Skill bonuses would be useful if it really skill based but in current form not.
Why i wrote this?
Answer: PILOTS in tank battle. I played not only one ground realistic battle where one of our or enemy player who nothing earned with his ground unit, just died, then bringed a juicy plane and he bomber the whole ground battlefield than got 6-9 kill, or bringed a fighter and hunting every opened vehicle, make all of them useless and wasted resource.
Waste of time , waste of money and zero skill needed in ground battle from this. Most player will exit after they lost his first/first 2 tank because that.
Not matter how good you are always will be exist the plane who will kill you and your mate next to you(Il-2,P-63C,P47D,BF109,FW 190, PE-8 or helicopters in battle where no mobil SAM system… and camping from 3+ km with his ATGM…and collect kills really skill based in ground battle…)
Mobil AA guns/SPAA are useless: all opened, to shut down plane too difficult(AA guns) 80% of players can’t use it or can’t hit the plane while fighters destroy them with his MG. Fighters always start attack enemy planes when not found free, opened vehicles.
Why not exists ground battle, instead of ground-combined battle type?
Has absolutely nothing to do with that lame ass npc response “skill issue.” You can’t physically see through them and not all maps are at sea level. Sea level is defined at 0 feet, you have maps where you start near mountains, higher elevation. Almost no one is going to tell how close to the deck they are or a hill side using the altimeter. Put some more thought into your own response next time.
This all sounds like a personal issue. If your altimeter starts dropping in number size you should probably pull up. Altimeters work the same whether you start at sea level or 5000 meters. You have a skill issue.
Killing bases delivers so much more RP than killing fighters. I would feel almost greedy to ask for more bonuses than the destruct bonus. It seems just fair to reward fighter mains too. Same applies to capturing points to a lesser extend.
Not sure why you always resort to this insulting tone. Why not just stick to the arguments?
Just like Naval with the bonus rewards being given for damage done can Bomber Players get points for amount of damage done or amount of bases deatroyed aswell??? Every update Bomber Mechanics are being forgotten/overlooked gradually.
" Let the WWII tanks fight at night if players want to do so"
What about the BR crossover where vehicles with no night vision face those with it? How would you enjoy that? How many vehicles that face WW2 vehicles are actually from the 70s and 80s?
I don’t think that having this skill bonus apply to just vehicle kills in GRB is a good idea. Vehicle kills are not a good indicator of skill. Kills are the most influential of stats regarding skill, but not the only source. I’d argue that there needs to be more metrics that determine “player skill” in an individual match. We couldn’t add too many metrics though, as some of them would overlap with normal RP gains (like number of hits taken or damage done).
Some things that could be measured for skill are, accuracy, average number of shots to kill, how many shots it takes to die, how long lives are (with player activity in there), number of bases captured, etc. Some of these metrics are easier for heavy tanks or tank destroyers or easier for light tanks and IFV’s. I frankly don’t know how easy it would be to have a system with these metrics that’s vehicle dependent, which it would need to be for actually determining skill.
French autoloader tanks have a tendency to have higher kill counts, german heavy tanks tend to deflect shots easier, russian tanks don’t need follow up shots (lots of HE filler), etc. The definition of “skilled” on any particular vehicle changes a lot. Having a broad integer kill count apply to all vehicles just feels like using a sledgehammer when trying to do brain surgery. It works to crack open the skull but isn’t precise and could potentially hurt the patient(game). I’d want to work at Gaijin JUST so I could propose ideas that would improve the game on technical levels. I already have massive beef with how stabilizers work (I’m looking at you STRV 103!!!)
A way devs COULD implement a better system would be with a linear equation. It could be something like, skill = C0 * kills + C1 * assists + C2 * caps etc with however many parameters you think are indicative of skill. Then Gaijin could either tune the parameters manually (painful!) or use simple AI (well actually it’s advanced curve fitting) to tune the parameters/coefficients (C0, C1, C2, etc) for a set of known skilled statistics (taken possibly from real players). They wouldn’t do that no, it takes a lot of time for very little financial payoff. It’s better (financially) to just slap the simple stats on it and call it a day. Sigh.
Another way to do player skill is to use statistics. I know Gaijin LOVES stats. You could have several categories, like kills, caps, etc, and plot those stats on a probability curve. For example, 50% of players get less than 5 kills (not true but example). Then you could add 1 “skill point” for every 10 percentiles that the player being rated is better than the average. At some number of skill points (summed across all tracked stats for that vehicle), then you get the first level of skill, more skill points gives you the higher tiers. This way skill isn’t directly tied to kills only, any Gaijin gets to use their lovely stats! Also, this probably doesn’t make sense I haven’t proofread it.
Anyway, I think I’ve just about rambled on long enough. Let me know if this sounds like a decent idea or if I’m horrible and should be hung. I want the game to be better.
@Stona_WT
One question regarding night battles
Why are Arcade Tanks left out from it?
I was looking forward to it, since playing at night with NV and TV gives different feel to battle
But it appears that only RB is included. Is there some specific reason or?
