No, the point of the game is to engage in vehiclular combat against other players. If those players stand no chance to win because of an asymmetrical system, then making the only way to win killing AI is not going to improve it. One team would stomp the other players while the weaker team would have to kill low reward AI in order to win? That isn’t fun. Asymmetric gameplay isn’t popular because jo matter what you do for the wraker team, they will always not stand a chance when encountering the enemy.
2 Likes
Blockquote[quote=“Laserdestroy, post:101, topic:110972, full:true”]
No, the point of the game is to engage in vehiclular combat against other players. If those players stand no chance to win because of an asymmetrical system, then making the only way to win killing AI is not going to improve it. One team would stomp the other players while the weaker team would have to kill low reward AI in order to win? That isn’t fun. Asymmetric gameplay isn’t popular because jo matter what you do for the wraker team, they will always not stand a chance when encountering the enemy.
[/quote]
By giving weak side more vehicle or limit strong side ammo maybe change the imbalance of of historical mode u said. As what i say, weak side can destory enemy AI ammo supply cars and other low armour vehicles to make enemy have no ammo supply to kill, not just win by face to face confrontation. And more vehicle on weak side can make weak side have more vehicle to fight with one, like WW2 10 or more t34 or m4 sherman against 1 tiger.
Sorry for that,but i dont know how to use quote function,i just reply to u,this is my first topic i really dont know how to use the gaijin forum
1 Like
Highlight the text then click reply.
But then the problem with this is that one person shoots the barrell of the tiger, and it’s dead. It has no fighting chance. If you really wanted to implement this, you would make it a requirement to shoot from the real Gunsight, making it harder to target barrels. Oh, and tanks can’t see around corners in third person, so therefore, you are limited to either gunner, driver, or commander view.
Wait a minute, that sounds familiar… Almost exactly like Sim. If you want historical mode, go play that. RB has no capabilities of hosting a Historical mode without being completely unbalanced and without one side being used to wipe the floor while the other side is mopping up. There is no way that RB historical mode will be balanced, everyone will be upset, and all it will end up doing is causing problems and longer queue times (which no one likes).
Again, killing AI vehicles shouldn’t be the basis of giving one team a chance of fighting back. Also, if an enemy tank is present woth one of those low armor vehicles then the weaker sides tanks still don’t stand a chance because of the armor/weapon disadvantage.
And how would this work? Having games with 25 vs 5? Making it make less sense from a gameplay perspective and shifting the asymmetry to the other team? These aren’t VIABLE gameplay options because they don’t provide FUN for the poeple that would play them. If you want asymmetric historical battles then use custom matches already available.
ok,thanks
The original intention i create this topic is for WW2 propeller air realistic,not for ground realistic,i tried my best to answer your question,if u think my solution about historical mode is not good enough,maybe ground realistic can maintain the current situation.But for propeller air realistic,historical mode is urgently needed to add.
Then why did you mention ground then? In the example text provided you literally talked explicitly about WW2 ground forces as a primary example.
And for props, this is already practically the case. I cannot think of more than 3-4 aircraft off the top of my head that are at BRs that face jets much younger or much older than their introduction date, aside from maybe top tier (albeit that is a mess in hell I do not want to touch). And quite frankly, the aircraft that sit at this BR sit there for a reason. Their craft is too good for their service introduction date (like Me-163 fighting P-51s) or too poor (like if the Strikemaster fought against the Meteor)
Then i cant think of a better way to balance the ground realistic.The original intention i create this topic is for WW2 propeller air realistic.As u know,propeller is value player’s skill,rather than aircraft itself.Good player know how to fly aircraft with it’s advantge,bad players only know turn around till stall.so,add historical mode doesnt break the balance of propeller,instead,historical mode on propeller,make poilots enhance their fighter skill and the sense of substitution.
That’s my fault,i was led astray by someone,my topic specifically mentioned Iwo Jima Guadalcanal…the original intention about this topic is discuss add historical mode on propeller air realistic.
And your opinion about propeller air realistic i disagree with u, Me163 vs P51 is a extreme example. Me163 has small fuel tank,full tank 6 min maybe,i admit that me163 is a small target hard to hit,and has very high sep,p51 is hard to deal with it,but not too many me163 be created,and if u think its imbalance,give weak side more spawn can solve this,weak side give more spawn,and limit bomber and attackers,balance the fihters of two side,let weak side has more fighters and strong side less…Balance historical mode on propeller is muh easier than ground target.I strongly recommend adding this mode
First off, the six minutes of fuel on the 163 can easily be made to last 12 or more. It is not a plane that requires 100% engine power to gain speed. It is 110% leagues better than the P-51 in almost every way- and functionally it would not be a fair fight.
