I came to the conclusion that the game’s automated systems which handle “inactivity” of players - punish quite many good players for what the system mindlessly considers “inactivity”

[TheDudesRug]

@Fins_FinsT

As mentioned by one of commenters, they had automated messages about being reported by other players more than 10 times.

Pay no mind to such messages. People can report you simply because you annoy them. Here is what happened to me after I annoyed a whole squad in naval rb last year:

Do you know what came from it? Absolutely nothing.

[Fins_FinsT]

@TheDudesRug

Do you know what came from it? Absolutely nothing.

If we talk specifically about consequences now, then maybe you’re right and those messages never, ever, lead to anything “bad”. Or, maybe sometimes they do, and you just got lucky. Personally, i don’t know for sure.

But whichever it is, is not really important, even. The fact is, there are rules - specifically, the parts quoted and specifically highlighted in blue color in the post linked in my previous message, here. Those rules mean, “combat avoidance” is punishable by up to deletion of player account, at WT administration’s discretion - it’s right there, in the rules, in writing.

How often does it happen, or whether it ever happened at least once - is also not really important. Especially since some kinds of bans are private information, not to be revealed in public, as mentioned in this topic. The really important part - there is legal grounds for “banned for avoiding combat” in WT.

But please, also note how 1st post of this topic also speaks about majority of players seeing “inactivity” as a bad thing. Lots of players dislike when someone “runs away”, and their feeling is reinforced by mere presense of “inactivity” reason being present in the list of reportable offenses.

It’d be much better if instead of “inactivity”, that list would have “being AFK”. Simple change, which would perhaps create significant shift of whole player base’ view about what is, and what is not, reportable offense in the game.

And/or, maybe there is something else, possibly similarly simple, which could be done to improve most players’ understanding of what is, and is not, respectable in-game tactic and behaviour.

P.S. Heck, even game masters are not rock-solid clear about it, as discussion in this topic clearly demonstrated.

[Dodo_Dud]

@Fins_FinsT

Those rules mean, “combat avoidance” is punishable by up to deletion of player account, at WT administration’s discretion - it’s right there, in the rules, in writing.

And they aim at well known problems in naval, where botting is an issue. But so far, botting in RB is not the issue.

@Fins_FinsT

Especially since some kinds of bans are private information, not to be revealed in public

Permabans are listed every ban wave.

@Fins_FinsT

also note how 1st post of this topic also speaks about majority of players seeing “inactivity” as a bad thing.

They won’t all love you, no matter what you do.

@Fins_FinsT

It’d be much better if instead of “inactivity”, that list would have “being AFK”. Simple change, which would perhaps create significant shift of whole player base’ view about what is, and what is not, reportable offense in the game.

That is your own oppinion, just like theirs. But since it is not possible to discern between “AFK” or “not AFK but not doing anything on purpose”, it isn’t practical.

For now, there are no inactivity bans in air RB. Not one so far. If you are not using bot scripts and play the game, I see no problem. No one here ever had any. What more certainty can you get?

[Real_K_Soze]

@Fins_FinsT

End result: bases must be there, they must not produce any much ticket bleed when destroyed (possibly repeatedly), they must give competitive RP reward. And it’s exactly how it is in the current reward system.

You got some things right - others are wild guesses.

My pov:

1. Bases and airfields are the in-game equivalent of tactical & strategic targets in aerial warfare. The skill floor to kill a base was always low, the challenge was always to make it through the fighter / interceptor screen (often multiple times) through the enemy airfield. Killing the enemy airfield ended the matches until May 2020. The sole exception was the old Ruhr map with 3 respawning bases which could be bombed in 1 hour long matches.

2. Gaijin had always problems to balance bombers - either they were too strong for their BR and could not be intercepted and ended matches in their initial run, or their rewards were too high for their taste so they increased the repair cost. In addition: The average fighter pilot is, was and will be not patient enough to set up a correct attack plan. So they died like flies because they used always the most dangerous approch - tail sniffing from lower alt with way too low excess speed.

3. The introduction of Mach 2 jets (F-4E in March 2020) ended matches even faster - the player increase during covid made it necessary to implement a tool which allowed absolute rookies (CoD & Fortnite playing kids) without any clue about aerial warfare to play the game and spend money to progress.

4. The ticket bleed from killing previously 3 non-respawning bases was significant, killing the airfield was decisive - so classic bombers had their place in the battles like still today in low BR matches.

5. The rather high RP output of a base destruction reflected a compensation for the rather high risk to get shot down often before they could drop. Today the inflated RP for killing a base is technically just supporting the sales of premium multi-role Mach 2 jets, at prop BRs above BR 3.7 bomber game play was killed by the flood of strike aircraft getting much earlier to bases.

6. They only fair solution (up to BRs when “real” bombers end) would be an increase of RP for designated bombers and a decrease of RP for all other classes - just to reflect the risk flying out a bomber.

