That’s a ban for you good sir
Why should we do DIY band-aid instead of actually, you know, GET A WORKING GAME?
Didn’t even reflect from what I said about you people and it’s not even a day old critic.
Possibility does not make it a logical or good option.
why grinding without Band-aid until they fixed the problem? this issue is due since 2013,…
It never had been fixed for “x” reasons i don’t know of,…
and @Surbaissemaxxing : please deal with the insultive part,… everyone have rights to speak,… it’s not to get bashed by some people not even thinking about the consequences,…
Some of these ideas regarding radar AWACS and SAMs would also give utility to electronics warfare aircraft (and stealth aircraft when more are added) and maybe we’ll get a more varied selection of ECMs if any of this is implemented
Try to be respectful, I don’t want this thread locked for flaming and insulting.
7 Likes
The reason here is simple - most real engagements were decided by one pilot surprising the other. This fact is partially why the rule “speed allows one to set the rules of engagement” became so absolute.
IDGAF about what some people do with their gameplay - I stopped playing like a sweat years ago.
No, it looks the way it does thanks to the objective setup and snail’s unwillingness to change it. Fighters don’t need to care about nonfighters and vice versa. Lack of well-thought-out gameplay for nonfighters leads to guffawing about “lack of skill” from certain people (including a few in this thread), leading to neutering of nonfighter relevance, which leads to less people playing them, creating even less incentive for snail to give them more interesting gameplay.
And this is due partly to snail’s lack of vision and also due to incessant screaming of certain users (including some in this very thread) about how “skill-less” nonfighters are any time they even begin to become relevant in the game mode. Such folk have actively prevented developments which could have led to actually intelligent objectives for bombers and attackers.
I started the game on Air modes, man - I only play mostly Ground these days because Air RB is boring. Only a modest portion of purebred fighters are actually relevant to the majority of matches, precisely because there is little to no ability to surprise people.
Much of the reason that speed was more important than maneuverability in reality was because of surprise attack possibility. Removing this possibility from everyone just because you personally don’t like it is incredibly selfish.
I want to be able to use speed-centric planes to jump more maneuverable opponents before they can react. I want to be able to have more uninterrupted 1v1s. I want to be able to have dogfights where the other guy can’t use “Target Tracking Cam: Enemy” to simultaneously stare locked-on at the nearest guy while maneuvering in perfect sync with every movement of the guy behind. I want to be able to have necessary time to get proper firing solutions that aren’t just quarter-second snapshots. All that is only doubly as important in time periods where aircraft guns are not working well (such as 1.59 and much more recently).
I want to be able to use bombers without being lit up across the map just because a single random enemy bomber flies within 5km of me. I want to be able to use a ground attack plane without being lit up across the map because some AI attacker flies within 5km of me.
I want to see gameplay which is not just inclusive of all plane classes, but gameplay that requires all plane classes to win every single match.
This of course means that fighters cannot be allowed to win games by themselves by PvP TDM alone.
Different people have different definitions of fun.
Mine is simple: I want to be able to use as many planes as possible in their correct roles as possible, where every plane class has its specialized role it does that does not step on the toes of the others on their own team.
If I fly a fighter, I want to clear the air of enemy aircraft and then go help clean up the actual objective after the dogfight is complete. Most real dogfights happened to either 1) clear the way for/escort attackers & bombers to a given objective that’s not in the air or 2) preventing the enemy side from doing the same.
If I fly a bomber/attacker, I want to be able to swoop in to do an important objective after the dogfight is done like happened most of the time in reality, while having to potentially contend with some air defenses and bomber-killer aircraft.
If I fly a dedicated bomber-hunter/attacker-hunter (like a Do-217N), I want to see my objective actually matter.
Some planes’ entire main role is currently PvE, they must be allowed to matter and not be automatic “less-than” fighters.
Just because fighters require more “skill” right now does not mean that bombers and attackers can’t get more intelligently-designed objectives in the future. But so long as objectives remain zero-sum, there is no incentive to come up with anything better.
I do not desire to stop you from having your fun, man, as at the end fo the day, this is a game. However, you having your definition of “fun” should not stop other people from having theirs.
