Most of those that moved down were not CAS aircraft, but CAP. Aircraft better suited for A2A not A2G. For example the Sea Harriers went down 0.3, these have no different CAS performance to the 9.3/9.7 harriers but were at 10.3/10.7 respectively because of 9Ls.
Some CAS did move down, and I do personally question some of it (like I think 9.7 is too low for the unguided Tornado IDSs), but others such as the Hawk 200 RDA moving down makes sense because the Hawk 209 which is still a lot better was at a lower BR. There are other CAS aircraft that I think should still move down more, such as the Hawk 200.
But multiple capable A2G aircraft moved up, such as the A-6 and Buc S2B.
There is an argument to be made that most of those BR reductions nerfed CAS, by making more capable CAP aircraft available at lower/more convenient BRs. For example for 9.3, the only real option I had before for a CAP aircraft was something like the Hunter F1, now I can use the Harrier GR3, Harrier GR1, Hunter F6, etc etc. Waaaaaaay more capable A2A aircraft than anything we had before, but all are still weaker than the Buc S2 for CAS that was already at 9.3. Same again for being able to use something like the Phantom FGR2 at 10.3. I jsut wish the Sea Harrier FA2 moved down to 11.7 so it was available to use at 11.7
imo CAP is not played for both strong SPAA and weak CAS. No planes to hunt and no multi role available for the SP change made small CAS loads/ weak CAS loads on CAP planes cost too much, and they are less useful in shooting planes than friendly SPAAs when the opponent CAS is around the tank map under enemy SPAA cover (where they usually are).
I still don’t expect to see any CAP even with this missile spam tbh. But yes, there would be more balance issues. More point and click and more compression.
On the CAS side I’m glad to see the q5, tronados, su17, f111, f105, etc etc to go down. I see it as a starting point where people can finally see how strong SPAAs are against most planes instead of the few who does need to be moved up.
considering f111 mig23bn, and 10.0 f4c, I’m good with it :D
I think another ‘nerf’ that could work is a hard limit to how many aircraft can be active at once, make it at least 2-3 at once on either team so the SPAA isn’t overwhelmed by 4-5 planes spawn-camping them.
I’ve had a few games where I’ll spawn as an SPAA to try and ‘thin the herd’ only to take a couple shots at one plane and get shredded by another.
First off, most enemies aren’t visible at distances where trees/buildings stop rendering.
Second off, terrain loses fidelity at long distances which can hide tanks out in the open, even well within visual range (hilly/dune maps in particular tend to cause this).
The only advantage ULQ provides is playing with 40fps instead of 20.
ULQ or lowering the Graphics is what Corb does he had a video on it but seems to have removed it?
He also goes through his keybinds, by lowering effects, terrain. Tanks and vehicles are easier to spot.
This gives you an advantage as you are not spending time scanning for targets.
AFAIK Dagor engine renders stuff in layers (unless it was recently changed). First is water, than ground, than ground deformations, than vehicles and than trees. So even in highest settings you will see vehicle tracks before vehicle itself and vehicle before trees.
As for top tier, Thermals make it easier for both. Without thermals, ULQ still has an advantage to spot tanks quicker. At one point i played ULQ for top tier to play CAS with the F-16AJ when it came out for instant reactions instead of guessing if thats a tank or not.
Helps with everything. Including for tanks, can’t even hide behind black smoke from burning tanks cuz ULQ reduces it by a lot making it see though black smoke. While I have to wait till the smoke clears in order to see what’s on the other side of my tank too.
Yeah, ULQ is something they need to address because its basically an exploit at this point. Should be locked behind a benchmark. If your computer genuinely lacks the ability to run the game in any other setting, then it unlocks, but if you benchmark and reach a perfectly acceptable FPS on low. Then it should be blocked.
Just limit war thunder max fps in nvidia or amd settings and boom, profit. I myself locked it at 60 because Im used to 60 and dont want all that extra heat and cooler roaring
And that’s why it’s optional. Anyone who likes good graphics can have good graphics, and anyone who needs an FPS boost or just prefers less visual clutter can use ULQ. Forcing min graphics settings with benchmarking or hardware checks would be even more abusable as more technically inclined players could easily spoof the checks through a variety of ways, and use ULQ when most players won’t even have the option.
Its unfortunate to play against players with high end PC and running ULQ while im playing at Max, sometimes movie mode. But Pangolin is correct here. We choose to play on max and we always have a choice to adjust them for advantages by sacrificing some scenamatic moments. It is available for everyone as an option. I wouldn’t want to lock the settings though, i would occasionally swap to ULQ to check things or confirm sus kills in games i been on in replays.
Still though, ULQ is in fact used by many to gain more advantages, perform a lot better in game in form of FPS etc…, and spot/react quicker than others. Personally, to me its a cheap move and an eye sore. Learned its not an exploit or cheating, but its just how it is. Im satisfied to do well in movie settings without advantages playing at 60-80 FPS instead of 400+ FPS.
There definitely needs to be something done about ULQ being giving such a significant advantage for players. It practically removes bushes and foliage. I constantly get hit behind tons of foliage by players I just could not see but were right infront of me.
