If you could, how would you re-balance CAS in Ground Battles?

Game Discussion Realistic Battle
1118

I agree.I think Gaijin need to step back and see that it has 3 Ground battle arenas and it could do so much more with all 3.

Sim seems to be the biggest waste of potential and dare I say it waste of space.
I still maintain that simply removing CAS changes the dynamics of the game considerably.

You could have fixed positions like Company of heroes where a towed gun is put in place with sandbags and defenses.You could try and hold a cap this way and it would mean a mid map battle rather than a spawn camping end game that we have now.

If you could create and hold a defensive line the game changes completely .
Make SIM into that if its a space hardly being used and appreciated.

How many units do we have that we never use due to CAS. Smoke would be game changer for example.It would have real use rather than being a signal to CAS to come and get you.

Removing CAS would be like taking a predator out of the the animal kingdom and upsetting the eco system.It would be fun just to see what happens.

What kind of new game would we end up with?

1 Like
1119

People aren’t just talking about spawn costs though. Even when they are increased people willl stilll be mad about being bombed.

Gaijin already changed a lot of air to ground weapons to reduce their efficiency.

Take the bomber DM as an analogy. Regularly you see RB players complain that bombers are made out of paper and get destroyed to quickly. They then show gameplay footage of an attack on a bomber and compare it to real life guncam footage.

They complain that the bomber in game goes down way quicker, completely ignoring that mouse aim gives the an effective firepower increase of about 1000%. Real hit rates were 2% RB hit rates are far beyond that.

If gaijin would listen to them the bombder DMs would be ridiculous, way too strong compared to real life.

The game is supposed to show the vehicles as they were, so if you need mouse aim, then don’t complain if everything dies faster.

Same happened with ground weapons. Best example is the RP-3 rocket. IIRC It was modelled after a 180mm SAP naval shell. It is pretty much the Airborne variant of a naval shell. If it hits it annihilated tanks in testing.

However in test it was also shown that the hitrate was abyssmal, the test (something along the lines of 36 were fired only 2 targets were destroyed) was then used by the people who wanted to balance CAS to argue that the Rocket was too effective… Gaijin listened and they nerfed it too the ground.

Jowever these idiots didn’t read why(!!!) it only destroyed 2 tanks. The real issue wasn’t that the rocket didn’t do the damage portrayed in the game. It was that they were fired from longer range than in game and that the missile due to their weight droped quite a lot… The pilots in the tests simply missed.

Of course in WT with mouse aim, the players hit way easier than in real life and that made the RP3 a monster of a weapon.

So the RP3 is unrealistically gimped because RB players are idiots and cannot take into account that their mouse aim pew pew shooter cannot reflect reality, due to mouse aim…

So no you cannot use RB to balance weapons or DMs, simply because RB players are too dimb to realize that all the crutches they use make comparisions to reality Impossible. And the RP3 change negatively affected all air modes and both air AB and air RB have more than twice the number of players GRB has, together they have more than 4 times the players… You cannot balance based on RB, due to the combination of realistic performance, comically unrealistic gameplay mechanics and players that take RB seriously… It’s a recipe for desaster. It just doesn’t work.

Just look at the RB bomber DM threads, where they seriously compare the game to guncam footage… They really do!!! They compare mouse clicking with the workload of a fighter pilot…

RB isn’t balancable, that is what AB is for, the AB Community doesn’t think what they play is like the real thing so you can balance it. Instead of trying to balance the unbalancable, just make RB TO and give the players the option and then we can have realistic weapon Performance again in the air modes.

1120

That would completely Ruin everything sim about GSB… Aircraft are the only thing making GSB a sim in any sort of way.

If GSB isn’t a simulator then it has no right to exist. No aircraft, no mode. The only acceptable way to remove aircraft from GSB is to delete the entire mode.

Don’t ruin SB to save your pathetic pew pew shooter. GSB needs a proper overhaul. Not just a new mission design. It’s not your coping tool it is supposed to be a sim. If you don’t like controlling the tank manually without mouse aim from the inside, then you are not the right person to judge what a sim mode needs.
Keep you dirty arcade shooter finger from sim. It needs to become like air sim.

1121

I’m happy that more people understand that.

1122

Well i just think tanks in WT are a joke and always have been.

The stuff that gaijin broke in the air modes to accomodate the RB tank crowd is ridiculous. And only so that the GRB players can keep their delusion that the game realistic… Yaah that’s not worth it.

I would much prefer actual realistic tank gameplay and then addon assists for the kiddie modes AB/RB. Like gaijin did for air (and helicopters). It seems that gaijin noticed their mistake by not making a sim mode for naval because they couldn’t even pretend to act like that sh*t is realistic.
But tanks were first and gaijin tried to sell them as realsitic and now the cannot rectify the problem.

