By how? You are not even the one who stated
nor
I would rather see this, than just “Lets just have a middle ground and tune them down a bit”, imo.
- No infinite reloads in air rb.
- More cool modules like turret rings and spare ammo that should detonate, fuel lines and hydraulics, mechanisms for gears, bomb bays and mechanisation, etc.
- HE shells rework that will make them more realistic with fragments of various size and also a nose cone fragment as they did with aphe shells.
- Flight model should take into account hull damage, as @Heehehehe said.
- Fire should be modelled as a cone effect behind that will kill gunners and damage hull behind it if bomber won’t extinguish it. Rn it does that, I think, but not reliably?
5 Likes
But you see what you just said, IS the middle ground i want to see. Never, in any post did i say that i want a middle ground with HP or anything hinting at that.
I used middle ground just as a term to describe something between the extreme ends of wet paper towel and indestructible death star.
Edit: I hate the idea of modules or models having any sort of HP bar to begin with. That’s reserved to the other game we dont talk about here.
yeah, this is what i would do
1 Like
heli pve, assault ground pve, assault air pve, should I continue?
pve is bad, pvpve is the best, I would love to have escalation for all brs At least from rank 3
Yes, because that sounds way too pessimistic and literally you are trying to “sweep dirt under the rug”.
Can we really say with certainty that bombers inherently don’t fit, or are we just jumping to conclusions because of a bad experience?
You know, there are a hundred things that could be done to make them fit, and this is basically the first time in 10 years a real attempt to address the issue has been made. You can’t throw in the towel that soon…
Besides, if we have to remove bombers from ARB, we’d also have to remove interceptors whose entire role depends on them.
2 Likes
But now that i might not be misunderstood on purpose, or because of lack of actual ability to read what i write. I have seen good propositions, this especially:
But what do we think about combining this, with and Enduring Confrontation mode in Realistic Air Battles, minus markers?
I would like to see more bombing targets than generic bases. Give actual tactical targets to bomb.
Use larger maps, so it is easier for every type of plane to use terrain etc to cover their advance and flight path, reducing chances of being spotted.
Matches should take MUCH longer than current RB matches, and leaving mid game would give you less reward, than someone who stayed from start to finish. But only as a percentage of time spent in match. Needs ideas for this, to encourage staying in.
All this in an RB mode, where enemies dont have markers on them, and you have to actually spot them by seeing them in the Air.
Obviously markerless mode has it’s issues, where lower quality settings make it easier to spot planes against the ground. But i think this is one path to give bombers more purpose, right?
2 Likes
@Kefal_Bravo_690
Why did you remove your reply? I was about to answer a few of your points.
But what i remember reading, is how i dared to approach the Me264 with my B-26B, correct? Because the B-26B is a bomber affected by the change.
Did i read it right before you deleted it?
Sure because you did provide some specific input here
Interestingly, the situation mirrors the cas in grb. Some people demand it being removed, which will also lead to a removal of spaa from every tech tree…
Why is it that me, someone who doesn’t play bombers or -input whatever misconception about me you might have-, has to be the one to come up with ideas for vehicles which i don’t really enjoy playing.
This is not an exclusive right for me, you can do it too. It’s more constructive than picking things out of posts that fit your hateful agenda against criticism and those having it of the current state.
Sounds like escalation mode. It should be extended to lower BRs, really.
I can already imagine like, 3 more BR brackets.
7.0-8.3 with early jets, s-25 ana mim-4 (iirc) SAM systems, with flaks on airfields and dumb radarless spaa everywhere else. 20% smaller map. Highest escalation will unlock il-28 and other low rank nuke carriers.
Then 5.0-6.7 with flak sites with radars and spotlights and radarless spaa everywhere else. Highest escalation will unlock first nukes on tu-4 and b-29 which could destroy airfields easilly. Maps are 50% smaller.
Then 3.0-4.7 rank 3 escalation… With just dumb radarless spaa, highest escalation level will unlock pe-8 and lancasters with big bombs. Maps are 50% smaller.
1 Like
Sorry, i left out of my post that this should be something that all BR ranges have.
I feel like bombers are ok at 1-2 ranks, really. They have targets to bomb there with small bombs.
So even if said mode started at rank 4 it would be great
Why not have the option for all BR’s to those people who want longer matches, and don’t care about getting into an engagement 2 minutes into the match. We had an EC mode in RB every now and then back in the day. I loved it. But i guess it wasn’t popular because people want short time-to-engagemnt instead of longer battles where you have to fly for a while and actually find the enemies.
I stand behind what I said lol. Shit like this should be tested by the people making changes
And this was tested on the dev server as well. By players, and most said “Oh this is broken but it’s not gonna be the final version, this is just the dev server”
That aged well
2 Likes
oh yeah I am aware, just talking about people who think we should encourage lazy behaivior
well it wasnt, in first match of arb my tu-95m was oneshot by a missile
wouldnt happen on dev, so they did something
1 Like
is this new? it says the frag pen now
1 Like