Most of the better feedback here focuses on cases that should matter. Moving ranks due to weird rules. Planes loosing airspawn even tanks loosing scouting. Changes to what vehicles can do tasks. In my feedback i never bring up vehicle type grouping since i don’t think that matters that much really. If devs cant fix a simple issue like some F84Fs loosing airspawn but some keeping it without going back to the drawing board so be it.
I think calling them out for using arcade brs (not bad in most cases) and weird rules to group and move stuff is needed. Most feedback here and on earlier post is “50% off is great and we will take it but your grouping is trash.” Devs do seem to care a bit like bringing F6F5N down after feedback and complaining seems valid in that case so we get less shit folder for realistic players to look at and progress.
Moving ranks upward is exclusively a benefit.
Moving ranks downward so long as it’s above rank 3 is still largely a benefit as lower repair costs occur.
As I said personally early on in all of these threads:
Rank 3 should start at 4.0, and possibly 3.7.
And that’s it.
Honestly, the aircraft being 3.3 and 3.0 for rank 3 for so long was annoying.
even having ranks that go from BR “A” to BR “B” won’t work (regardless of which BRs modes you choose).
Trading your vautour bomber spawn for and airfield spawn in air rb i think doesn’t quite get compensated by rp/sl modifiers ““benefits”” from higher ranks. Non american F-84Fs loosing air spawns also doesnt sound beneficial at all but i guess we can test which one will performs better progression wise and if its actually a benefit to loose an airspawn for higher rank with no other compensation.
Again gaijin touched on this in their building line ups argument but ignored planes in line ups for other modes. If u wanted F6F5N for 4.3 grb/naval line up you had to go to rank 4 because of the 1st iteration of the changes. Gaijin adding Pz.38 NT to bolster german scouts only to remove its scouting few months after. Moving ranks up is good and should be done where u can but not by arcade brs and not while ignoring the consequences of it.
Moving ranks upward is not always a benefit not sure how loosing air spawn is compensated by just better sl/rp modifier and sometimes more/less planes to research with such plane if u do that.
Im aware this if we now lower vatours to not get obliterated by everything with and afterbruner around 9.3 can lead it to be now in rank 5 range and if we dont it will be in rank 6 range which is rather silly concept. There’s no excuse for US F-84F not loosing airspawn while others do even if they dont need br change.
You forget the part where Vautour goes to 8.7 later on due to lower efficiency.
Overall this is a net-positive.
As for F-84Fs, I don’t know if that’s a negative or not, cause F-84F is a baby Sabre at the end of the day.
F-6F5N being rank 4 is exclusively a benefit…
well we shall see since french one stays rank 4 and US left the stupid folder with F4U-4B to be rank 3 again. you see F6F5N was already in a folder and would be cheaper to research anyway also the amount of stuff in ranks stayed the same after devs listened to how silly it was and changed it back. Its still positive but now you have F4U-1C folder at rank IV instead which is also net benefit but doesnt hurt realistic players as much and I would call that pure beneficial change. I think that there wasnt enough defoldering to not make those changes beneficial in any %. But F6F-5N example shows that it can be done much better.
That’s extremely wishful thinking not gonna lie. When we got airspawn changes no plane got compensated at a reasonable rate or at all. F-84F got added at 8.7 and got moved down for a good reason because its pretty bad at air combat. It could be used very decently in grb but its very fat F-84 more than baby Sabre.
That is cause only two aircraft could reasonable be reduced in BR: Su-17M2 & A7D.
However, A7D stopped games within 90 seconds on many maps, as I remember the Sicily matches clearly to this day.
And A7D stopped being used cause it stopped being the most powerful 10.3 in the game.
I mean small maps that attackers could end below 30 seconds are thankfully br locked now. Buccaneers were pretty forgotten. Other A-4s than A-4B just lately finally got their rocket boosters. F-84F and Vautour case is more complex since they sit much lower but again should be looked into before making such changes.
I still think we have right to complain on how gaijin changing stuff (maybe not just if its purely beneficial like A2D going up and other prems even at cost of tt planes being out of place) when they are very selective with their rules. And putting obvious suggestion on how to improve stuff by basically not removing or sacrificing few benefits gaijin already were giving too us. I think it works both ways gaijin can make on average beneficial changes and we can work with that to fix what’s clearly wrong making low or no impact like with F6F5N case. Some players are probably willing to make insane sacrifice to keep tidy tech trees im not that for doing that and some people are suggesting that.
