Some of the changes are bit sketchy and illogical. Shifting tech tree vehicles, especially downranks I can see being an issue when someone bought Talisman for them.
Besides, is it known when update releases? I’ve just noticed tech tree reshuffles screw up my RU Air progression and I do wonder if I can research+buy next vehicle before I have to grind extra 220k rp.
Ah. Still, for a game who’s whole thing is “realistic” models and damage, and etc. having the realistic mode not be the center of attention makes no sense to me. It would be much better (and more sensible) to base the grouping, BRs, etc. off of realistic because that is what the game tries to market itself as.
Especially since arcade has a weird meta, and a lot of things are way higher than their versions in realistic, it means that the tree “progression” will be convoluted due to the impact the arcade “meta” of cannon head-ons has to vehicle stats and battle ratings, compared to realistic, where similar planes actually have to outfight each other instead of just getting a single burst off in a head on (most of the time).
It’s starting to be obvious that gaijin don’t actually want to lessen the grind.
They pretend to help by foldering vehicles and halving the rp for foldered ones, but then move half of rank 6 to rank 7 just to increase their costs…
And these “rules” about br gap between foldered vehicles makes absolutely zero sense, especially when you realize we just had a huge br change for hundreds of vehicles.
What will happen to folders when the STaTIsTiKs tell them to change the brs again?
It’s just ridiculous…
the J34 is the Swedish Hawker Hunter (and clearly has Swedish markings) so it doesn’t make sense for it to be in the Finnish line; i don’t recall Finland ever getting the Hunter. The J34 were also indented to take over the interceptor role from J29s so it also makes sense for the J34 to coma after them (i might folder the two Tunnans now that think about it)
the A28B is essentially the same aircraft as the other export Vampires, just relegated to attack role and makes sense for it to be in the same “attacker” line as the other “attack variants”, A21, A29, A32 and AJ37.
the Finnish Vampire FB 52A, while practically the same aircraft, has Finnish markings so it goes into the Finnish fighter line
Why do all Vampires get a couple of bombs and rockets while the A28 is stuck with only rockers? i have no idea, don’t ask me, ask gaijin
As for the F-105 and the Harrier, honestly i just don’t know how to better order them, i just don’t think it fits in the bomber line (as someone suggested to me back then).
Then again, this is one of those specific cases that can be dealt with later, once most of the tech tree is fixed.
The fact players are putting more thought into these folders and techtrees is pretty messed up…
But ok, that does make sense. Except the f105.
I really hope they take some consideration as to what has been said in this thread regarding the grouping, because most of it makes no sense. On top of outright removing some groups that already exist (like the Fw 190Ds), grouping vehicles that aren’t related at all (Marder and BMP is my favorite example) just makes no sense. The convention, before now anyway, was that similar vehicles were grouped, not vehicles that are the same BR. I hope they go back to that.
I think you missed the bit about Ground being three times as populated in AB. Air is pretty equal. Most players play Arcade by a wide margin. We are just more involved in the forum in RB.
I think the fact remains, like it or not, Arcade is the most popular version of WT.
Why would they focus on a niche part of the game just because we use the forum more? (I am RB, all my AB was pre level 100).
The selling point of WT is mouse aim planes and non-hp damage systems (beyond modules having a form of hp).
I would prefer it centered around RB too, but it isn’t.
I get some of your reasonings. But certain vehicles with similar BRs and playstyles should be together while others shouldn’t. The Russian light tank/BMP like is a great example of this.
Good argument by gaijin but they ignore the feedback that arcade air brs arent very accurate comapred to rb ones. There’s like 20+ examples of that. And ruining logical progression for rb players is brushed off as necessary evil which is not necessary at all. and we still have no response on vautour/F84F issue.
Lets see why is Japanese and Chinese F-30 Sabres 8.0 in arcade while american F-35 is 7.3 and A-5 and F-25 ar 7.7 and Italian one is 8.0 while being worse than all others? They are all same br in realistic except for A-5, because some are pretty much identical (ignore Cl Mk.4 being still overtiered and chinese sabre having bit lighter engine).
