Are you dense? Pilot durability has EVERYTHING to do with SPAA. Engines don’t generate spalling or shrapnel, meaning kinetic rounds hitting plane engines have a good chance of killing the engine but won’t hurt the pilot. Meaning you can still drop ordinance. Pilots have absurd durability, far surpassing even exposed crew on tanks. You can put multiple 20mms into unarmored cockpits or through the back of unarmored seats and have the pilots not die. Pilot snipes are rare, but its utterly artifical. There have been times in WT’s history where pilot kills were ~30% of all air kills, but they have buffed pilots articilally so that bomber gunners weren’t as effective and plane damaged matterd more. That you can’t see the correlation between artifical pilot durability and air having advantages is laughable.
Then you have the HUGE number of weak points on planes not modeled. Planes can’t have their guns or bombs destroyed on the aircraft. Planes cannot have the cockpit control pannels destroyed. Planes’s flight assistance instantly determines where damage is and what control surfaces can counteract damage to other surfaces (which would cause a crash with any human controlling).
KDR matters are you are being willfully ignorant if you think otherwise. A good portion of games end up being deathmatches, where the team with the most people still in game after 10 mins winning. Hell, we even have a 2 cap game mode where kills are far more often the determining factor than capping. And the games that are capped are usually be the team with… guess what… more kills.
This isn’t cod, but this is a basic part of ANY instanced shooter. Again, you have to be willfully ignorant or trolling to not see otherwise.
Convieniently a thread that I engaged with in the past week, has been deleted, and it’s mainstay was that you couldn’t range a Pe8 or a Lanc with WW2 era vehicles, which is gone.
Doesn’t matter, my stance and statement still stands, and with the implementation of the new SPAA on the next update, that’ll make a different outcome, won’t it?
Who are we kidding, there’ll be players still complaining and making these statements about air being the only option because that’s all they find works.
Oh please, you start out ’ how does a pilot taking a 120mm to the chest have to do with SPAA’ as if you can’t draw parallels. Then you get indignant when you get called out on said willfull ignorance. ‘without any actual basis’? Seriously? You are the one who started the discussion with ‘well we know whan you say is not true because SB’… LIke SB flying is like RB flying. You start with bad assumptions, throw out only situational argument, make bad conclusions, feign ignorance, then when you are called out you cry.
I disagree with most of what ULQ posts, so stop trying to make it out like you are the victim of something.
Discussions about bad ideas often end up with them being called… bad ideas. That you can’t understand that everyone criticizing the idea is a sign of that is on you. That IS the discussion, no matter if it goes the way you want or not.
Can’t wait for a new version of WWM, probably is going to be much better than the old ones.
Sadly probably it is going to be again only good for squadrons consisting of best players to win the whole mode, but I hope normal players are going to enjoy it too!
It’s the thing, it’s an effort, and an attempt at making something better.
There’s others to be added, as well as other roles, but the larger concept of radar over all, but this multi-vehicle/data linking is really going to be promising.
Very keen to see the development possibilities from even having this sort of thing brought in, along with the possibility in the future of having target lazing directly implemented.
I would like to suggest a permanent battle mode that brings ships, tanks, and aircraft together on the same map.
The map could have a river or canal running through the middle, perhaps with branches that create different routes for ships. It could also be set in a bay or coastal area. Tanks would fight over objectives on land, while ships would have their own capture zones on the water. This would give each vehicle type an important role: tanks would fight for a land objective, ships would try to capture naval points, and aircraft could support both sides.
I have attached a simple map image as a rough example to help illustrate the idea. It is not meant to be a finished or detailed map design; the developers could adapt the layout however they think would work best.
In the future, this mode could also include the infantry currently in beta, creating even more ways for different units to work together.
Since the game already combines tanks and aircraft in some modes, adding dedicated naval objectives could expand that experience. It would give ships more purpose in combined battles and could attract players interested in using different types of vehicles in the same mode.
Teams would win by controlling their objectives and working together. Another possibility would be to include victory by eliminations, as in other game modes, so the team that destroys more enemy vehicles could also win. I think it would be really exciting to see tanks advancing along the riverbanks, ships fighting for control of the water, and aircraft battling in the skies. I hope you will consider making this a permanent game mode in War Thunder.
Would love to be capping some point in tank, and then hear some distant whistle and last thing in life, would be full boardside of 50kg+He filled shells from on platoon of ships decimating cap zone.
Yes, I would be one of those naval players doing that.
Especially if this mode would be maxed by naval BR.
