End the diminishing Returns mechanic

Dev Server General Discussion - Dev Server
1

Do you want to see this mechanic removed?

  • Yes
  • No
0 voters

Gaijin has long had an extremely negative opinion of ground attackers and have consistantly gone out of their way to ensure that ground attackers are less viable than fighters or fighter-bombers, this can be seen in a number of ways, from how they balance them via BR, how the gamemodes are designed and built, the rewards given, etc etc. But the most egregious in my opinion is the diminishing returns mechanic.

This mechanic needs to be removed.

The mechanic works like this, the more bombs you take, the less reward you will get per bomb. Take for example the Buc S1. I can run 8x 1000lb (of 2 different types) and with that bomb load I can in theory destroy 1.8 bases. However, I will earn vastly more reward if I run only 4x bombs and destroy only one base, than if I run 8x bombs and destroy one base and damage second or kill some Ai units. This entirely negates any advantage I may have over something with a slightly smaller bomb load. (I have heard multiple times that it is at 8.7 because it has a larger bomb load than the Canberra at 8.3, but with this mechanic in mind, should that matter?)

A core advantage of ground attackers over fighters and fighter-bombers should be an increased bomb capacity, but this mechanic totally eliminates that advantage, and that isnt factoring in that taking a greater bomb load already has a significant negative impact on flight performance and balances itself already

I conducted some quantitative testing of this and the results are below:

Tornado Gr4 (talisman and Premium)

Bombs RP SL Score
5 4410 10540 536
6 3901 9320 473
7 3533 8441 428
8 3257 7781 396
9 3045 7268 369
10 2872 6861 348
11 2733 6523 331
12 2616 6244 317

In essence, whilst it does show that if I can get 2x base kills, I would earn more than just 1, the rewards are notably reduced. Additionally, as I increased the number of bombs, the consistency of getting base kills drop significantly. I can usually always get a base kill by running 5x bombs, but it took me a number of matches to get 1x base kill with the max bomb load. Not too mention the fact that just because I have enough bombs too kill a second base, doesn’t mean that there is 1 active, or I’ll survive long enough to reach the target. In the 20 or so matches I did for this data, that happened only twice and the second one, just barely.

Whilst I was unable to get clean data, due to the fact that Ai vehicles reward a different amount depending on exact type. I did log this data a bit and does show that the rewards are also impacted by the amount of weapons taken

Though interestingly, napalm doesn’t seem to be impacted in the same way and so doesn’t get an immediate and notable reward advantage as you can run fewer bombs. But you still get the FM advantage.

Harrier GR1:

Bombs RP SL Score
3 Napalm 3961 23613 536
5 1000lb 4569 27231 618

So either bomb load needs to be balanced via BR / natural negative performance impact or via this mechanic, it cannot be done by both simutaneously and I would vote removing this mechanic

4 Likes
2

this mechanic is in place to prevent fighters with enough nalpalm bombs to destroy bases to rush faster than attackers and steal all bases

1 Like
3

They do that already, all this does is punish aircraft without Napalm

2 Likes
4

Sure, why not

5

Not sure if that is the reason. But as a fighter with bombs, you are better off to take only 2 napalm and some missiles.

6

Yes but I myself still think the whole target system should be completely changed in WT, as discussed in several (mostly Sim EC related) threads:

WT should come away from hitpoint-based area mission targets towards modular targets with realistic resistance depending on weapons used:

Instead of having a certain area into which one simply needs to drop a certain amount of certain bombs (with certain damage), have mission targets comprising of various objects with various resistances that need to be taken out.

Not only would this make attacking such targets extremely more interesting, it would also allow for fairer, target and hit dependent rewards. For example a “bunker complex” of 5 hardened shelters, each yielding x SL/XP, vs. “assembly area” with numerous light barracks and vehicles, each yielding y SL/XP. The bunker complex would best be hit with precision bombs, the assembly area would better be killed with area weapons (incediaries, rockets,…). Then there could be factories, powerplants, SAM or ballistic missile sites, …

Would be completely new mechanic, but could offer a lot if done properly…

8 Likes
7

Honestly would buff strategic and heavy bombers in SB EC and let them climb up high and kill bases frkm there.

Curre tly theyd spend all their time climbing and landing exactly due to diminishing returns.

Would enciurage going for bases rather than airfield.

Would create o jectives for fighters at higher alt.

More higher alt dogfighting = i like.

So i support.

But i do prefer schind’s suggestion.

Basically do what il2gb apollo does and theyre golden.

3 Likes
8

Just stop letting fighters and multirole jets bomb bases its not that hard gaijin

9

But then Mig-23ML and F-4S players would have to learn how to actually play the game :D

2 Likes
10

People base bombing with napalm don’t care if they get less rewards, they’re still getting quite a bit regardless.