This again.
Y’all beyond saving. literally the guy from the “flooded house, boat, chopper and god” story.
And ?
What’s so weird in changing the mode from the ground up if it’s evident it doesn’t work with current settings ?
ARB should encompass both PvP and PvE at the same time.
Source ?
Because there’s still people that enjoy the current mode?
So the bases and ai targets don’t exist in air rb?
2 Likes
You also have people that don’t enjoy the current mode ?
Just imagine how bad our electronics would be if designers just opted to stick with all of their original ideas and made zero updates that change things from the base.
PvE impact should be much bigger as there is a whole class of planes that is literally built to do just that.
That’s not what nerfing rewards across the board looks like.
Want not have both as filterable options?
Because these people are selfish snakes with severe case of tunnel vision. The least they can do, in case of “bad reward” is advocate for better reward but being the kind of people they are they just use the bad state of the game as leverage to shot down other idea rather than seeing those issues as actual problem that is detrimental to players.
1 Like
I doubt most people truly enjoy the current mode - rather they tolerate it because there is no better option.
Doesn’t every round amounting to just the same dogfights over and over on a different color palette not get boring?
Unless destroying them is under no uncertain circumstances required to win matches, frankly no, they don’t practically exist.
Fighters currently can win games while completely ignoring both. This is the source of the mode’s issues.
2 Likes
Multi spawn modes would make things much more interesting, you’d have more things to engage and to actually play both A2A and A2G in the same game.
We definitely don’t need bigger maps, just better placement of things around them.
1 Like
was that one of those votes like where Gaijin asked “do you want repair cost based on how strong a plane is or it’s rank?” and every one voted rank because the 30k SL repair cost planes where unaffordable to play for most people and people wanted to be able to play them… and Gaijin responded by INCREASING EVERYTHING to 30k?
To be honest, what they enjoy or not shouldn’t matter while one class of aircraft is almost useless in the given game mode. That fact alone should make Gaijin to rework ARB.
Fighter jocks malding their mode (which currently should be called Fighters Only) might change to suit all aircraft types equally shouldn’t concern anyone.
3 Likes
That would be the ideal solution to this
1 Like
I dont see how using your skill to win a match is an issue
1 Like
The fact that you can’t see how bomber and attacker are thoroughly useless in current iteration of ARB says everything about you as a person. Again with leveraging a bad game design for your own enjoyment. You lot deserves 2022 war thunder.
2 Likes
So say you have 14 F-4Ss bombing on your team after a sale. Is losing then a skill issue?
Or you are playing Germany 6.0 and half your team is in bombers. Is losing a skill issue? Seems like it is according to you.
2 Likes
Frankly, its worse than this.
Three of four major classes of aircraft are at best playable and at worst totally irrelevant (heavy fighters, attackers, and bombers). And of the purebred fighters that are playable, maybe a third of them are “meta-centric” enough to actually be considered “good.”
I too support totally upending the mode to support all plane classes, while intentionally not introducing a separate pure dogfight mode. We don’t need 3-5 different aircraft modes - just a single intelligently-made and GOOD one that everybody has actual value in.
Fixing the near-total-irrelevance of everything but meta fighters will also help the CAS spam issues in Ground RB, because now many of those attackers will have somewhere else to go.
5 Likes
Of course you might say they should stop bombing. However that’s never going to happen. Also Gaijin is also never going to remove bases and ground units from ARB since it’s how they sell half their premiums. So people are going to do it anyway. Why not have those players which are “useless” on your team do something actually useful.
How I would personally go about a comprehensive framework for “fixing” Air RB, two possible methods:
- Completely scrap Air RB and make RB EC the only Air Realistic game mode.
- Heavily reform Air RB into something strongly inspired by EC, but still retaining the “one death” nature of it.
Now how would this work? What underlies all changes to maps, objective types, airbases no longer being able to be practically destroyed via bombing, and basically every other change stems from an unresolved mess dating to this game’s founding.
The mere ability of any single objective to auto-win the game without input from the other two objectives. Killing all planes leading to a fast automatic ticket bleed to zero, which bleeds to zero regardless of what attackers and bombers did, if anything at all. The old ticket bleed from airbase destruction was similar - it did not matter what fighters and attackers did. And attackers being able to wipe all the tickets via ground units without input from fighters or bombers. This meant that the three objectives - A2A, CAS, and Bombing were effectively competing against each other despite being on the same team.
To properly renew the game mode’s foundation would demand the following:
- Remove the “No active players left on enemy team” auto-win ticket bleed.
