I would like to offer some constructive feedback regarding the current state of Ground Arcade Battles, specifically the frequency, density, and cumulative impact of Air Events and artillery on the ground combat experience.
First of all, I want to make one thing absolutely clear:
I am NOT asking for aircraft or artillery to be removed from Ground Arcade Battles.
I understand and appreciate that War Thunder is a combined-arms game. Aircraft, tanks, SPAA, tank destroyers, light tanks, artillery and other vehicles can all contribute to an interesting battlefield.
My concern is not the existence of these mechanics.
My concern is that their frequency and cumulative impact can sometimes become so high that Ground Arcade no longer feels primarily like a ground battle.
Ground Arcade should primarily be about ground combat
When a player enters a Ground Arcade Battle, it is reasonable to expect that the majority of the gameplay will revolve around ground vehicles fighting other ground vehicles.
Players choose different vehicles because they enjoy different styles of ground combat.
Some players want to use Heavy Tanks and engage enemies directly.
Some prefer Medium Tanks because of their versatility.
Some choose Light Tanks because they enjoy mobility, scouting, flanking and finding advantageous positions.
Others choose Tank Destroyers or SPGs because they enjoy long-range firepower, positioning and supporting their team from a distance.
All of these are legitimate ways to enjoy a Ground Battle.
However, the current frequency of Air Events and artillery can sometimes make it difficult to actually play the vehicle you chose.
Imagine that I spawn in a Light Tank or SPG.
I carefully choose a position, use terrain and cover, look for enemy vehicles and try to participate in the ground battle.
Then I have to deal with:
- an aircraft carrying bombs,
- another aircraft attacking ground vehicles,
- artillery striking my position,
- another Air Event shortly afterwards,
- and potentially another aircraft entering the battlefield before the previous threat has even disappeared.
At that point, the question is no longer simply:
“How do I defeat the enemy ground vehicles?”
It becomes:
“How do I survive enemy ground vehicles, aircraft and artillery simultaneously?”
That creates a fundamentally different gameplay experience.
The problem is not Combined Arms
I want to emphasize this because I don’t want this feedback to be misunderstood.
I like Combined Arms gameplay.
Aircraft can provide valuable support.
Artillery can force enemies to reposition.
SPAA can protect the team from aircraft.
Fighters can intercept enemy aircraft.
Attackers and bombers can create important tactical opportunities.
These interactions can be exciting.
The problem begins when these supporting mechanics become so frequent that they start competing with ground combat for the player’s attention and time.
There is a significant difference between:
“Aircraft are part of Ground Battles.”
and:
“Aircraft are present so frequently that they become one of the primary threats that ground players must constantly manage.”
That distinction is the core of my concern.
Gaijin has previously acknowledged a similar problem
This concern is not simply a personal impression.
In July 2023, Gaijin published an official discussion about Air Events in Ground Arcade Battles.
Gaijin acknowledged that gameplay had suffered when ground vehicles sometimes had to deal with 2–4 aircraft instead of one serious aerial opponent.
Gaijin also explained that repeated Air Events by the dominating team could reduce the losing team’s chances of making a comeback.
Source:
I appreciate that Gaijin recognized this problem and made changes to Air Events.
However, I believe there is still a broader issue worth reconsidering:
The problem is not necessarily one individual aircraft.
The problem is the cumulative amount of air activity throughout the match.
Even if each individual Air Event is reasonably balanced, repeated Air Events can create almost continuous air pressure on the ground.
That is a different problem from the balance of a single aircraft.
The cumulative effect matters
Consider the following situation:
An enemy player earns an Air Event.
Aircraft appear.
The event ends.
A short time later, another player earns another Air Event.
More aircraft appear.
Then another player gets one.
Then another.
The result is that, even though each individual event is temporary, the ground battle can remain under almost continuous air pressure.
This is what I believe deserves more attention.
The important questions should not only be:
“Is this individual aircraft balanced?”
