that it’s my fault for even commenting… It’s just deminishing to discussion, no matter how much ULQ and these guys even say they’re discussing anything, as they aren’t, they are trying for an echo chamber and constantly berating anyone who dares to mention any other option.

I don’t want PMs, I don’t want any sort of ‘It’s both sides’ nonsense… I’m not wrong for making the comments, I’m not wrong for holding the opinion. My stats have nothing to do with this, and my advice isn’t limited to merely being low teir… The gatekeeping and echo chambers need to be stopped.

This is an example of the silliness that comes from this sort of thing… I don’t align with what’s demanded, so I MUST be defending Gaijin…

Just beyond a damn joke… I answered this many times in this thread, yet they proclaim that they haven’t been answered…

Liked, by the select few… TYPICAL…

242

My suggestion takes little to no effort to put in the game, meanwhile yours would take months of constant work just on that in order to implement it.

I’m telling you that your suggestions won’t be brought in a sensible time frame which is a massive problem. You’re mixing things up.

Who said you’re wrong for doing that ?
My opinion is that your opinion is wrong, which makes you upset for some reason. We don’t need to agree on things.

Considering you have 26 games in GRB using rank 7 and 8 vehicles I think your opinion on that isn’t very valid.
That’s like I start having opinions on Naval after I played half a dozen games in that game mode.

1 Like
244

You are blind…

245

Cool gatekeeping, but mindset is a lot to do with it, and the teactics and advisories I hand out aren’t limited to the teirs you think they apply…

Your opinion, is also just your opinion, much the same as mine.

246

I also didn’t say you were the bad guy, it’s those who are in this thread, as with every thread, making issues with me.

I called the moderators because the critical few were getting well up there in silliness. I addressed what you said, you took it to another thread because you’re not happy with the response and claim that you hadn’t been answered…

You had…

Whilst you are part of the problem because of this, the direct mentioning of those who are in here like every other thread is the commonality.