And some people like fair fight in tank vs tank combat.
If War Thunder isn’t providing that experience for you, I suggest you look elsewhere instead of demanding War Thunder change to suit you.
Like a new gamemode for people after so many years wont change much.
Not to mention that with new gamemode people who like what You like would be playing the mode with You, there is no issue.
If it wont change much then not adding it isnt a big deal.
Just like prey is a crucial part of the ecosystem, people who don’t know how to CAS are important to GRB.
Going back to this, theres a quote in military circles.
“If you’re in a fair fight, you didn’t plan it properly.”
– Nick Lappos, Chief R&D Pilot, Sikorsky Aircraft.
In a military combat game a “fair fight” is the result of poor tactics.
But don’t fret, I have a solution for you. Get all the anti-CAS guys together and set up a series of custom lobbies tuned just the way you like them.
You really have to act like that right?
It wont change much for people who like combined aspect of the Game and will allow players who like tank vs tank combat to have it.
You can just say „I like free frags”
That would just end all this nonsense discussion as it all comes down to It That You don’t want easy gameplay to go away
It will change in the sense that there will be overall fewer players to fight.
And as I said above, the option to create a series of custom Tank vs Tank lobbies has always been there. Why not utilize it?
Because why people should play custom battles of they could be normal games?
If there was only few people who enjoy tank vs tank combat then adding a mode wouldn’t change much for You. You have to Pick if You belive that it would divide playerbase or that only few people want it
If War Thunder was accurate to actual war, every early top-tier US vs Soviet match would end like this
Because they aren’t normal games now, so if the choice is to either not have them at all, or make them yourself, making them yourself seems pretty good to me.
Furthermore if you banded together and made a series of custom lobbies, then demonstrated that they are routinely populated, it would send a much stronger message to Gaijin than “anti-CAS thread #1937473” on the forums ever could.
Making custom lobbies and playing in them would not only scratch your tank vs tank itch, it would give you a better chance of seeing a real TO mode.
Can anyone provide an actual reason not to do this?
He said in a discussion about a multiplayer game.
Or ask for them and that is what they are doing.
Lmao
You have already explained Your point and why You think that way, no point in further discussion.
and how’s that working out for you?
A routinely populated series of custom lobbies would not only give your demands more weight, it would allow you to play as you want in the meantime.
Give me a serious answer as to why a series of organized, populated, custom lobbies is bad for you.
- CAS hater:
“I have a problem and I want it fixed!!!”
- Normal people:
“Here’s the solution.”
- CAS hater:
“NOOO I WANT IT FIXED AT YOUR EXPENSE!!!”
I hope y’all realize why Gajin chooses to ignore you.
You haven’t offered any solutions.
I’ll say it again.
A series of Tank Only custom lobbies operated and populated by an organized a group of Tank Only players.
And ARB/ASB would be mostly people vulching aircraft before they can even take off, dropping a million bombs on the runway so that the craters prevent take off for those that did survive.
Germany during WW2 put this to great use versus poland, france and USSR.
Then Western Allies did the same against germany.
Edit:
Oh, and most tanks would get destroyed while still in the hangar from various strike/bombing runs. Survivors would get destroyed while moving from depot to battlefield in the column or while taking a break off to the side and messing up camouflaging the tanks.
Great as I use all vehicles and like combined aspect of the Game.
This is truly a case of unstoppable forces meets immovable object.
Ngl though, i am going to take your side in this case simply because pangolin thinks stingers are op.