Yes a ground units only realistic battle is the only answer.
1 Like
Nope, the actual GF mode is mostly fine just need some balance touches, and one fo the most important is increase the SP for obtain planes.
I’m only getting revenge killed if I cant be bothered to move but if we had a Ground forces only version of GRB that wouldn’t be an issue.12 years we have been trying to balance CAS.
You can keep screaming into the void but it doesn’t appear that TO is gonna happen, so you might as well petition for the ability to check CAS since it’s not going away.
Saw somewhere someone replied to me, but Gaijin could and most definitely should implement further out landing strips for cas based on tier, secondly from another reply stating they died to ground ai AA we should definitely add random ai AA to grb as well as a balancer. I for one am sick of seeing helis just camping mountains or hills they pop over every 2 seconds, or planes that can just fly under the plateau of a map we’re in in half a second because they’re horribly designed to use AA.
TLDR: Further spawns/ rearms for CAS as well as ai AA oob for ground forces to help fight off cas that just sits behind the environment as soon as they launch a missile or bomb.
A.I AAA is a horrible idea. Gun A.I AAA has pretty much laser precision with how Gaijin configured them for whatever reason. Missiles might be fine.
But convoys in sim EC are notoriously deadly, and I doubt they’d be able to balance them for GRB (AAA of convoys still problematic - #16 by LeoNerdo, Does anyone attack the convoys!? Insanely Accurate convoy AA this update )
Wait so let me get this right you are mad because CAS players used their brain and used the terain to actually get a chance at using their bombs so they dont just die to a missile 5 seconds into their life
Idk fair enough then, at lower tiers its also incredibly easy to shoot down planes especially at 6.0 with the early cold war spaas starting to show up
My logic was sound: it is arbitrary and capricious to sudden change accessibility/costs based on other players’ actions.
What another player does (such as spawning a vehicle) should not have any influence on what another player can do. Such things have been tried before–in such events as the “Chronicles” series (which you have alluded to)–and that setup became a source of bitter issues because of its restrictions on players’ choices.
It was routine in Chronicles for successful players to be deprived of access to the quantity limited vehicles (often ‘top tier’ vehicles for the match’s BR range (ex. T-34, KV-1 or Tiger) or an aircraft) simply because another person obtained those limited vehicles prior to them. The successful players who missed out often didn’t turn their cheeks on this–they would abandon the match…and why shouldn’t they?
Nothing they did would override the artificial quantity limits after other players foreclosed on their access to vehicles there…so it’s understandable for them to write-off such a match to try again in the next.
Your proposal to hike vehicle SP costs and/or limit access based strictly on match time and/or others’ use of such vehicles would only encourage similar trends. It would encourage ODL, discourage teamplay and other corrosive trends.
An idea akin to congestion pricing really has no place in WT where there’s no reason to restrict players’ freedom of choice. If they wish to use a vehicle and have the SP to do so, another player has no place decreeing that prices be hiked to deprive them of that ability. (You don’t see tank costs hiked for the last player to spawn in do you?)
RB GFs is filled with tankers…I play every day and run into about 30 in each match. Who do we have to “bring back” to this when there are so many here?
To preface this aside, I will decline to comment on top tier–I haven’t bothered with that quagmire. Beneath that range…I can say with confidence aircraft are not ‘overfilling’ RB GFs.
Aircraft exist as half of RB GFs’ vehicles, but represent far fewer than half of the vehicles spawned. (Aircraft also lack a practical means of influence on objectives (caps)).
For your allegation to even be arguable (nevermind proven), you’d need to show aircraft usage as more than 50% vehicles used in the mode and that they’ve accrued more than 50% of the playtime therein. Beneath such numbers…aircraft could be reasonably judged as simply maintaining their presence as 50% of the vehicles in the mode. The combined arms mode is indeed home to combined arms battles.
Frankly, there is a far stronger case for aircraft being underrepresented without even touching upon the related matter of cost-effectiveness, which ties in…
…now. Overall, tankers who fly are already greeted by worse cost-effectiveness with all of their vehicles overall (GFs + AFs) than strict tankers (GFs only) in RB GFs:
-
Aircraft SP costs are far higher than tank SP costs.