- Remove the “Airbase destroyed” auto-win ticket bleed.
- Increase ticket losses per aircraft kill so that killing all 16 players + AI attackers (I don’t remember exactly how many there are per team) bleed exactly 50% of the starting ticket bar in incremental chunks per plane death.
- Add many more simultaneously active bombing targets, but disable their ability to respawn. Adjust their ticket value to add up to 50% of the starting ticket bar.
- Either halve the number of active ground units or halve their ticket value such that killing all of them wipes 50% of the ticket bar.
- Extend match timers back to 1 hour, have the “supply line trucks/boats” spawn in at the 20min mark like is still seen on a handful of old maps when matches last that long. These vehicles would intentionally be worth 50% of the starting ticket bar.
Then, each objective is given the time to be taken care of without being forced to excessively step on the toes of planes whose purpose is devoted to other objectives.
Maps must be very much remade to fit objective setup like the above. I personally find maps of the style “[Air Battle] France 1944” to be a suitable model, of which there are several others of similar layout for [Air Battle] Hurtgen, one of the several Moscow maps, and a couple others. Each side has three well-separated groups of pillboxes and three well-separated tank columns, encompassing the majority of the map. The only current downside of this map style is that all players airspawn at 2000m, bombers included, which means bombers are even more defenseless than they currently are.
After those two are properly dealt with, then we can begin to seriously hammer out things such as:
- More varied objectives for attackers that require more player skill to deal with
- More varied objectives for bombers that require more player skill and/or teamwork to successfully take out (as there is only so much skill you can realistically add for bombers the way the game models them).
- Objectives that can influence the air battle, such as radar stations.
- Choice of ground units in the mode (classic Air AI or using player tank/ship models as is seen more recently)
- Re-incorporation of AI scout planes and bomber formations like were once present on some maps, which act as a lure to encourage people to actually climb.
- The question on how “necessary” red enemy markers, at least on aircraft, are. IMHO enemy aircraft markers should be axed completely, both to bring parity of Air RB with Ground RB and Naval RB, and also to encourage addressing of other serious issues they act to cover up.
- Addressing of the everpresent problem of dot spotting being unequal with respect to different graphics settings - DCS once had this same issue, and Universal Dot Scaling was what it took to fix it. Currently it’s way easier to spot aircraft on ULQ than on higher settings. The existence of red enemy markers is an excuse to ignore this problem. It is ridiculous to be able to spot enemy bombers right when they spawn while still on the runway.
- Many BRs are completely nonsensical, and would need immediate adjustment once red markers are axed. In general, speedy planes with acceptable maneuverability would go up quite substantially, while dedicated turnfighters would see BRs drop. Without red markers so easily spoiling surprise attacks, it would become much more normal to ambush and blow to smithereens that A6M Zero before it starts turning in the first place, as an example.
- Undoing years of idiotic nerfs to rudder control on countless prop planes and some jets which at one point or another were intensively whined about. Rudder bricking seems to be Gaijin’s “favorite” nerf for a “problem” plane. Some planes which once had it later had it removed - Fw-190s, I-185s, Ta-152s to name a few popular examples. Others had it given to them and still have yet to see it lifted - F4Us, Ki-43s, J2Ms, P-51Ds (though surprisingly not the A-36, P-51A, or Cannonstangs), P-51Hs, Tempests, F8Fs, and all the 5.0-6.7 BR heavy fighters.
- Gun damage being generally increased, as apparently it has been nerfed considerably in recent patches across the board for some reason. Most likely a bungled RealShatter thing akin to how Volumetric Armor is still a big problem with tanks.
There are many other specific little issues I could go on and on about. But these are some of the most important to mention.
@MotorolaCRO what do you think of this?
1 Like
Those guys goes chicken after being called out.
I am going to read your response fully a bit later as I am busy right now. Now let me just say this. I didn’t include any concrete proposals on how ARB should be fixed since everyone has their own opinion. I think it’s better to agree for now that we are unhappy with how ARB currently is and to get Gaijin to acknowledge that. I would much rather compromise later when they are open to reworking things than argue to death now and for Gaijin to dismiss us since we “don’t have anything better”.
2 Likes
I find the community formed around this game fascinating, i can’t think of any other game with this sort of playerbase and cat-and-mouse back and forth between developpers and players.
Very interested to see where this game will head in the future, and interested to see what this thread can offer, I won’t reply further until I’ve read everything, kudos to OP for initiating a strong thread, at least.