7. And the ticket impact should also reflect the involved plane classes - a base kill by a bomber should be higher than by a fighter or strike aircraft.

As a summary:

It looks like that you actually belive what you wrote so i keep it rather short:

• Your assessment why the current reward structure and ticket relevance / impact is like it is looks rather naive.

• High RP for killing a base are just a tool to allow toddlers / kids (caught in the hamster wheel called grind) to participate and to progress.

[Mordillo66]

100% agree!

The best examples for what GJN created over the years are the Ju 88 A-1 and the F-117. The first one is able to win a battle on his own (by introducing incendiary bombs) while staying untouchable for the whole enemy team. The second is totally useless in ARB.

[Dodo_Dud]

Isn’t this getting OT?

[Real_K_Soze]

@Fins_FinsT

Heck, even game masters are not rock-solid clear about it, as discussion in this topic clearly demonstrated.

Again, they are not involved in stuff that is not related to the in-game chat. So they use the forum to post their private opinion as they are regular players which play the game (at least most of them) and can share their thoughts like everybody else.

Just look up the threads when the first “Fair Play” report mentioned thousands of temp game bans for team killing. They openly admitted that they don’t have details and just keep an eye on the chat.

@Fins_FinsT

It’d be much better if instead of “inactivity”, that list would have “being AFK”. Simple change, which would perhaps create significant shift of whole player base’ view about what is, and what is not, reportable offense in the game.

And/or, maybe there is something else, possibly similarly simple, which could be done to improve most players’ understanding of what is, and is not, respectable in-game tactic and behaviour.

A shift of view on things requires a neutral and sober view on things - which requires the willingness and the cognitive ability to change their perspective. That is not possible for most of the players.

I mean in theory you need to be banned from using the reporting function if you report a chat banned player for foul language.

The whole concept of in-game reporting is a placebo. Otherwise there would be no row “team killing”. Why? Quite simple:

1. Team killing reports are not manually processed - that’s why they have an auto-ban system implemented. GMs stated multiple times that they don’t interfere with this process.
2. For guys able to create creative ways to avoid the auto-ban system (like ramming or disabling the prop) players have to use the report function on the server replay site - also stated multiple times by GMs.
3. The only reason for the in-game reporting button looks like a kind of false hope for reporting players - meaning that they assume that their report would result in a punisment.
4. To be fair: At least in theory there is the possibility that reporting team kills would be used to lower the threshold for their auto-ban system.

The whole concept of player reports needs the same overhaul like the Air RB economy.

@Dodo_Dud

Isn’t this getting OT?

Technically not, the OP refers to (optimizing) the reward structure in general and reporting in certain scenarios.

The RPs for base bombing are a main driver for non-pilot players to join Air RB lobbies…

@Mordillo66

The first one is able to win a battle on his own (by introducing incendiary bombs) while staying untouchable for the whole enemy team

Whilst i agree in general regarding the Ju 88 A-1: Untouchable in full downtier to a certain degree. At BR 2.7 u need to be a good pilot to make it work.

Winning became easier with the increase of the bomb load from 1.900 to 2.400 kg. But even before you could win a match if you put the right mix of SC 250 and SC 50 on bases and kill all 4 non respawning bases - in case one or 2 bases were killed by team mates the payload was good enough to kill the airfield too…incendiaries makes things just way easier 👍

[Dodo_Dud]

@Real_K_Soze

Technically not, the OP refers to (optimizing) the reward structure in general and reporting in certain scenarios.

The title (goal posts) is:
I came to the conclusion that the game’s automated systems which handle “inactivity” of players - punish quite many good players for what the system mindlessly considers “inactivity”.
What you debate is interesting, but doesn’t really belong here imho.

[GNDM_Panzer]

As far as I remember, Gaijin modified those algorithms so that the people space climbing or hugging the map border don’t get that extra activity time, therefore those avoiding actually intently participating in the match don’t get anything extra.

I’m not spreading misconceptions I’m running off of memory here, so unless I’m misremembering - Which isn’t some crime, btw - I’m actually on point provided I’m not misremembering.

[GNDM_Panzer]

This whole response from you is a nonresponse and doesn’t combat anything I’ve said prior.

You are very much insisting on trying to control the behavior of other players which just isn’t going to happen, nor will Gaijin implement any extra controls just so you can get your way of gameplay which frankly speaking is completely antithetical to how most people want to play matches out.

If ground targets and bases were worth more for destroying, then people would be more willing to hit them when people like you are trying to find a corner to hide in, but Gaijin still sits on their hands about that so nobody is getting their way in such regards.