It is so annoying. An RB TO really could be saving tank gameplay and it would improve the well made vehicles like aircraft and helicopters… There is so much to gain here.

1 Like
1123

It just appears that it is too hard for some to understand and they prefer the never ending nerfs/buffs to things instead.

1124

Which is impossible since AB/RB/SB share the damage mechanics, so you cannot balance them, especially since you have arcade tanks fighting sim aircraft in GSB.

If you balance the damage mechanics for arcade tanks vs arcade planes, you ruin GSB since your mechanics are completely unrealistic.

If gaijin stands by it’s realism then, GRB becomes unbalanced.

AB can always be saved by the multipliers… People give AB a lot of sh*t but in many ways it’s the most thought out mode.

With RB TO you will always have the option to play TO if the regular GRB balance is bad for you and gaijin doesn’t have to sacrifice realism to the RB crowd.

It’s the best solution.

2 Likes
1125

That is a pretty succinct explanation on why arbitrarily raising SP costs due to bias is pointless.

1126

And with TO in place, proper changes can be made into gameplay of todays RB GFs mode.

1127

Well the weapons can get the proper Performance figures.

But i don’t see proper gameplay changes coming from TO to GRB.

1128

By that I mean Gaijin could change current gamemode in order to properly simulate the battlefield

1129

This dude knows something. Let him cook 🔥🔥🗣

1130

You cannot simulate a battlefield in a game though. Since a battle requires the units to act according to doctrine. This would rob the players of agency. A simulated battlefield is only really possible in the realms of strategy games, where the single units hat limited agency.

You can make it somewhat authentic but not a simulation. You can only really simulate the vehicles when you want it to be a game where you control the units.

In addition to that, even if you just want more authenticity… Why RB? It would be completely wasted on RB.

1131
  1. Limit the amount of players at the same time being able to do CAS. (Same system that can be used for super powerfull units, have a Reverse spawn cost system that atfer death of said CAS players is added pack in the spawn pool.Certain units can no exed the set Spawn pool cost)
  2. Add mor etargets for CAS to attack then players on the battlefield. Have artilery nad support units outside the fighting area. Destroying those will take away abilitys and amuntion, protection spawn points)
  3. Make all CAS start on the airfield and let them taxi to runway, spool up and so forth to delay there apreance. Same goes for helicopters. No instant air spawn and pew pew.
1132

Of course You can’t.

But You may try to imitate it by introducing mechanics like front line, supply line etc.

WWM was a preatty interesting idea that was wasted due to players not understanding mechanics in place.

That is why I’m talking about simulating it, not making it a simulation.

As simulating I mean mimicing part of if.

Because in order to make it in SB, we would need first to properly change the gameplay of tanks and ships.

1133

Well the conversation is dead now with TO advocates thinking it has anything to do with this Topic.

Fortunately the sensible discussion got in first and just off topic nonsense now.

1 Like
1134

Simulating a battlefield and making a simulation of a battlefield are the same thing though. It both requires lack of agency of the players.

Sure, but why would you want this, without proper vehicles?

1135

Change the rewards around such that it pays pilots better (by quite a bit!) to attack enemy aircraft, and not nearly as much to attack enemy ground targets. Also buff the reward for any ground vehicle that takes out an aircraft, and with that one change we would see GFRB seem like a tank battle with some aircraft, as opposed to an air raid.

Now, could aircraft still dominate the mode? Sure! Could we still see aircraft outnumber tanks? Sure again! But over time, people playing the game for rewards will be a lot less focused on playing the way they do now, and power will shift for anyone still playing like they are now.

1136

I don’t think you quite understand what you’re talking about. Ingame, heavy bombers will literally die to singular 20mm HEs, whilst irl bombers like B-17 were known for tanking loads of 30mm and rockets, especially to the fuselage. That itself is another problem, wings and the fuselage get destroyed by indentical damage, and furthermore, small bombers like Ju 288 will die to the exact same shells as a Bv 238 or PBM 1-5 Mariner would.

TL:DR it’s not just mouse aim, planes just seriously have screwed up damage models.

Individual weapon nerfs are the negative changes that only toxic CAS-hater extremists want. In all reality what needs changing is spawncost (and how you get spawn points), making maps with actual effective counterplay, adding more SPAA options to lacking nations like USA or Israel, and possibly even making planes in GRB forced to use mouse joystick.

1137

This is a myth there is even a study by the us army from the late 40s calculating exactly how much punishment a plane could take. I have read that, have you?

No it really is just mouse aim, in sb it takes quite a bit.
Yes it is mouse aim.

But those will always exist. And as long as there is no TO mode they will make their demands. Your idea that all of a sudden people will stop these demands is ridiculous. Just give them TO.

That’s the dumbest idea and completely unfair. Why should only planes be forced and tanks still get kiddy mouse aim?