1 Like
If you want to play a game mode where ground attackers actually matter…then you should just switch to SB EC where we don’t have a problem with toxic fighter mains.
3 Likes
Many people are wanting RB EC, which would be an exact copy of SB EC other than the different controls and 3rd person camera.
I too would like to see this. EC of course has its own separate issues (noscope convoy SPAAG with wildly higher accuracy than the best SPAAG players could dream of among them), but its frankly a better base for further development than the dead end of Air RB.
I also have no particular dislike, let alone hatred, for “toxic fighter mains,” provided them having their fun does not prevent me and everyone who wishes to play differently from having theirs. IDGAF what people do for fun in this game if they aren’t automatically trampling on everyone else’s fun by doing so.
5 Likes
EC has at least more potential for development than Air RB in its current state does.
I should know, I spaded damn near all my heavy bombers there (actually landing after every run unless shot down).
Sounds more like the entire uptier-downtier system in general is just FUBAR. Which it frankly is regardless of game mode, vehicle type, or BR range.
Bad objective design, quite plainly. With how powerful top tier weapons get, even current RB EC maps are nowhere near big and diverse enough. I remember fondly in prior RB EC events for prop tiers that there was in fact lots of back & forth. Especially in the markerless one.
Snailgorithm is not particularly smart. Most people are aware of this.
Bad maps can always be changed. Also Denmark probably is a better case to develop into a Full Combined Arms EC mode, if I must be frank, where we have all vehicle types.
Many of these people have not played EC or only fondly remember PvE lobbies with only fighter opposition provided by bots. Any of the old Napalmratte RB EC videos will highlight how dead the game mode was at the time.
EC has not potential in Gaijins free to play model because being able to cherry-pick vastly favorable circumstances causes people to exploit the economy. We see this every single time there is an aircraft event in sim and it’s just players rocket bombing airfields and trying to force PvE-only lobbies.
Except in practice, me having fun comes directly at the cost of you having fun. This is why most EC lobbies with active players will eventually turn pretty one sided once someone gets a PvP advantage. This doesn’t apply to just top tier either; this is also prevalent in prop tier games.
This idea that EC is actually gentlemanly 1v1s in isolation or that attackers / bombers don’t get farmed by PvP players is mostly a fantasy. The most common outcome following a merge in Sim EC is either winning very quickly or whoever gets third partied first loses.
And what happens once you are not having fun? You leave the game to find a new one that is hopefully more devoid of PvP players.
2 Likes
We Need To Talk About This Patch
there is his video watch it. and plus, with his latest video/post on YouTube through his main account he pointed out that armor for tanks is broken if driving in reverse. And he said he won’t make videos on war thunder until its fixed.
FYI when I made my reply on this part I was not talking about EC at all, unlike the other two parts of mine you replied to. I was more referring to how CommunistBalls was screeching about how attackers and bombers are “skilless” and therefore not worth the regular Air RB game mode doing anything with.
What I was referring to here was how my proposal to set up Air RB’s win conditions such that doing the “typical” PvP dogfight no longer deprives attackers and bombers of the opportunity to do their jobs to bleed the other half of the ticket bar, and vice versa. Nonfighters now have breathing room to where snail would be able to add more interesting and skill-requiring objectives for each to kill now that input from one or both would be required to win nearly every Air RB match. Even the most “toxic” of fighter mains would struggle to argue against such an idea, because after all, do they not hate the likes of “bomber rushes” and “attacker rushes” of years past? Making nonfighters worth a damn does not mean going back to that crap…
So the problem is the lobby system and not EC’s actual mission structure, gotcha.
I personally have played most of the EC test events that did occur for RB before the lobby system was even introduced in Sim. I especially enjoyed the Markerless RB one.
Frankly though, the fact that the game doesn’t have mission types set up to where there is a dogfight phase followed by a “cleanup phase” is the root cause behind nonfighters being worthless. In real battles there was still an overarching job to do most of the time once the enemy air power was taken care of - in War Thunder taking care of enemy airpower is the only relevant job.
