Only 2 CC’s i would listen too would be defyn and liniyka.
Really comes down to the players. I have seen far too many ground attacker/bomber players act like mindless drones who can’t adjust to what their team is doing. I see prop bomber players fly in a straight line towards a fighter and wonder why they die. I see ground attackers flying straight in to ground pound while there’s still hordes of enemy fighters still up. There absolutely are ways to use these planes effectively, yet you’ll never the vast majority of their users do any tactic that requires a couple braincells.
The biggest issue with ARB honestly is top tier being a slug fest and matches ending in 5 mins. The AF camping situation has also never really been properly addressed as well.
1 Like
With BR decompression it is often brought up that decompression would result in longer queue times but I have to say I disagree. There are BR ranges that most just never chose to play unless they have to grind through it because of how dependent their enjoyment will be on the matchmaker 9.7-11.7 in particular where for example; you can face 50g IRCCM missiles in planes that don’t even have flares.
Interesting fact for those newer to the game when the T2 was added (with only 2 aim9E at that time too) BR 10.3 had to be created for it alone because it was too OP to be 10.0 with the F100 and Mig19 now it has double the missile count of significantly better missiles and it’s been moved to 9.7 because they keep adding new things that body the current top tiers and instead of moving the new things up like they did with the T2 they move everything else down which has just resulted in certain vehicles being effectively unplayable.
Now as for top BR I voted 18.0 and that is as a minimum because I believe the decompression needs to extend down to at least around 7.7, I would also be in support of a BR system gaining finer tune of the BR’s by allowing all .0 to .9 through all BR’s as it would allow for those vehicles that are for example slightly too good at X.3 but awful at X.7 to go to .4 or .5 where they wouldn’t get the full up-tiers into X.7+1 but also not be able to bully the vehicles at X.3-1.
Lastly with the player stats I completely agree but I will extend that a vehicle cannot just be compared to the same players average overall it needs to be compared to their average in vehicles of similar role that occupy the same matchmaking range. If someone buys a high tier premium having never played jets let alone one with missiles they should be ignored completely in the statistics because their performance will be influenced more by their lack of experience than the vehicle itself.
4 Likes
Been typing between matches that’s why it’s taken like 2 hours lmao
2 Likes
Depending on a base re-work, fighters should suffer significant RP/SL gains for destroying bases/AI units.
I spawn in a strike aircraft, just for all the bases to be hit by fighters that can out-accelerate me to get to the bases.
I have had multiple games where I die because all four bases have been nuked, and I get slammed by a fighter because I’m fully loaded for strike missions.
It was fun playing an attacker when bases instantly respawned, but people were having too much fun and making decent gains. Everybody knows gaijin can’t allow that, so they removed it.
And, with the new carriers being able to be sunk, striking them is 1000% not worth it. You get the same score for destroying 2 AA emplacements compared to a whole ass Forrestal carrier. Same with the destroyers, but they seem to be only equal to a single AA.
Some simple solutions include heavy bases that require multiple aircraft’s worth of planes to damage, or Heavy ordinance such as the FAB-1500 or M118 to damage/ perhaps finishing off the target.
This may be a little too much, but what if some bases required multiple types of ordinance to destroy? Such as bombs + napalm for fuel refineries, Rockets + multiple >250 lb bombs/napalm for barracks/tents, or AP bombs for underground complexes? This would incentivize the addition of cluster munitions & more modern AP munitions. Adding critical points (such as the AF in Sim) to these ‘heavy bases’ would also make smart munitions a more attractive option.
To my knowledge, there are different base models in the files.
Please reply if you have any additional ideas or suggestions for changes to my ideas.
Thanks :)
1 Like
Or just make the stats they have public, I think that’d be a first great step. IDK why they even keep them private.
1 Like
That’s why I like EC RB maps, because I have a massively increased chance of destroying a base in a strike aircraft. You have to play around the furball, which is hard in the small maps. And your top speed tends to be faster than most fighters in most strike craft. (F111, for example)
I have a black statshark with 0.01 monthly kb and i really love bombing. Please let me press space on defenseless bots without better players killing me. I should also be able to win by bombing. Gaijin stop making the game unplayable for us bomber mains!!!