They should also be:
“How much total time during an average Ground Arcade match are ground players exposed to aircraft attacks?”
“How many aircraft can influence the ground battle within a given period of time?”
“How frequently can another Air Event occur before the ground battle has had a chance to return to normal?”
These questions are much more relevant to the overall gameplay experience.
Players should not be forced to play SPAA
This is probably my biggest concern.
If I want to play a Light Tank, Heavy Tank, Medium Tank or SPG, I should be able to choose that vehicle because I enjoy that style of gameplay.
I should not feel that I have to choose an SPAA simply because the sky is constantly populated with aircraft.
Likewise, I should not feel that I have to spawn an aircraft myself simply because I need a way to defend against enemy aircraft.
If the practical answer to excessive air activity becomes:
“Just play SPAA.”
then the game is indirectly forcing players into a role they may not want to play.
And that creates another important problem.
Teamwork cannot always mean sacrificing your preferred gameplay
I completely agree that War Thunder is a team game.
Teamwork is important.
However, there is a significant difference between encouraging teamwork and expecting random players to coordinate their entire vehicle selection around each other’s needs.
In a random match, players generally do not know each other.
They may:
- speak different languages,
- have no voice communication,
- not understand each other’s messages,
- not use chat,
- have no opportunity to coordinate effectively,
- or simply want to play completely different vehicles.
For example:
Suppose I spawn an SPG because I want to play a long-range ground-support role.
I might think:
“We need someone to use SPAA to protect the team from aircraft.”
But another player on my team may have joined the battle specifically because they want to play their Heavy Tank.
Why should I expect that player to abandon the vehicle they enjoy and become an SPAA operator simply because I chose an SPG?
That player also wants to enjoy the game.
The same applies in reverse.
If I choose a Heavy Tank, I cannot reasonably expect another random player to spend the entire battle protecting me from aircraft.
If I choose a Light Tank, I should not have to change my entire playstyle because the sky is constantly active.
If I choose an SPG, I should not be dependent on another random player deciding to become my personal air-defense system.
Teamwork should be encouraged by the game, not become an obligation that forces players to sacrifice the gameplay they actually came to enjoy.
Vehicle diversity should remain meaningful
One of the great strengths of War Thunder is the variety of ground vehicles.
But excessive air pressure can indirectly reduce that variety.
A player may want to choose:
Light Tank → mobility and flanking
but instead think:
“I can’t survive the current air activity.”
They may want to choose:
SPG → long-range firepower
but instead think:
“I’ll probably be bombed as soon as I find a good position.”
They may want to choose:
Heavy Tank → armor and direct combat
but instead think:
“I need something that can deal with aircraft.”
Eventually the question changes from:
“Which ground vehicle do I want to play?”
to:
“Which vehicle gives me the best chance of surviving the current air environment?”
I don’t believe that is a healthy outcome for Ground Arcade.
Ground Battle should not become an Air Battle with tanks underneath
There is also a fundamental difference between the intended identity of the game modes.
When I enter an Air Battle, I expect aircraft to be the primary combat element.
When I enter a Ground Battle, I expect ground vehicles to be the primary combat element.
That does not mean aircraft should disappear from Ground Arcade.
It means that aircraft should primarily function as supporting elements of the ground battle.
There is a point where Air Support stops being support and starts becoming another primary battlefield.
I believe we should be careful not to cross that line.
Air Events can also punish good ground gameplay
Another concern is that aircraft and artillery can sometimes punish players who are actually playing the ground game effectively.
A player may:
- carefully select a defensive position,
- use terrain and cover,
- flank the enemy,
- hold an important capture point,
- support teammates,
- or successfully engage multiple enemy ground vehicles.
But instead of losing because of a better-positioned enemy tank, better aim, superior tactics or better decision-making, that player may suddenly be destroyed by a bomb or repeatedly forced out of their position by indirect attacks.
Some of this is absolutely fine.
That is part of Combined Arms.