Bombing in the game is skill-less. You fly at a marked target on the ground and press a button for perfect bombing accuracy.
Ground attacking in RB is slightly more involved with having to place the cursor on a target and maybe hit it in the correct spot.
The whole entire skilled portion of it, if you want to call it that, is how they interact with other players.
So this just means that there is a free-RP farming phase once all of the players are killed and everyone that is left over is held basically forced to click on static ground targets. This also means the entire rewards system has to compensate for it as well.
The lobby system is an integral part of EC. If there is no lobby system then games would just be empty as soon as one side gains PvP advantage.
Because the ground objectives in the game are not interactive. They are either RP pinatas, bullet sponges that you cannot kill or catch up to, or they blow you out of the sky with arbitrary hit-scan AA. The game can’t even accurately path them or render them accurately on maps that have been around for years.
2 Likes
More freedom of choice within the match, more things to do/shoot at/guard, more possible strategy options as match isn’t reduced to 2v2 in the first two minutes, etc.
No matter what you do, ARB is hard capped by single spawn limitation.
Talking about PvP games/modes, it’s quite obvious that respawning is bread and butter of most games, as otherwise you’d end up with mostly boring, bland, 1d gameplay.
Just showing how my request for multi spawn didn’t come out of thin air, as it’s obviously on the minds of many players.
When I was flying planes for the purpose of A2A I was often left with nothing to shoot at, as the enemy team simply disappeared in the first two minutes of the game, which forced me to engage AI targets or look for that last guy who is probably either afk or hiding for some reason.
Your team winning the opening engagement and ending up in a 10v2 fight for scraps isn’t fun to many, which is something that would be solved with multi spawn system. Games getting decided by the opening engagement is far from perfect and makes games last as long as that first engagement is lasting, thus resulting in hilariously quick games.
As I said, CAS being popular in GRB is amplified by the lack of things to do in ARB.
The fact you need to spawn a tank first and do decent in it before even spawning a plane is holding off many people.
You’d still play a vehicle based shooter but with added complexity due to properly implemented CAS objectives that would impact fighters as well.
ARB has become a TDM and that’s unacceptable.
Considering ground targets and bases exist it proves that ARB isn’t a plain shooter by design, rather an incredibly unoptimized and archaic design made for the game’s needs a decade ago.
I doubt you’ll even need to have average intelligence levels to figure out how this new mode would be played. Current player material only looks to be not smart enough to use tactics or strategy while being without any patience because ARB itself forces that behavior onto players.
The higher you go, the more ARB becomes a mode without any strategy or tactics because the vehicles simply aren’t compatible with the design of the mode anymore.
The selfish grinding tours look selfish because ARB made ground pounding be a selfish playstyle. You see how everything stems to the game mode being utter trash that simply doesn’t work anymore ?
You’re speaking from the corporate PoV, I’m not.
3 Likes
So then, how would you make it “skilled” (enough) to then allow for making their objective important to winning every round?
The way I see it, there is currently no practical room to improve bomber gameplay due precisely to Fighter TDM being able to end rounds without input from bombers. Because bombers are already irrelevant, snail has no reason to give them anything else, thus they remain irrelevant.
Same as above with bombers. Arguably attackers are in a worse spot than bombers thanks to repeated ordinance nerfs to service tank mains complaining about CAS, shared spotting from the AI attackers meaning they usually can’t hide, and the nature of ground attack meaning you’re usually always low and slow.
You aren’t forced to unless you are literally the last person alive. If being asked to finish the rest of the real objective of the engagement is such an insult, you could always land at the nearest runway and J out to hangar. If you’re the last person left alive once in a blue moon, is it really such a “problem” to clean up the map once in a while?
So then what, are we supposed to just throw up our hands and say the mode is unfixable? If the root of the game mode doesn’t get expanded to allow attackers and bombers to matter, there will never be the slightest incentive to give attackers and bombers more thoughtful gameplay.
I agree with you that current attacker and bomber gameplay is rather uninspired.
What I do not agree with is using that opinion as an excuse to leave them that way.
1 Like
Imho this exchange is stuck in an infinite loop - as our understanding of the game mode, game design and player behaviour / motivations is totally different.
