Agree, just leave it how it is right now. it is really good.
The only thing they need to fix is that objectives can’t spawn inside the ITO range
Don’t think you bothered to read what I said, I can’t find any relevance to what you said to what I said.
the ITOs help the pve players
do what?
rtb safely and ngl its more fun shooting at ITOs then rolands. actually kind of a challange
rtb’ing wasn’t an issue for anybody
alr but it makes it safer now
I think it’s important making the distinction between zombers and PVE players, they get mixed up a lot. No problem flying out with the sole purpose of attacking ground or AI targets, issue is mainly those who try to force PVE onto other players, and their play style of generally almost AFK kamikazeing onto runways with zero regard to anything else.
As for “actual” PVE players, those who aren’t looking to just abuse the system to make a quick buck for events, I believe those players can actually make the effort to try and play around the ITO’s, it’s a new challenge. You can bomb toss up high, fly low to avoid the air defence or just destroy the ITO’s themselves if they have access to mavericks or something similar. The only challenge I see are those planes at 10.7+ that don’t have CCRP modelled in the HUD. Without it, it’s definitely trickier, however I still think it’s possible. I went into sim the other day just to test how hard the ITO’s were to play around and it really wasn’t that bad. In one instance I was able to basically make it all the way on top of an airfield at high altitude, before being blown up by ITO, so tossing should absolutely be possible. And Another time I tried just flying very low, not necessarily multipath and that worked too
2 Likes
Needs a bit of polishing I think. Ideally some proper SEAD weapons, but I agree. As one of those mud mover players. Im all for a good challenge
Polishing changes:
- Move bases a little further away from AFs, especially on maps like Denmark
- Improve AF module targeting using map designation
- Ability to fly under the radar? (delayed reaction for SPAA if you stay below a certain height)
You say somber, I see a free kill.
So American bias?
I think this would be really cool, like simulate the curvature of the earth
1 Like
Yeah, it would, its always been my issue with SPAAGs like the Sidam 25s and Gerpards. Its not that they are deadly. its that they start pre-firing you the moment you enter within about 5km. If they had a reaction delay and took a few seconds before they started firing accurately + you could approach undetected somehow, they would be really fun targets to attack
Wild idea, a hot take, science fiction if you will - Teamwork.
Let’s think of a scenario: You plan to bomb Redfor bases on Denmark, covered by AA. But because you are not foaming at the mouth about maximum UA, you bring another bomber in so you get one each and spend as little time in enemy areas. You get two attackers with standoff weapons to clear the defenses just before you ingress, giving you a window. But hold on, the attackers can get attacked by fighters… so you bring two fighters to engage. Oh no, but the enemy can have more fighters in the area, so maybe to be sure bring three fighters with you as well. So that is a sortie of 2x bomber, 2x attacker, 3x fighter. Fighters go first to screen and CAP, attackers run SEAD and shorty after, the bombers deliver the payload and head back. Attackers assume a secondary fighter role and provide rear security with fighters until everyone is back at the base to get ready for another sortie. (Spielberg is now calling me, he wants to make this fantasy movie that will put Avatar, Harry Potter, Lord of the Rings, Star Wars and Jurassic Park to shame.)
So we as players have all the tools to work around this EvPvEvPvP problem. If there is more bases, you bring more bombers, if there is more AA, you bring more attackers, if there is more enemy fighters… you bring more fighters. But at the same time the other team is trying to do the same and we arrive at the zero sum game.
In the real world of WT airsim though, figters will go to where the enemy is, not friendlies. If there is a constant furball in the middle of nowhere, they will go there to get kills and SL. While this happens, attackers will go for the ground battles to get ground kills and SL because all the fighters are occupied with the furball. Bombers pick up whatever bases to they can sneak up to and try to get as many as possible to get tonnage and SL. Inversely, bombers will not go for the bases covered by AA because it’s certain death, attackers will not attack the AA, because it’s way more dangerous than ground battle and fighters cannot afford flying 20 minutes escorting when nothing can happen. The game does nothing to incentvise teamork, there is no Tank-DPS-Healer dependency like in the MMORPGs, there is no rock-paper-scissors system. Just keep doing whatever you are doing until someone runs out of tickets or the timer runs out. Also no incentive to help anyone on your way back home for that sweet UA bonus. Others can get missiles up the engines all day (probably don’t even have to worry about going negative from prem time), so why would I waste my non-prem hard earned SL.
