War Thunder for Nintendo 64 is going to be next level.
You should see the resolution certain people get on their walls of bushes…
2 Likes
Dude uses ULQ.
Still can’t see Helis.
Lol. Lmfao.
The jokes write themselves.
1 Like
I agree that the spawn cost needs to increase by a fair amount. I think 200 to 250 SP should do it. It’s way too cheap right now.
The the clearest evidence of that :
-
People regularly get into planes within the first 60 seconds of a match.
-
Some people have more airplanes than tanks in their lineup and can use all of them in a single match.
-
suicide bombing is a viable in the trade-off of spawn points lost versus gain.
4 Likes
oh hey heli kid go spawn your helicopters, don’t waste your time
If I want to spawn Helis, I shall.
If I want to spawn aircraft, I shall.
If I want to spawn tanks, I shall.
If I have the SP and the desire, I’ll spawn what I want. Simple as.
2 Likes
that’s why gaijin needs to increase costs :) but you are too simple to understand it along with your bots liking you
Some people just need an air vechicle in ground battles in order to be able to do something.
Not to mention that the person You are responding to is known to cry all over the forum about russian bias.
Using earned SP =/= reason to raise SP costs
As it stands, what @GNDM_Panzer stands regardless of SP costs. What he said is very simple and correct: players are entitled to use their earned SP however they please.
If a player has the requisite SP to use an aircraft/tank, that player has the absolute right to use it if they choose to. It is their SP to use…not anyone else’s to dictate about.
As for the silly “bots” talk, I laugh:
There is no shame in saying/supporting the sensible comment of “your SP is yours to use.”
You’d be wise to listen to what he said–it’s correct.
Actually, tankers who fly tend to be RB GFs players of at least decent/above average skill and are often among the best of their team (that’s how they access their aircraft on respawn!)
If you really wanted to go down the “some people” line, we could say a lot of things:
- Some people rely on manipulated settings trying for an advantage
- Some people use cheesy stuff like bushes to find success
- Some people often/only play in squads to improve their odds
There’s a lot of ‘unique’ conditions varying for everyone, but there’s little reason to go into them (and certainly not here!)
Others’ vehicle choices are their choice. What “some people” do is up to those people, not you. ¯\(ツ)/¯
1 Like
and this choice will still depend on them, but not from the very beginning of the match and they will have to work harder for it :) currently, it is enough to make 1 kill or 2 assists and you jump on the plane. Tell me, what’s so hard about it?
1 Like
Any data to prove it?
Getting SP to spawn a plane is not much.
So some people tend to do the same things as others in the same game? Nice.
The only ‘unique’ thing is players playtime.
That is why some need air units to be able to compete against others.
That is why air units SP should be risen.
1 Like
@GNDM_Panzer Your post states a very simple yet important truth: a player’s earned SP is theirs and they have the right to use it as they please.
To see the people who screech about freedom in game (often self-described ‘TO advocates’) is just sad…when they object to the simple fact you stated, they’re coming out as anti-freedom.
Those people wish to restrain or eliminate other players’ freedom of choice. Embarrassingly, it’s usually in an attempt to stifle the competition. It’s not a good look to try to subvert in-game losses like this…but plenty seek it anyway.
Any given game…pay attention to the top scorers, they’re usually tankers who fly.
As simple math shows, Aircraft SP costs are the highest in the mode. While you can obtain tank respawns without SP earnings, some successes must precede aircraft use (outside first spawn helicopters).
This is what applies to your inquiry @Evort01. If you want to compare SP costs versus value, you might even suggest GFs SP costs be raised…they’re so cheap that first spawns are throwaways (you are guaranteed a GFs respawn as-is!)
There are plenty of people who share background characteristics with others in-game and outside of it.
Not all of those characteristics are things to brag about…many are shameful or underhanded. People who rely on cheesy ‘handicaps’ to advantage themselves are not as good as the people who take the honest approach.
Given all of the various settings that can be configured as well as countless legitimate (rather than self-imposed) technical limitations many face, that is not true. There are tons of variables in play.
Considering that aircraft are the most expensive vehicles of the mode and require successes in RB GFs to reliably obtain, the suggestion that there is a large swath of such folks is rather silly.
You may not recognize it or understand it…but tankers who fly tend to be average or above average. They’re certainly more versatile than someone who artificially limits themselves to half the battlefield.
Not really.
