Im sure a witness statement will be sufficient shortly
If the “witness” can’t do your legwork and provide a quote, it will be useless.
Tell that to the jury
What jury? Which court would come to a sentence, when the prosecutor tells the judge to go look for the evidence himself, since he doesn’t have any?
You can’t provide a quote to back up your claim and that’s it. Your claim is false and can be dismissed.
1 Like
I want you to find it your self so you know how silly you can be
Yeah CAS does ruin a ton of matches. SP costs need to be vastly increased and AA needs to be added to all nations for most BRs. Also non-radar SPAA should get a target lock (like whats on console) because it is nearly impossible to use effectively when more than 1 plane is up. It also doesn’t help that SPAA doesn’t have any special sight that helps you aim better.
1 Like
@Wishie7119 That is just a silly excuse for not having anything to present here.
@Ion_Protogen I agree partially, SPAA need more incentives, better rewards and more useful sights in addition to gaps being filled. I’m not sure about the target lock as I don’t play on a console. Does it work like on radar SPAA? If so I’m not sure, the lock alone would help.
I believe that planes should cost the same as tanks because some natiins dont good SPAA and the ordinance that actually destroys tanks should be increased, realistically planes in the real world would not be able to do what they do in warthunder with an enemy as capable so close. Tanks are more realistic than planes in warthunder
Please elaborate how tanks in War Thunder are more realistic than aircraft.
There is nothing realistic in War Thunder when it comes to vehicle controls, performance and deployment.
1 Like
Maybe on the WWII part of the game,… but not on High Tech Top Tier one,…
I guess it is about attackers and bombers not entering areas without having air superiority IRL.
Simple, you would not have an airbase so close to the battlefield with an enemy as capable, because it would get bombed and put out of commission unless you have air superiority.
Are you sure, with an enemy as capable. Gaijin is balancing CAS in GRB as if your in battle with an inferior enemy
That is true, an airfield would not be that close. You could argue that the airspawn is there to simulate aircraft reaching the battlefield from further away.
Do tanks roll out of supply depots within 4km of each other IRL though?
And carry tonnes of ordinance, we dont have b52’s in game, f16’s cant do it. Its all out of proportion
Loadout options for aircraft are based on their real life data sheets.
The F-16C is listed with a maximum capacity of over 9000 kg of ordinance IRL. One Maverick is up to 300 kg.
But do they carry the fuel to do so? And get back home, tanks can just park up and not fall over
An aircraft can get air-to-air refueling on the way to the objective, use its ordinance and then RTB.
Why should they be designed in a way that makes them useless?
We dont have air to air refuelling, if we did it would get shot down, bombers dont fly with out escorts. Like i say its all out of proportion. If your enemy is as capable they would have air refuelling with patrols etc.
1 example
If usa and russia went to war, britian would be used as a stepping stone and would be bombed thus rendering air bases in britian usless, then there would be a massive air war over the artic before either side could land tanks with CAS. So i think planes and tanks should cost same SP but increase ordinance costs.
In game planes and tanks would have to earn SP for bombs, while there is tank battles on the ground and air battles in the sky
Don’t think there is too much problems, you often get one or two out of twenty matches where nobody use CAS, so that’s technically already a TO, takes a while to get rid of the camper but it’s a non-issue really, it doesn’t bother me at least. This also seems like a problem only anti-TO guys are worrying about.
1 Like