But when it happens too frequently, it reduces the importance of the things that make tank combat enjoyable:
positioning, awareness, maneuver, armor, firepower, map knowledge and tactical decision-making.
There is also a snowball problem
Imagine one team starts winning the ground battle.
That team naturally gets more kills and assists.
More players become eligible for Air Events.
Those Air Events then put additional pressure on the already-losing team.
The losing team has fewer opportunities to maneuver, capture objectives or recover.
This can create a cycle:
Winning team → more successful ground engagements → more Air Events → additional pressure → fewer opportunities for the losing team to recover → even greater advantage.
This is particularly important because Gaijin itself previously acknowledged that massive Air Events could reduce the losing team’s chances of making a comeback.
A good Ground Battle should ideally allow a losing team to recover through better positioning, tactics and successful ground engagements.
Repeated air pressure should not make that recovery disproportionately difficult.
What I am NOT asking for
I want to make my position completely clear.
I am NOT asking for:
- aircraft to be removed from Ground Arcade,
- artillery to be removed,
- Combined Arms to be removed,
- SPAA to become unnecessary,
- or Ground Arcade to become a “Tanks Only” mode.
I think all of these elements belong in War Thunder.
My request is much narrower:
Please reconsider the frequency, density and cumulative impact of Air Events in Ground Arcade Battles.
Possible solutions
I don’t claim to know which solution would be perfect, but there are several possibilities that could be tested.
1. Limit the number of aircraft simultaneously active
Impose a maximum number of active aircraft per team.
This would preserve Air Events while preventing the sky from becoming overcrowded.
2. Increase the minimum interval between Air Events
A short cooldown between events could give the ground battle time to return to normal.
3. Limit repeated Air Events from the same team
This could reduce the snowball effect where the winning team continuously generates additional air pressure.
4. Introduce a global or team-based Air Event budget
Instead of allowing an effectively continuous chain of Air Events, the total number or duration of aircraft activity could be limited during a given period.
5. Keep Air Events short and meaningful
Aircraft should create a tactical opportunity, have an impact, and then leave the battlefield.
They should not effectively turn the ground battle into a continuous air-defense scenario.
6. Consider alternative Air Event mechanics
There are already community discussions proposing alternative approaches to the current Ground AB aircraft system, including systems inspired by Naval Arcade Battles.
The important point is that the current system should remain open to evaluation and improvement.
The goal is not fewer gameplay options
I genuinely enjoy War Thunder because of its combination of different vehicles and combat roles.
I do not want Ground Arcade to become a “Tanks Only” mode.
I want aircraft to remain part of it.
I want successful players to be rewarded with the opportunity to provide air support.
I want SPAA to have an important role.
I want artillery to matter.
But I also want to be able to spawn a Light Tank, Heavy Tank, Medium Tank or SPG and actually spend most of my time playing that vehicle and fighting the ground battle.
At the moment, there are situations where the amount and frequency of aircraft activity becomes so high that the player is forced to think about air defense almost as much as ground combat.
That creates a situation where a player may choose a vehicle not because it is the vehicle they want to play, but because it is the vehicle they believe can survive the current air environment.
I believe that is the part that deserves reconsideration.
Final thought
Ground Arcade should be Combined Arms — but it should still primarily feel like Ground Arcade.
Aircraft should support the ground battle.
Artillery should support the ground battle.
They should add tactical depth to the battle rather than become dominant elements that repeatedly interrupt the ground combat experience.
Gaijin has already recognized in the past that excessive aircraft presence can negatively affect Ground Arcade gameplay.
I believe the next step should be to look beyond the balance of individual aircraft and examine the overall frequency, density and cumulative duration of Air Events throughout an entire match.
I respectfully ask Gaijin to review this aspect of Ground Arcade and consider whether reducing simultaneous aircraft, repeated Air Events, or overall Air Event frequency could create a healthier balance between ground combat and air support.
The goal is not fewer gameplay options.
The goal is better balance between them.
Thank you for taking the time to read and consider this feedback.