Why should aircraft be discriminated against? Outside of top tier (which is an utter mess in all regards), aircraft are already the most expensive and least cost-effective vehicles of RB GFs, so further hiking their costs is not justifiable.
Anti-aircraft bias is inconsistent with WT’s framing as a combined arms game. To suggest discrimination against vehicles in such a regard is to advocate against players’ freedoms…it has no place here.
On the contrary, if SP costs were to change at all it should be reducing aircraft SP costs for clean fighters (per Fighters First). FF is a popular idea which expands players’ freedom of choice and, along with related changes, would give players an improved RB GFs to work with.
We know FF has been well-received when previously discussed. :)
1 Like
Oh You mean the battle score that You earn more while doing things in the air than when You are using a tank?
In a Ground Mode planes cost additional SP, that is right but then when it comes to the balance they cost too little.
And that is not true.
With air You can destroy things eaisly while the same action in a tank would be problematic at best.
You mean the ones who use things that other people can’t use? That is right.
If we are not talking about cheats then anyone can use what others are using without any issue.
Or are we talking about the advantages that higher graphic settings give and people who can’t use them due to hardware limitations?
Sadly we don’t have proper statistics to talk about it. I would love to see how many “above average users” crash themself while trying to suicide bomb someone (because I see plenty).
They are not being discriminated against. This is a Ground mode that focuses mostly on Ground units and most of them can’t fight back against air units thus due to balance reasons, the SP of air units should be risen.
Sorry, I can’t find any poll on the forum showcasing the popularity of FF, but I can find the one talking about the unbalance and need for another mode just for tanks :). Not to mention showcasing what majority things about CAS SP.
The battle score of a tanker who flies is the battle score of the tanker who flies. They get their scores as a result of their successes, which are mix of their ground and air actions.
If they end up near the top of the board…that’s because they’ve been successful. Do you follow?
That is your personal opinion, not a fact.
Outside top tier (it’s a perpetual, whack-a-mole mess of imbalance among AF/GFs both), I can say that data shows that’s wholly untrue of aircraft in lower areas of RB GFs. Aircraft are far worse on cost-effectiveness than GFs in those areas and have fewer capabilities also.
Not really. Not every aircraft possesses the weaponry to kill any given GFs vehicle as you imply.
When you have a technique on how an He 51A or Ki-10 can wipe out a T-35…get back to me.
Some people do not have the means to use what other people are exploiting. The former simply cannot do what the latter are choosing to do. That creates an imbalance and makes them inherently different.
The freedom to choose graphics settings is not something everyone has. While some people choose to exploit certain settings trying for advantages (such as unnecessary ULQ use), others have no choice in what they must use.
That is one of the sorts of variations I was referring to–but there’s no need to go into further detail here. PM me if you want me to explain further, don’t bloat the thread.
Casual observation can give some insight, though Gaijin possesses the official statistics.
Still, even those statistics cannot provide insight into all causalities…often what people think is suicide bombing is just Gaijin’s controls going wacky and screwing players in the process.
I’ve seen that issue firsthand and the players hit by that are blameless…and, as an aside, aircraft are very vulnerable to such glitches (more than GFs).
Incorrect: RB GFs is the combined mode jointly shared by air and ground units. As most tanks have the means to defend themselves or accompanying dedicated anti-aircraft units, there is no reason to preach favoritism for GFs over AFs by skewing matters.
Let player skill decide the matter…if players fear a threat by enemy AFs, let them use the tools they have to deal with it. SPAAs and defensive fighters exist.
Well-received in discussion =/= a poll
I did not mention a poll, so it’s a bit strange that you talk about it like that.
Organic reactions amid groups of various users are better than polls anyway because they are nuanced and contain players’ reasoning for supporting/opposing/indifference about ideas. This is far harder to fake than polls, which can be manipulated and skewed far more easily.
Knowing where to find the search bar isn’t really a flex.
Yeah, there are TO threads but most of them are inactive and/or contain the same half dozen or so guys all insisting TO is a great, perfect idea…while making no attempts to advance the idea (much less realize it).
The first TO thread to really get anywhere in earnest was started in January 2018…it is now July 31, 2024. In my most neutral tone, let me break this to you: that’s 6.5 years with no appreciable progress.
[citation needed]
To be direct with you, you’d struggle to support that contention even if you alleged to be talking about ‘majority’ of active forumers…nevermind a majority of players.