There aint no way in hell that random people would cooperate to such degrees. Clans/Communities maybe, but even then they will some someone else getting all the kills while they “help win the game” but get nothing in return… So they go “help” the fighters to get some kills and SL… and we are back at the start.
Conducted some simple tests yesterday (only in test flight), but with quite sobering results. I tested various aircraft and weapons against the hot AA targets in the southwest of the Denmark Test Flight Map (ADATS), the cold SPAA’s around the airfield, and Mission Target Bases.
A-7E, AGM-62 & LANA, 3000m:
- Engaging the ADATS, always got shot down before getting into range for Walleyes.
- Engaging the SPAAG’s near the airfield, needed to get within 6-8km to get hits and kills.
AV-8B (NA), AGM-65G, Litening II, 3000m:
- Needed to get within at least 10km to get moderately reliable kills, within 8km to get reliable kills.
AV-8B (NA), Mk.83, Litening II, 2000m:
- With CCRP/Lofting, release of the bombs was at around 6km from target.
- Accuracy and precision low: already slight errors (not perfectly aligned climbing vector) will lead to complete miss.
Buccaneer S.2B, Aj.168, Pave Spike, 3000m:
- Able to lock between 15-20km, but accuracy and precision low, only moderate kill probability.
- Better kill probability when launched below 12km.
- Main problem is low contrast seeker of the missiles and only low res/low zoom TV channel of the Pave Spike.
A-10C, GBU-39/B (SDB I), Sniper, 3000m:
- Able to engage from 15-20km.
- Low accuracy and precision of the SDB’s and their low yield make actually killing targets quite unreliable. Often several bombs needed for one target.
JAS39C Gripen, GBU-64 JDAM-ER, Litening II, 3000m:
- Able to engage from 15-20km.
- Very reliable kills thanks to good yield of the 2000 pounder
General observations:
- Rendering distances are a problem: one can easily see and identify a target at 20km even with old targeting pods or seekers, but before one can actually lock the seeker, landscape elements like trees start rendering, sometimes obscuring the target that was previously visible, making it impossible to lock.
- In VR there is very annoying sight stutter in seeker and TGP views, making finding and locking targets difficult.
- The visualization of one’s locked point/target rarely corresponds to the position of the target, especially with TV/IIR seekers: One may never be sure if the correct target is locked, because the seeker just points roughly to the area of the target. It’s not possible in WT for TV/IIR seekers to actually lock and point based on image/ contrast, and seeker just blindly locks the target. Or doesn’t. Fine tuning an impact point is only possible via Targeting Equipment and thus with Laser or PGS guided weapons.
- With high yield/long range/high precision weapons at high tiers like the JDAM-ER’s, it’s very easy actually. With the weapons and equipment available at lower tiers not so much…
(Note: this are just my personal observations: Maybe others have different experiences and observations…)
1 Like
And with this we should attack such targets at 10.7:
= /
Denmark has ALWAYS been terribly designed… but designed around Rolands.
When you play as redfor and C7 doesn’t spawn an airfield it’s not worth joining the game… who wants to spend half the time flying over water??
and the NW corner doesn’t need FOUR airfields… sometimes FIVE!
Change it so they spawn in B1 and A4 and C7 of course and the problem is solved… the southern ones probably need tweaking too.
but if you want to bomb 5 minibases*** DONT PLAY DENMARK.
Rocky Canyon doesn’t have this issue
Vietnam doesn’t have this issue
Afghanistan doesn’t have this issue
Smolensk doesn’t have this issue
Spain doesn’t have this issue
Sinai doesn’t have this issue(?)
All 128 km2 maps with 5 bases… but rarely played because of stupid Denmark.
Denmark is my go-to map if I want to fly the Warthog. For everything else I find it also too flat (like most maps).
For Bases, but also Air/Air, I like Afghanistan very much, as the topography offers a lot of possibilities for offense and defense…
1 Like
Agreed… flying the A-10C up the left side to kill SPAA with lower risk was also my goto when playing a thunderer wager…
PVP was on the right side… and you always knew where there would be at least 4 bases… but again, if C7 didn’t spawn it wasn’t playable since a fighter will spot you if they have to spawn in the NW corner.
but it’s still deathly boring to see 5 Denmark maps and nothing else for the BR…
let it die :p