Buccaneer S1 is a slightly better Canberra so it can’t go down.
And S2 has 2 bases of bombs with flares. 3 bases if you bring no flares.
I love a good critique. What I dislike are demands of things in a tantrum manner & making threats if their demands aren’t met.
Pretty sure some of those posts are still active on this thread. IDK if there were many on the other thread.
I can tell you I’ve seen people threaten Gaijin with more horrific behavior because their expectation was implemented a slightly different way than what they wanted.
Not sure on your stance but I believe a decent compromise can be reached like some other people suggested by following some gaijin rules and having same reducing of grind for every tier and nation in the same beneficial way maybe off by a bit by simply using different foldering and some more compromise between arcade and realistic to achieve same benefits and dealing properly with rank changes that still will happen and people wont like. If someone asks if i take current changes or no changes i obviously will take them. Snail giveth and snail taketh as they say. Even 50% of on current folders and eco changes are sizeable buffs to grind but cant say no to more. Some tech trees fore me have been grouped near perfect like japan ground and i didn’t see people complain about that either.
being real the arcade vs rb issue could ve been easily avoided by looking at stuff like best Ki-84 7.7 being higher br than prem Sabre 7.3 in arcade and going to conclusion that arcade meta is so much different than rb that there needs to be a good compromise for air tt changes and not arcade taking it all. I personally have almost no issues with ground grouping done except pointing out gaijin brs are outdatet in there too. 95% of my feedback is kinda air related.
Speak for yourself, qemo sabe. :-)
He speaks for literally 95% of this forum…
Btw, i was re-reading the news article, and i particularly like this passage:
“When we sat down to make these changes, we also realized that we could carefully look into the position and ranks of all vehicles, and streamline them where possible. Therefore, we are not only reducing the amount of vehicles to research to progress down a tree by grouping vehicles, but we are also making trees more logical and better structured — taking into account the large number of vehicles that have been added to the game in the past few years.”
i mean, i wouldn’t call their trees “more logical”; if you only look at AB BRs maybe, but… do you think grouping different vehicles is logical? or getting later variants before earlier ones?
i don’t know you, but it doesn’t sound logical to me.
If you own the vehicle already. If you don’t it’s now harder to get in most cases.
There’s a few obvious winners out of this, like XP-55 and XF5F owners as one example. Some losers, sure.
I’d just say you were always gonna get more vehicles moving across the line from rk3 to rk2 than the other way when you did any refoldering of rank 1 and 2. The whole point is to speed progression, because there’s an unbalanced amount of play along the rank progression now, and people are taking too long now to get into late-game. That meant the average BR people used for daily challenges was also going to need to go up, inevitably. It’s not a bug, it’s a feature, so trying to talk them out of it here seems pretty pointless.
People do this same thing with BR change lists, always offering their elaborate counter lists. This never ever works. As with those, there’s going to be minor changes around the edges. Just roll with it folks, there’s always another update where any real bad decisions will get undone.
prevention is better than cure mate; most of us won’t roll with it (i think)
Br based taks were quite nice and solved lots of issues but creating at least the issue with naval Bluewater that made some tasks insanely easy and reduced the grind needed for some tasks to 0. Im not that knowledgeable on what happened there and why exactly br based tasks are gone.
The 2A5 and 2A6 have minor differences so one isn’t necessarily better than the other. I’d pick the PSO over the 2A6 any time of the week especially because of the increased protection.
Still not “all” though. That would be 100%.
If you define “this forum” only as people complaining on this one thread about it, maybe. I don’t think the majority of even all forum users would want to see the other good stuff in this update delayed further over this. And that number itself is an infinitesimally small part of the player base.
Forum griping has its place, I do it a lot too, we all pay $, we all have an unchallenged right to gripe here. I just think the amount of whining this last month or two on this forum, over this, the T-90S, yadda yadda yadda, could actually be getting to the point where it’s got to be depressing both forum participation and even game participation now. And that would be sad. Maybe just let it roll now and if it’s as bad as you say, take the W for calling it now, is all.