To borrow your line:
As a side note, that poll’s credibility is further undercut by the phrasing used by its framer who obviously has no clue how to do it properly.
The options are poorly written out and inconsistently arranged…“costs way too little” ? What a lousy way to express the idea of “too inexpensive”.
Just looking at that poll and how it’s written, it is just as possible people (esp. non-English speakers) thought they were expressing support for lower costs.
All in all, that “poll” is thoroughly unimpressive.
1 Like
And You don’t follow that just because someone spawns in the plane right after doing well in a tank it means that he gets that points because he uses both type of units?
That is just how things are. It is much easier to bomb a tank who can’t do anything to You than attack him with a tank.
Please provide this data (link to the site or maybe a post about it with things up-to date).
But most of them can.
Not to mention that not only T-35 is going to be on the battlefield as open-tops are going to be too ;).
If we are going to talk about PC players, only the players with outdated hardware can’t use higher settings (which in some cases give advantage).
Oh ULQ talk when it is not even giving You the advantage that other graphic settings can?
You can also PM me if You are willing to understand what graphic settings give what advantage and how it works. You might finally understand how things really are.
Oh I have just had two games where in the end best players were still using tanks.
So from my observation things are a little different to what You are talking about.
So how does T-35 defend against Do 17 E-1? (Please we are not talking into consideration that air user can’t bomb a target).
Or many more that have limited angle on mounted MG?
There is much more than just a few that can’t defend against the air.
The mode includes both type of units but again it focuses on the ground aspect of it. If it wasn’t the case then the whole gameplay would not resolve around ground map.
They can be used after the user dies, so they are not there when needed.
So in a discussion with how many users? How many really liked it while others were against it?
A proper poll would showcase what majority thinks about it.
So make a proper poll about FF idea and show us how many players really want it.
You can include even the question about SP of aircrafts and their role in GF RBs mode. I hope You will do it properly to not later say that this poll is skewed.
A tanker who fly that is successful is successful, regardless of the vehicles used.
The player and his success was what we were discussing, not vehicles.
Incorrect.
Putting aside the fact that many (most?) aircraft simply have no means to attack all enemy GFs, competitive means to attack enemy GFs are far more prevalent among GFs. It’s easier (and less expensive) with GFs.
This has already been done and the same trends on kill share data are visible in matches as they happen.
I’m not going to bother bloating the thread with the data reposted here again, you’ve seen it.
That’s irrelevant.
If an aircraft like the He 51 or Ki-10 cannot wipe out any GFs vehicle, your claim is disproven outright. (This is why absolutist comments are easily disproven–they are extremely conditional.)
I have no interest in bloating the thread here by explaining graphics matters to you, but I appreciate your humor.
My understanding of WT is advanced beyond your own, so you don’t have anything to offer me.
You’re simply confused…I didn’t say TnF are always the top players of a team, I say they tend to be top scorers (ergo, not always and not necessarily #1).
Reread what I wrote.
A proper poll might show better data than that messy botched attempt you showed–but alleging it would show the majority’s opinion is overpromising.
We will have to “wait and see” to understand future surveys.
If I bother some time, sure.
I haven’t been on the forums much lately but have seen moderators are truncating threads down to cut down on the duplication and bloat.
Again, it’ll have to be a “wait and see.”
1 Like
How is that incorrect?
It is far easier to bomb Jagdtiger than to fight him while using M4A2 76
Of course they do as ground has open-top vechicles and lightly armored ones too.
Of course it is.
Of course it is not disproven as they are much more vechicles that can be killed.
Not to mention that destroying radiator can cause fire, and as we know putting tank on fire a few times lead to its death.
Sorry but it is not and anyone can see it.
You mean what You wrote here?
From my perspective people who fly are not usually in the top scores. We already had a disagreement once when talking about nations (USA/GER) having uptiers/downtiers on old forum and my perspective showcased something much different than Yours.
I would love to see it especially as I know how the results will play out.
Many aircraft have no means to bomb (or rocket) an enemy at all…and even those aircraft that do have such weaponry (and the players have such modules unlocked), successfully targeting enemies with 50kg bombs and other nominal weaponry is no easy task. A fair portion of bombs need direct hits or they will do nothing.
Flanking an opponent is a lot more straightforward than engineering some Machiavellian moves as many (though not all) aircraft would require.
Your premise is not entirely baseless…but it is faulty because generally it’s just simpler with GFs.