Therefore, once again I will reiterate what you can do if you don’t want to fight the match out as the surviving player on the losing team;

1. Crash and let the match be over with.

2. Let the enemy shoot you down.

3. Return to airfield, land and then J out.

There is no fourth option. " Outrun and dodging other players " is a non-applicable option functionally and if you want to be asinine about it - Well, Necronomica already broke that down for you.

[RunaDacino]

You can play a match of ARB to confirm. Get score, hide and compare against the graph.

I’ve recently played a horrible GSB match where I literally drove to A point, capped, died and respawned with backup.

I got 85% activity despite only doing anything for like 30 seconds because with my deaths I earned 480 score and lived for 5:47 minutes.

[GNDM_Panzer]

Okay, hold on, I think you’re losing the plot here.

Your GSB match doesn’t have anything to do with this thread being about air battles, so where’s the relevancy in mentioning it?

[RunaDacino]

@GNDM_Panzer

Your GSB match doesn’t have anything to do with this thread being about air battles, so where’s the relevancy in mentioning it?

All game modes, INCLUDING air sim, have the same logic for how activity is calculated.

It takes input Score and Time Alive and outputs Activity%.

Air sim is special because that match FIXES time alive at maximum 15 minutes before restarting from zero (instead of letting you accumulate 30, 45, 60 minutes’ of time alive).

Ground sim, unlike air sim, functions perfectly identical to ground RB and thus air realistic. All that’s different is that the function is compressed to give higher activity for less score as compensation for higher difficulty of the game mode.

Air realistic’s function is shaped like so (Data & conceptually):

Air sim’s function, assuming you survive the full 15 minutes, is shaped like so:

All that matters for these 15 minutes is how much score you have earned.

Same is true for ARB.

I have saved screenshots across multiple ARB games’ reward screen but didnt save the exact score so calculation is a bit difficult. Furthermore, the conceptual diagram only goes to 2200 and in a few of them I go above 2200 score so that again makes it somewhat harder to approximate.

It is possible to back-calculate score earned from itemization at end of match so I can do that if you insist.

Edit: oh, and GRB/GAB/NAB/NRB/GSB have the caveat that to acquire accurate figures, you must only consider respawning with the SAME vehicle or ODLing. Stuff gets weird if you use multiple vehicles.

[GNDM_Panzer]

@RunaDacino

It is possible to back-calculate score earned from itemization at end of match so I can do that if you insist.

Hmm, no I won’t ask that much from you. I’m just not convinced to take these graphs at face-value so I will review them at a later time and compare/contrast when I’m ready to.

I will thank you for sharing this information, though. I’m sure others are also grateful for it to compare to their own data, if nothing else.

[RunaDacino]

It kinda makes me wish we had a community who wouldn’t vandalize stuff, otherwise we could come together on one mutually edited google sheet and keep adding ARB/GRB/etc data going

“In a single vehicle I lived for X seconds and earn Y score and post-battle itemized vehicle breakdown said I had Activity%”

Would make it much, much easier to get quantitative & predictive functions for modes other than sim. In sim it’s a bit easier due to the maxcap of 15 minutes removing a variable, so all we needed was one very angry person to collect hundreds of examples to complain to gaijin that activity maxes out at 92% per cycle no matter how much score you earn (gaijin said “working as intended.”)

[Normandy_Corsair]

I was with you until you started saying “good and skillful” players are the ones purely doing PvE (who coincidentally also have penta-negative levels of K/D)

You seem to think that being “good” at the game is manipulating the systems to give you the most RP/SL, but that simply isn’t the case.

[Normandy_Corsair]

@Fins_FinsT

And why you want the round over? What good do you get from ending it?

Going to the next round and not being subjected to mind numbing gameplay of flying around pointlessly waiting for your team to catch the last guy who is playing passive presumably

@Fins_FinsT

And the win - is either certain, in which case you can just quit and go next round yourself,

The win becomes less certain when you start making the numbers more fair for the enemy… leaving matches also immediately cuts off your RP/SL gain as you are very much aware.

@Fins_FinsT

and then it’s fair game and sound tactic on the last guy’s part, which you should respect.

It depends what exact tactics you are referring to.

@Fins_FinsT

But that’s entirely different point. My 1st post is saying that IF the last guy does not want to fight - it’s a good thing for everyone who is playing to earn RP. Simple as that.

Only if they are able to quickly manipulate situation to be in their favor regarding grinding, such as bombing or hitting ground targets. This is something that a lot of aircraft simply can not do.

@Fins_FinsT

As for your proposed options, they are not so good. “Crash to end the game”: doing this applies full SL repair cost. Why do it? “Let enemies shoot you down” - the same.

SL repair costs are not a valid enough reason to intentionally drag out games.

@Fins_FinsT

“Land and jump out” - this one is OK only if you know you can safely land. Sadly, those days, it’s very often not the case: there are players who will destroy you when you’d try to land. Vultures, the old WT word for 'em - they prey on airfields, both with and without AA on them, to get easy kills.

