At toptier it’s fine, but at every other BR it’s awful.
Gajin should made it rank 6+ or 7+
I think it should be divided into precision-guided weapons and non-precision-guided weapons. If you sortied first with precision-guided weapons and then bring unguided bombs or rockets in your second sortie, the SP cost should not increase—this would be more reasonable. 🤔
In WWII battle ratings, since there are no precision-guided weapons, the double SP gain effect still applies. However, in top-tier battles, if you’re shot down after using precision-guided weapons and return with no ground attack ordnance at all (including unguided bombs or rockets), engaging ground SPAA would become quite challenging.☹️
spawn a tank bro, it’s a ground battle
2 Likes
About time too. CAS ruins tank battles although am now finding naval battle more rewarding when dealing with aircraft. They can’t get close before BOT AA gets them. Great fun, ships can shoot back and ARE NOT SITTING DUCKS to less than average tankers.
1 Like
In ASB, I dont see the markers being too helpful at WW2 brackets. It tells you which of the 8x8 km squares within the 64x64 km play area has tanks. You still rely on muzzle flashes to find your targets and must visually identify and approach.
In comparison, GSB is at most ~4x4 km across (likes of Hurtgen Forest).
“In middle of a town” is a valid difference, but in GSB you also have tanks hiding in trees (Port Moresby especially hard to spot depending on which gridsquare).
Static may be valid, but we’re talking about tanks without stabilizers. See aforementioned yags/bredas - they find a spot and stay there to provide suppressing/covering fire. Effectively same as in ASB.
When I flew out my P40 due to running out of line-up compatible tanks, I found it no more difficult to strafe germans with my .50s than it is with my Mustang Ia in ASB proper. Deaths were due to enemy aircraft being spawned.
Weakening CAS is a good thing, the land warfare history mode is originally based on land battles, instead of letting most players be bombarded by individual players, I support weakening CAS
2 Likes
It’s a really dumb change that no1 asked for. There’s far better ways to go about nerfing CAS.
1 Like
这样我开苏34或f16意义在哪里，苏30sm和f15e比他们做得更好，尤其是苏34，陆战不会有人使用苏34，空战也不会有人使用
1 Like
thats like saying its OK to beat a man to death with baseball bat because you paid for it.
2 Likes
Why can you use the SU34 after using the SU30, the only good thing for other air forces is fighter jets, and if you die, you will double the respawn points
This post was flagged by the community and is temporarily hidden.
这种改动我认为还是利大于弊的，光论我自己玩德系陆战历史5.0-7.0权重时的体验来讲，现在的游戏机制极其容易出现某一方有几名（实际游戏中只需大约两名）使用空军优势系的完整出击队列的玩家抢先凑够重生点，然后通过消极对战/直接弃车等方式开始驾驶飞机对另一方进行彻底的打击，且这种局势几乎是摧枯拉朽，二战防空车防空成功率低且某些系空军强度不足（例如不购买高级载具的德系空军）导致这种局面经常无法逆转，哪怕将优势方的攻击机/轰炸机消灭优势方也可以使用那些有对地能力的战斗机继续制造优势（例如美系，美系空军无论哪架飞机几乎都有不错的对地打击能力），而这种改动很好的制止了这种情况，保证了空军弱势系的游戏体验，让其不至于哪怕完全歼灭敌方第一波空中打击就被第二轮使用不同种类机型空中打击到彻底丧失战斗能力
Overall, I believe this change does more good than harm. Speaking from my own experience playing German ground forces in the 5.0-7.0 BR range in Realistic Battles, the current game mechanics make it extremely easy for one side to gain an overwhelming advantage. Just a few players (often only about two) using nations with strong air superiority can quickly earn enough spawn points by using their full lineups. They then deliberately destroy their ground vehicles or abandon them early to start flying. This allows them to unleash devastating air strikes that are nearly impossible to stop. WWII-era SPAA has low effectiveness, and certain nations’ air trees lack potency (like non-premium German air), making this snowball effect almost impossible to reverse. Even if you manage to shoot down the attackers or bombers, the dominating team can simply switch to their fighters – many of which have potent ground attack capabilities (especially American planes, where nearly every fighter can effectively strike ground targets). This change effectively curbs this tactic. It protects the gameplay experience for nations with weaker air forces, preventing them from being completely crippled and losing all combat effectiveness after just the first wave of enemy aircraft, only to be immediately hammered by a second wave of different plane types.（Machine Translation)
4 Likes
Have you not been in threads where people were asking to increase CAS SP cost??
We can’t have OP AA AND CAS nerf at the SAME time. This is too much
3 Likes
We are well aware of the whiny vocal minority of CAS haters.
As I said in a separate discussion, the CAS change makes sense for toptier, but is bad at every other BR.
ppl want CAS SP increases, they didn’t want this. Gajin’s proposed change is simply a bad way to go about increasing SP cost.
I am not going down this path again.
I’m in favor of any change to the current situation, change is good you’ll survive.
During World War II, the German forces suffered heavy losses from CAS (Close Air Support) bombing. Given that the German troops were already clumsy, they were further decimated by air strikes. Therefore, eliminating CAS is advantageous for the overall land warfare environment
GR CAS should be rebalanced, especially in the top tier. However, Gaijin staff should have realized that any change to the respawn system of certain type of vehicle may cause a butterfly effect on other types.
Nerfing the CAS domination via SPs will surely have a negative impact on the in-game achievement of playing SPAAs and reduce players willing to play anti-air vehicle actively while anti air tasks quite common in the battlepass challenges and daily/special tasks. This condition may also applies to air superiority players and even the AR Mode.
Additionally, I wonder if carrying high penetration belts or respawning as helicopters with ATGMs will be categorized as the re-defined CAS if this change applies to the next patch.