Second of all, if you have twenty planes fighting maybe six, how in goodness gracious would that be fun? At best, six aircraft would each get 3-4 kills each. At worst, you have twenty people fighting for six kills.
Why limit attack aircraft and bombers, they are already very useless as it for the WW2 BRs.
How do you balance the fighters of each side? Through ahistorical nerfs and buffs? Through adding more or less, another idea debunked earlier?
No matter in what way shape or form this is implemented, it leaves people, and especially nations like Russia or Sweden (nations that created Props long after WW2 and did not have many WW2 era planes) behind. It will make grinding both unfun and near impossible. There is no way I’m which a historical game mode can be implemented that is fair, or fun for both sides, or worth doin.
No it doesn’t, not any more than any other aspect of the game or aircraft combat. Tell me how a Bf109K stands a chance against the Spitfire LF Mk IX when the Spit can outclimb and outturn the Bf109 and because of the superior climb rate prevents the Bf109 from using it’s speed advantage by gaining altitude over the Spitfire. Airframe matters just as much as skill.
Yes it does. Historical ALWAYS breaks balance because warfare has never been symmetrical. There will ALWAYS be a weaker team at a heavy disadvantage if historical matchmaking is implemented for any mode. That is why you don’t see a plethora of titles with that gameplay, because it doesn’t work.
First,i told u that not to many me163 be created,i agree with u that me163 is much betteer than p51,but 3/4 p51 against 1 me163 can reduce tthe impact of heimbalance,no player can deal with 2 or more fighter at same time.
Second,20 p51 vs 6 me163?No u are wrong,if p51 has good teamwork,me163 cant win,but if p51 squad has bad teamwork against me163 alone,me163 will easily kill all p51.The essence is whether to achieve good teamwork.Just like what real WW2 pilot did on history.
No need balance,who has good teamwork who win,although this requires a lot of contact, it is difficult to get atarted,but its more interest than now “balanced” propeller air realistic .
No,russian has a lot famous plane(fighter) in WW2,like lags,yaks,and sweden,in WW2,sweden is actually occupied by germany,i dont think sweden should join in propeller air realistic historical mode.the country who should join in historical mode maybe US,UK,German,Russia,Japan,Italy,early Franch.Other country maybe join in historical mode by surrender aircraft ortrade aircraft,for those country who dont have their own aircraft,its easy to create some model ,which already in game
If 109k be patient,you will always get some chance,noboby always rational,good pilot always have patient,Ivan Kozhedub early 40 battle on his flying career,no kill,but it doesnt stop him becoming the most famous ace in russia
No, explain how a “better pilot” in a Bf-109K could ever hope to outclass a Spitfire as described. The Spitfire has every advantage over the Bf109 other than speed and the Bf109 can do basically nothing because the Spitfire can always build and keep an energy or altitude advantage over the Bf109. Again, airframe matters just as much as skill.
No kills? He is credited with over 60 air to air victories… It took me 2 minutes to find this, where do you even come up with the idea that a 60+ victory ace didn’t get any “kills”?
[quote=“F6F Minsi III, post:114, topic:110972”]
No it doesn’t, not any more than any other aspect of the game or aircraft combat. Tell me how a Bf109K stands a chance against the Spitfire LF Mk IX when the Spit can outclimb and outturn the Bf109 and because of the superior climb rate prevents the Bf109 from using it’s speed
i know he claimed 62 kill but what i said is in early 40 battle flight,he get no kill on his early flight,heis first mission on 1943.3.26,but his first claim is 1943.7.6,and i forgot source of kozhedub early 40+ mission has no kill,but from 3.26 to 7.6,im pretty sure that in his early flying career,he cant no claim
If 109k stay on 6000m but spitfire lf on 4000,im pretty sure 109 has more advantage,that’s what skill i want to say,good pilot know when fight,when climb when give enemy crit hit,airframe is important,but not all,i admit that 109k against spitfire is hard,but still ave chance.
Have
As what i say,teamwork and patient will reduce the gap of airframe,on WW2,fight alone never give u advantage,but fly with your team and have good teamwork can