So your strategy here is to break game ToS by playing 100% passively, avoiding all conflict OR trying to land on airfield to J out if you think there is a chance you will die doing so, just because you might have to pay 6000SL? With all this math you are throwing around, have you ever considered that wasting 10-15 minutes of time running from losing 6000SL removes your ability (and therefore creates an opportunity cost) to go to ANOTHER GAME and earn many magnitudes of SL above that 6k figure? Even if you end up dying in both games?

@Fins_FinsT

And yes, the other team can and should keep hitting bases, ground units and NPC planes when that last guy is running away.

MANY planes cannot do this and are effectively useless/pointless once the enemy opposition runs out.

@Fins_FinsT

That is what i am talking about, man - that “last guy running away” and surviving for longer actually gives the other team ideal conditions to get more RP and SL from a match. They should thank him, if RP or SL is what they want.

Again, and what you clearly do not get, 1. this does not matter if said user does not care about maximizing RP/SL reward in exchange for them having less fun and 2. This doesn’t matter if said users are not CAPABLE of doing the actions you presented.

@Mordillo66

If I interpret these calculations and conclusions correct, it only shows one problem to me:
The reward system doesn’t fit the current state of ARB at all.

Yes.

@Mordillo66

The primary goal of ARB is to win a battle. And the reward system has to follow this goal. Actually it doesn’t.

I agree.

@Fins_FinsT

It doesn’t fit completely, but it does fit certain purposes. It’s different. That’s why my 1st post uses specific phraze i used to describe this problem - not “doesn’t fit ARB”, but rather “the game’s automated routines to deal with “inactive” players, and majority of players in the game - all see such “combat avoidance” as something bad. In error.”.

It is exactly the game’s “inactivity” reporting tool, reward suppression subsystem and “potential bans” which needs revision. Not the entire reward system. Because there are important reasons RP and SL are awarded the way they are awarded, and changing them any much - would be inadvisable.

Here’s an example of what you say here being true. The system USED to reward you for “passive participation” meaning things like flying near enemy planes would trickle activity time/rp/sl to you invisibly because the game assumed you were baiting, defensive flying, etc and therefore participating and therefore would reward you. Nowadays you can go 15 minutes doing the craziest defensive flying of your life and earn literally and exactly 0 RP because you never got to get your own guns on something. It’s ridiculous.

[iboopy]

I think being fired at, or within the vicinity of other planes should count as activity.
However, as to the rest of this thread, landing timer is great, it stops camping (most of the time) and the slashed RP rewards of playing giga passively can hurt strike aircraft, but prevents people being dicks all game who sideclimb to space.

[Real_K_Soze]

@GNDM_Panzer

I’m just not convinced to take these graphs at face-value so I will review them at a later time and compare/contrast when I’m ready to.

The fellow player is correct - the % ratio of activity is a result of time and score. Meaning the longer you play the less activity you have with the same score.

I played yesterday a prop match in which i played ~ 22 minutes. 2 air kills and a base kill is in short matches a guarantee for 85-95% activity. In this match i got just 77%.

• I killed a bomber at ~ 6 minutes, waited for the base respawn, killed a fresh base after ~ 13 minutes. I played actually 1 vs 5 but could not go low as i was looking for an enemy player with 0 mission score.

• In addition i just saw always just 2 of them and i don’t want to get jumped out of nowhere. I got blind hunted but saw no contrails coming up.

• Their bomber crashed and the 2 squadded La-5s ran out of fuel and managed to crash whilst landing; the 0 point guy was one of them 😎. As i knew where the last 2 enemies were (ground pounding) i went for the most dangerous plane first - the other guy managed to crash too. Game over after my last kill after 22 minutes.

[Real_K_Soze]

@Mordillo66

The primary goal of ARB is to win a battle. And the reward system has to follow this goal. Actually it doesn’t.

Yeah - but somehow the primary goal is usually out of your individual control and you have to rely on a mix of pure luck, experience and team composition.

Imho you might have to take a step back and acknowledge that the MM decides the majority of your matches - meaning the nation allocation is way more decisive than individual skill - so whilst the rewards are allocated to single players - real decisive game play (like killing the enemy top player or most dangerous aircraft) is underrated like hell.

I sit currently on a 26 (!!!) match win streak - in just 6 of the matches i was able to decide (5) or influence (1) the outcome (5 x last survivor, 1 time winning a 1 vs 3 turn fight).

So if we have a common understanding that winning a battle is the primary goal - how is it that i can get away with 26 victories in a row and bring 2 wagers (10 victories) to pay the full amount of 250k SL each through without losing a single aircraft???

Edit: I extended my win strike to 36 wins in a row - and lost my 37th match thx to a totally pathetic USSR/GER/UK team - and lost my 1st plane in this series.