CAP should be at least as expensive as CAS due to how much of an advantage it has.
Not really. It should be cheaper than a full CAS loadout since it’s sinilar to SPAA in that it is not effective against ground targets (many spaa are but an AAM should not increase SP cost since it is not effective agains ground targets at all). Which are the majority of targets in GROUND battles.
But that is for second spawns. You don’t seriously believe the cost to spawn planes should remain the same no matter how many you spawn? If you are getting 1000SP for a plane you already uswd your chance to get the base cost plane and died. Deal with it and spawn something else.
1 Like
There is so much wrong with that reply.
Well elaborate please. You have been dodging questions left and right this thread.
1 Like
CAP is far better against planes than SPAA, and most SPAA are very good against tanks.
So what you’re saying is, CAS isn’t influential enough on the match to warrant AAMs costing additional SP? And by that same logic, CAS should be cheaper cuz of how little importance it is?
I believe you should get 2 plane spawns at base price. Additionally, you should be able to choose whether each of those 2 spawns are CAS or CAP so that players can be smart and plan out which plane to spawn when. Lastly, as a way of forcing players to be smart with how they assemble their lineup (instead of just brainlessly picking the meta CAS option), the SP increase should be based on fighter/attacker, not CAS/CAP.
Same should apply to SPAA. If you die in SPAA, then you used your chance, and you shouldn’t be able to spawn another.
And it is still more expensive than SPAA. your point here is moot.
Yes many spaa are good against tanks. Hut many are also not like the lower tier ones or the highest tier ones with only missiles.
No. I am saying that AAM should not cost additional SP since they don’t work against most targets that are ground targets.
Well then you just want to be able to keep killing tanks in your plane even after being shot down. That is not fair to the ground players that managed to shoot down a plane.
No because not all nations have this option and also this new system makes it more fair for ground players.
But you can spawn another plane for 1000SP which is 2x the base cost. Just like when dying in an SPAA you can respawn in another SPAA for twice the SP cost
4 Likes
Here is my opinion from a toptier view.
I don’t like the new system at all. It’s way to restrictive.
Why would you spawn a, let’s say Mirage 2000 when the Rafale just does ewerything better, same with the Su30 vs Su34. Eurofighter vs Tornado and so on.
I grinded Air trees, invested a lot of time, bought additional crew slots, to have two different planes if i need them to complete my lineups, which now just became useless.
In top tier a dedicated CAP plane is not needed, especially with the powerful new SPAA’s.
Second plane spawns should be more expensive than they were before, but the system as right now needs adjustments.
I am definitely not a bad player, but there is no way 99% can spawn a second plane which is not a pure fighter.
I even already saw people complaining here that there aren’t enough planes to shoot at.
Maybe they should do it so you can’t spawn the same type of ordonance twice, let’s say no IR seekers twice etc. That would reduce second plane effectiveness by a lot.
3 Likes
Which is kind of the point. You ahould not be able to just keep on spawning planes in ground battles.
1 Like
I am not saying you should, but making an entire branch of planes useless is not the way to go.
Make it harder, make it to use worse loadouts, but don’t make it nearly impossible.
1 Like
But is it really making a whole branch useless? You can still spawn them. It just means that if you prefer using a multirole for ground strike you will probbaly use the multirole in a CAS and maybe even CAP role. The only limit is spawning planes with ground ordnance. The fact that people complain about not being able to spawn in with 2 fully loaded ground poinders is kinda insane
3 Likes
Close air patrol is balanced relative to close air support (which doesn’t needs to be cheaper) and could be cheaper, there are more situations where a second spawn for air engagements is needed rather than close air support is, because it’s obvious I want to sling a air missile in a ground vehicle.
Considering how bad you can’t rely on anti-air vehicles, making truly team-based gameplay unreliable both when on ground or in air with vehicles like ZA-35 being completely useless when comes to being an actual anti-air vehicle and people being clueless about an airplane zooming in their heads, things like these needs such change.
My main point about AAM was that if I decide to take a full AAM loadout my cost should not increase past the base cost since I am basically spawning in AA as I have no weapons for ground strike. It is just a more effective SPAA and it already costs way more.
Pangolin seems to think this is unfair and the cost for AAM loadouts should go up.
In top tier yes, why would i spawn, again as example the mirage 2000 rmv or whatever its called.
Rafale does everything better, even with CAS loadout.
In top tier as for now is no need for a dedicated CAP plane anyway. Why would i spawn that, if i can spawn very capable SPAA now for a fracture of the price. Hell i can even spawn twice in an AA and would still be cheaper than a fighter.
The only as striker marked plane which isn’t useless as for now is probably the F15.
I am not complaining about that if you read my post.
And i think i made a very reasonable proposal.
1 Like
I agree but the point still stands you can still spawn in the mirage it’s just not what you prefer so you don’t. It is an issue of the new system but at the same time you can probably see how 2 CAS planes can be too much for such a low cost.
Might even say the issue of them being useless lies in the fact that air modes are still utter crap and the only option is to use these planes in ground and bully tanks.
I never specifically said you did. I could have worded it better. But you can see how many others complain abot exactly this
Yea sure i can, but you also don’t spawn a Leo2A4 when you can spawn a 2A7 for the same price. It just makes no sense to do it.
Yea it was definitely too cheap before, not everyone should be able to do it nearly every time.
Now it’s just the other extrem and that entire crew slot became big wast of time and money investment.
Yes, there is a middle ground to be found here. Extremes on both sides don’t help the game.
2 Likes
You might prefer the 2a4 but yeah the issue is the same pretty much.
Would you have just preferred a higher first spawn cost or what?
I don’t think the new system is entirely bad. I would like to have it to just increase prices for the same kind of loadout, so you can’t spawn fire and forget missiles twice, which i think is what people have the biggest issue with in top tier.
It would also make the game more interesting as the CAS player when you can’t do the same thing twice.
Then for example i at least could try to do something with the Mirage, be it dump bombs or laser/gnss.
Increasing first spawn is also a possibility, but it wouldn’t change the core problem, just make it harder to get there.
And i guess that ship sailed anyway, as they won’t get rid of the new system anymore.
Sorry for typos, i hate typing on my phone.
1 Like
Which I agree. When though you need to work a little bit to get full-loaded ground ordnances or air-to-air weapons, as @Pangolin_Fan said, you need to:
You don’t need a second spawn when you can be smart and know how to plan and consider the right plane to spawn in with, in his words. My thing with cheaper air-to-air weapons is that most of the time people will spawn with airplanes to engage ground vehicles, not to protect them, most of the time close air support will outnumber close air patrol airplanes and, as I attached previously, ZA-35 is most of the time not used as a anti-air vehicle but anti-tank, as @Pangolin_Fan is using this argument to sustain his point.
Every anti-air vehicle is very good against ground vehicles excluding missile carriers for obvious reasons but everything else can engage ground vehicles one way or another, see XM246 as well, I can surely say that XM246 scores more ground vehicles than air vehicles. More anti-air vehicles being used as anti-tank means more airplanes taking advantage of this, until people actually uses anti-air vehicles to focus on airplanes, air-to-air weapons should be cheaper, even with the new anti-air systems, they’re not entirely powerful to take an airplane behind mountains or in a secure distance, this is where close air patrol is important. You don’t see close air patrol being used as close air support.
2 Likes
How about increasing first spawn and leaving second spawn as a 2x multiplier.
Sounds like the best idea. Make both more expensive
4 Likes
Bait accepted.!
What do you think of this idea? Gather your pink ponies and go play in the sandbox? And take the remaining 5 cas haters who portray themselves as the majority of the wt community.
2 Likes