-
Aircraft RP/SL earnings rates in RB GFs are inferior to RP/SL earning rates in RB AFs
- Aircraft use in RB GFs comes with greater costs, due to more vehicles (GFs) involved and their costs
- You pay for the aircraft and its repair bill…plus any GFs used and their repair bills
- You also pay the opportunity costs in RP/SL by not using an aircraft for the time spent using GFs
- Aircraft use in RB GFs comes with greater costs, due to more vehicles (GFs) involved and their costs
As @PointyPuffin and others have observed, RB GFs is already a poor venue for airplanes’ earnings efficiency.
Any suggestion to worsen rewards, especially without compensatory SP cost reductions, would simply be further rigging matters against aircraft. If a change is to made on earnings, it should be to raise others’ (GFs’)–not reduce those of aircraft.
In the past, I’ve encouraged a 400% bonus on earnings for air kills by SPAAs.
Pretty much all of that (especially the playability part) is based strictly on your opinion, not anything concrete.
If @JuicyKuuuuki sees a ‘cloud of enemy air’ over his spawn, he’s liable to see a buffet–not any mere tamale…sauced or not. With spawn protection as it is, pretty much anyone can try to make a buffet out of such a scenario.
1 Like
It really is Something people never think about when people talk about limiting the number of aircraft in game, is what happens if they don’t have another ground vehicle,.or at least one appropriate for map/match so far and was intending to spawn in an aircraft instead. It’s quite likely they will just quit the match instead and then the “people quitting matches early” thread will get longer rather quickly
1 Like
Something people don’t think about too is that people are leaving matches early when air arrives as they prefer ground vs ground combat.
Didnt realise that the moment someone spawns into an aircraft it forces all other 31 players into an ARB match
1 Like
If they don’t want to fight the air they will leave for another match where they can enjoy more of ground vs ground combat.
If I die to the air should I spawn into another ground vehicle to die again to the air?
That’s honestly how I see it lol It’s literally a buffet for me lol Most recent games thus far.
2 Likes
I dont think I have ever had a match where i’ve died to aircraft twice in a row.
99.99% of my deaths are due to tanks. In fact, the number one reason I quit a ground match is becasue our spawn point is being camped by other tanks and I wish someone would spawn in CAS to bomb them. In fact my best match i’ve ever had as CAS, was spawning in a heli and killing the 10 or so tanks sat literally in our spawn point.
1 Like
Spading the Stormer HVM in GSB was hilarious, I just farmed kills at the start of every match (and the odd light tank too)
1 Like
Good for You, I had such games.
Or someone from enemy team spawns CAS and bombs Your spawn (did that a lot of times).
So You enjoy this kind of gameplay.
Some people don’t. That is why TO is an answer to all the problems which would allow for truely combined mode without the need of nerfs/buffs.
Yes, that is a very real scenario too. It is simply wrong to deprive players of their rightful access to their vehicles…if a player has the SP to use a vehicle, they have the absolute right to pursue it.
Surge pricing is decidedly unpopular with consumers…and there’s little doubt that’s the same case here.
As I related above, the Chronicles events years ago were quite notorious for this…and people would explicitly cite this as why they left.
Players would often see the last ‘token’ for a limited quantity vehicle used, see their ability to obtain said vehicle evaporate in that moment and leave the match immediately thereafter. You cannot take away the goal they’re pursuing and then expect them to keep working…it doesn’t work that way.
ODLing (or at least a very similar trend of early leaving) would, without a doubt, explode if this sort of setup was realized. People who advocate for such a system either do not grasp its ramifications or do not care about the negative ripple effects it would have.
A player is free to leave any combined arms battle in the combined arms mode if they fear combined arms gameplay. That is their personal choice, though ODL is often frowned upon.
Freely leaving the battle is completely different from being forced out by arbitrary costs.
Who says you will be outplayed and defeated? It’s bizarre to be so convinced of defeat as that…but again, your decision to spawn or not is a personal choice that you’re free to make or not make.
What you show there exemplifies why paralyzing defeatism about enemy CAS is bogus: no success is guaranteed to CAS or anything else. You may be outplayed and defeated…or you survive (and even win too!): that is what the fighting decides.
Defeatism is convincing yourself that loss is inevitable. Sad as it is to say, even some high-time players who should know better buy into that bunk. Disappointingly, that’s how far the CAS hype sham has gone.
Heck, didnt they just relatively recently change it so that planes cant land and cap zones anymore?
Matches can still be lost, even with air superiority
2 Likes
Yeah, it’s now limited to anything that can re-arm on a helipad, so just rotaries and VTOL aircraft
1 Like