That’s immaterial to the premise, which was He 51A/Ki-10 versus T-35.
You had told us any aircraft can pose a deadly threat to any GFs vehicle…explain how this direct engagement would result in a dead T-35.
As there is questionable reliability in ‘can’ (rather than ‘will’), I’d say the premise you stated looks pretty shaky…and practically disproven, undone by its absolutism.
The simple truth is that a fair number of aircraft have no practical means to attack many (armored) GFs units.
I have shown my understanding of WT is excellent and have offered you the chance to communicate via PM. There is no need to bloat the thread with anything further.
Indeed, note the key terms:
- “top scorers” = the people on the upper half of the board, especially the top 3 or 4 spots
- “usually” = much of the time, but not always
While it is true that there can be variation in such trends, my statement already accounted for and allowed for such things.
My terms were much more realistically written (rather than absolutist) because I understand there are indeed variation in such things as player behavior and its patterns.
Oh boy…you’re claiming to be a clairvoyant now?
Will you give me tomorrow’s winning lottery numbers as proof then? (I’ll split it with you!)
1 Like
That is why a player needs to know what aircraft to spawn when he wants to destroy a certain enemy.
At lower tiers, 12.7mm even with anti-air belt is enough to destroy most of the ground units without any problem. At higer B.Rs. 20mm is enough. (talking about medium and heavy tanks).
Of course it is easy. At the B.R. where 50kg bombs are used they are really well for destroying ground units.
Not all maps allow You to flank the enemy and You still need the enemy to not know about You in first place.
When it comes to air it doesn’t matter if he knows or doesn’t know about You.
Of course it can be done. If it can’t You can try it and post results of it (like a link to server replay or video showcasing it).
As long as You can’t disprove it my statement remains true.
That is why they are used in air mode, not in GF RBs mode.
It is like wanting a reserve tank to be able to fight Maus. Of course You can choose to play it but You won’t get the results.
With what You were saying about ULQ? Nope.
If You want to really learn how graphic settings work, write me a PM. I will tell You which settings give advantage in what because it really differs.
The key term is “any given game” and I have provided some that show that things are not like that.
You don’t need to be clairvoyant to see the trends in the community.
Can’t wait to see that poll!
That whole statement is great but don’t move the goalposts:
You (incorrectly) suggested any aircraft has the means to target any opposing GFs.
50kg bombs exist at many BRs, but their effective deadly radius is consistently small and extremely needy with something heavily armored (a la Jagdtigers).
Aiming that precise by eyesight takes more than what something like an M41 or other Jagdtiger peer would require.
While that’s arguably true, you can still succeed even without total surprise. (Cripping hits can enable later successes.)
Flatly untrue, especially given the needy nature of air weapons like 50kg bombs. If a target knows of an incoming attacker, it becomes far easier for them to evade. Even a slight ‘miss’ of 1 meter can mean the bomb fails…all because of its weakness, not poor placement.
Incorrect–you have to prove your statement to validate it. As it stands, your own take on it is that it is not reliable (‘can’ not ‘will’).
An aircraft lacking bombs and equipped only with 7mm MGs will not have serious anti-armor capability, in direct contradiction to your claims. That’s all there is to it really…your statement was absolutist and we have a counterproof.
That’s not what you were saying earlier…you insisted all AFs had an advantage over GFs and deadly seriousness simply for being AFs.
Incorrect.
The key terms are the two I explained…‘any given game’ is the venue to look at, but “usually” refers to quantity of instances.
You would need to be clairvoyant to foresee the poll results now as you implied…it’s just not possible otherwise.
If you’re already personally convinced of a result in an incomplete survey, that evidences bias. (Remember, I said we’d have to “wait and see”–that is how to stay neutral, levelheaded and unbiased)
You need to wait for the data–do so.
1 Like
What I have said is:
Not:
So please don’t try to put words in my mouth in first place ;).
Of course if someone is using the incorrect tool he won’t get proper results.
Again, using them is not that hard.
And dropping a 500kg bomb on jagdtiger is much easier, especially that he can’t do anything about it.
If air user knows what he is doing, the target won’t be able to evade them.
Oh I have done it a couple of times. Anyone can test it ingame.
That is why it is not being used for targets with armor.
Again, what I have said is not what You think it is.
Please cite me where I have said it so I can properly talk about it.
So sorry but usally it is not the case when it comes to the games I play.
It is possible by seeing the trend in the community.