Answer is simple gaijin doesn’t look into or update arcade brs adequately or regularly but now is using them to group stuff up for some reason.
As example F-35 and CL. Mk4 are apparently higher br in sim than other 50 cal Sabres despite being lower in arcade probably because sim brs are also often ignored.
F8E is lower br in sim than F8U-2 despite being a clear update and being higher br in realistic. Why? again sim brs are not being looked to regularly or with any attention at all. Theres examples of that all over tech trees and only realistic brs seem consistent because of regular updates.
It’s becoming clear at this point that even if we don’t all agree on what exactly makes these changes bad, we all agree that the changes are bad, and for multiple fair reasons that aren’t just “I dont like it”.
Remains to see what gaijin will do with that feedback
Those are the sort of numbers I expected
I assume once you factor in the fact this test took place smack in the middle of the covid pandemic, and the new player influx was insane then, it is much closer than displayed at least in terms of ground RB.
As if we look at thunder skill, which i know is not the best but neither was this, the majority of games logged are rb.
Clearly while arcade is undeniably the most popular gamemode, it’s not by such a margin that realistic should be completely disregarded.
For air it’s almost even, for ground it’s indeed significantly in favor of arcade, but we’re still talking 20% of games being arcade.
Looking at some comments in this thread, you’d think 90% of games were arcade and barely any were realistic in which case it would make sense to favor arcade this much. But here ? 50% for air, 20% for ground, that’s a significant portion of the playerbase, and I’d be curious to see the distribution of these games over different ranks/BRs.
This sounds like another case of “the majority of the playerbase plays for free” conveniently ignoring that “the majority of the playerbase” never gets past rank 3 and stops playing after a month / hasn’t played in years. Stats can mean anything if you pick and choose the right ones.
Basically, the results there are heavily skewed by the pandemic, which introduces so many new players to the game. When you compare it to thunderskill, and what is displayed there, the majority of the games logged are in rb, though i feel its an incomplete data set as its basically logging what is being played at around 6.7 and higher. regardless the gap is much smaller than is being implied by some of the people in this thread, as it is clear they have never tried to find a game of air arcade at around 7.7, as last time i decided to give it a go for a task challenge i was queuing for like 5 minutes, which is comparable to naval when no one was playing it
thunderskill is not representative in any way, it only calculates the base of players who “signed up” to it, i.e. checked their profile. And most ‘random’ players have this in mind. They come in after work, play a few games and leave. Many of them buy high-tier bonuses because they simply don’t have time to spend 12 hours a day playing the game.
That… Has pretty much nothing to do with my comment…?
Also folders don’t “break the setup” of anything… They speed up the grind and hide similar vehicles, or atleast they should.
People can still unlock whatever vehicle they want to build the lineups with.
The folders based on brs is just simply shitty design.
BR is a variable, but vehicle type or its use in the game aren’t.
And sim games dont on average last 5 mins, so both data sets are faulty. I am just working with what i have, if gaijin wants to disprove it they just have to show game stats.
The more i am reading of the devs, the more obvious this was one guys idea, and now they are doubling down like crazy to try and justify it. Reminds me of the reactions they gave from last man standing way back in the day, before begrudgingly removing it as it flat out broke the game XD.
The way this has been set up is going to skew progression, and very likely induce player burn out alot quicker. Plus using the stats we got from the server replays, the air rb and arcade are more or less played the same. The big gap is between ground arcade and rb, which last i checked for the ground arcade you can’t even bring your own planes, so the logic that arcade is drastically more popular in terms of air, and they are basing their entire decision on that is asinine to say the least.
The problem is that they don’t have to do anything, you make the wrong assumption that anyone here is listening to you at all. their approach is very much based on “statistics” that only they know. The changes, even though very unpopular, are passed anyway, or are postponed and come out in a slightly changed version with very strong opposition from the community. The only sensible argument that decision-makers understand is the wallet. And that’s all that matters to them. No one there is interested in whether you will have fun because you spent 200 bucks in the game, if statistically there are enough of you not to spend money here, then only someone will take your opinion into account.
I have been here since 2014. I’ve seen a lot over the years and it shapes my opinion.