2 Likes
Don’t see where he was saying the objectives needed to be defenceless, I for one would like to see newer AA in high tier games.
5 Likes
pve4life!
2 Likes
CC advisor for ARB? Defyn
1 Like
Or even higher tier attack aircraft ai something higher than a mig-15
Wow this is so real. Us 0.2 KB players need to rejoice and fight these lame fighter supremacy nerds!!
1 Like
War Thunder air RB used to have some interesting mechanics like in Norway or Wake Island where a team had to defend by destroying the landing crafts and the other attacked and needed to defend their ground forces. I don’t recall the last time i played in such a map but i sure miss it. Nowadays every map feels the same, specific objectives in maps are just sidequests to the real endgoal of ARB (at least the one that defines battles nowadays) which is to destroy the enemy team.
I personally think there should be another mode to ARB so we can get this objectives based maps in the game. And ffs don’t do symetric maps with symetric starting positions, make it harder for one team at the start (obviously not impossible but just slightly). In my opinion this make the game more fun, overcoming a dificult situation definitely is rewarding and shows how skilled a player is.
I want to add as well that bombers should get the biggest rewok in ARB. There are many bombers in the game, widely played by the comunity (its impossible to find a game without a single bomber in it). Do bombing points bigger (like cities or factories or whatever), more meaningfull to the game victory conditions and maybe (this is a wild idea) make long range bombers spawn with ai bombers in formation following them and droping bombs at the same place roughly as the player does. You already have this mecanic in testing grounds and solo misions, why not improving it and make it functional for ARB bombers? It would also increase the survivability of the bomber player since he would be protected by a quasi perfect defence formation, just like AI does on certain maps (which are deadly if you’re not carefull).
And lastly, please, add more specific maps for certain factions. We can still get japan only vs the uk and usa only but these maps are very old and rare to get. War thunder has the player base to lock certain misions to certain factions.
P.s. DECOMPRESSION!!! Why is my R2y2 still 8.0???
6 Likes
Have we ever gotten an official statement about this? I don’t think gaijin cares at all.
4 Likes
So people complain the RP/SL gains on Air RB are too low because of 5min matches, yet the same people vote like this (not that this thread will make a difference with Gaijin´s track record):
Absolute clown behavior
3 Likes
I would like respawns so my 500% rp doesnt go to waste bc of a single aim120
2 Likes
In a world where fair gameplay is optimal, you seem to completelty miss that…
Already have this in the form of bad teammates, and yes the 8vs1 is winnable if you are skilled. Shooting bots “strategically” is not skill.
Last thing we need is the game playing itself. Again this isn’t skill. Unsurprisingly you never hear about the lone bomber winning fights (they arent designed to)
No
Gaijin doesnt need to make a statement addressing this. The ONLY issues with air rb are bugs (including cannon bug), clouds, spotting, airfield AA and the BR system. Otherwise, gamemode is fine.
2 solutions: dodge the missile, or play sim. Sim has respawns.
1 Like
old historical battles still exist, i think they need to return, i think players need to suck it up with longer match making in order to have a funner game, if historical matchmaking came back itd make players actually use their brains and learn how to counter enemy teams, at a certain point, lets say 8.7 historical battles can be disabled and the current air battles are what jets use, but for props there needs to be modes similar to historical battles returning, we need tasks and goals to accomplish so the round feels more alive as we play
1 Like
Ideally you would start with almost what sim battles are currently.
Airfields, and team-owned grid squares.
having a “Complete this = Win” is a little extreme except for killing all enemy players.
What I think would be interesting is EC sized maps, and more players. Smaller objectives that either ticket bleed OR take out a chunk of tickets.
You could have objectives on the borders like taking out bases or ground units to capture or defend grid squares. The team with the majority grid squares will cause ticket bleed.
For removing chunks of tickets, base bombing and airfield bombing. For fighters, taking out other players or AI strike/bomber groups.
With larger lobbies, this would spread it out more. Still 1 spawn though. Airfields will be important. A single spawn will also let you sit down and play a game ‘real quick’ without a big time commitment.
Anyways, that’s my spitball idea.
3 Likes