As a final message in this matter:
-
Air RB is not limited by poor map design, stale game play or poor overall design - Air RB is shaped by the quality and expectations of the overwhelming majority of their paying customers.
-
The main challenges of Air RB are rooted in the success of Ground RB, the mindset and motivations of newer players, their willingness to learn and invest time AND money - and that long-term players are way too few to be important regarding income/earnings for gaijin.
-
I tried my best to show you and the OP that currently just long-term players would benefit from most of the proposed changes. The rookie player just follows the incentives by gaijin which are easy to identify - just look at SL & RP gains for extremely simple tasks like base bombing with a premium aircraft.
-
I support any reasonable suggestion regarding an increase of “playability”, immersion or general game play. But it is obvious that gaijin has modified the game and tailored it to facilitate players looking for instant action in a shooter or easy grinding opportunities - that’s why the game play quality is declining from the perspective of long term players.
-
Therefore anything which increases difficulties for those players is not welcomed by newer players or gaijin. So if you claim to be worried about non-fighter aircraft and their role in Air RB it makes zero sense to reject the idea that these new / fresh / rookie players are paying this game - maybe not in amount spend per player, but by their sheer numbers.
-
You might agree or not, but as soon as the game gets more complex and the needs of these rookies are not considered, gaijin might think about a few cosmetic changes, but they won’t risk to lose or reduce the income stream these players create for gaijin. So any request for a change should contain also a proposal how the needs of those players can be covered.
-
Spawns: The only reason to offer multiple plane choices would be the possibility to swap planes after landing and repairing like from a fighter in a bomber whilst keeping the one match - one life approach. Importing additional problems to Air RB with this multiple spawn based on multiple deaths is just creating more issues.
-
Objectives: Your points regarding objectives simply miss the point that in almost all shooters mission objectives are just there to support player interactions. That’s why those objectives (and air markers) are marked on the map / in your view.
In any case: Have a good one!
1 Like
So a rookie can buy an F-4S with a PD radar, multiple secondary weapons, RWR, countermeasures and more but can’t handle bases not being in the same spot same every match?
Can’t tell if you insulting the intelligence of “rookie” players or just haven’t thought this through.
1 Like
wrong,… players that answers gaijin’s surveys are not all paying customers,…
Learn curve of players today stops at 30% of the full process
invest time - yes as any game with similar economy/research systems
Money - still not necessary, if you invest enough time, there is no money to invest.
what are you considering long-term players to be?
2 years old?
5 years old?
since game was released (out of BETA)?
since game was accessible (BETA)?
since game was early access (Closed BETA/Alpha)?
Learn curve stopped at 30% remember?
players that were really into the process of learn how to play would be making at least 80% of the learning curve within 2 weeks.
That is true , no time for team strategies, no time for placement,…
the reason is the shortenned maps with now airspawn to allow player to scatter a bit,… but with the same low-minded strategy of rushing mid-maps guns and missiles blazing
but all of this followed the different surveys results that gaijin made (or at least seemingly, since we can’t verify the results of those surveys)
i have the answer,… make them a full force tutorial (when entering the game with props, and then entering jets era),… instead of the joke of tutorial they get today,…
make them learn what they don’t know,… so we can increase the difficulty
that’s a new proposition i’ve not heard yet.
could be interesting, but also brings problems on it’s own,…
how to consider god-mode series of reward, if we all can switch from F-15E to P-26A35 mid game?
how to consider rewards/economy?
how to consider win conditions (since you can be like the last guy alive, then have a turkey shoot of 10 A-6’s/A-4’s/A-10’s going for ground pounding mid game)?
how to consider the lost of information in RB? like you can see the feed to know what aircraft is played by the last guy, and base your strategy based on those information in late-game ← this would disappear.
I do think your wrong on this one,…
Because even destroying all ground units today does not gives you a win condition.
I’ve trialed it in custom high tier battle(setting BR13.7 as mininum BR for the battle), on Falkland map:
destroying all ground units
2 destroyers and Forrestal Carrier
→ still not considered a win,…
had to bomb 5/7 bases after destroying all ground units