i’ve got some ideas, but not full proposal that could be added today:
add more space to maps (current ones are handkerchiefs, with nothing interesting because it’s always a bit of plains with Ground units AI on it) which would give time for Teamplan (alongside AWACS and Ground Radar)
→ Add AWACS at high tier [10.0+] (give Full UI over your ennemies (distance/height/aircraft type), until your AWACS is shotdown by said ennemy)
→ Add Ground radar [5.0+] (that gives only ennemy plots on your map , until destroyed)
→ Effective SAM [11.0+] on each farthest sides (which give a “no-no” area, until destroyed)
[those 3 are easy to model and make in-game]
→ can add air refueling (in future)
spread spawn to 4 airfields (4 aircrafts per aifields) (which would spread the battle, even with “rush-mid map” type of players)
have AI GT all over the place, not with a Singular line of demarcation, but much more “W” Form type:
Trains (undefended or defended)
Convoys (Spaags’s and SAM type ZSU-23-4 M4)
Entrenched areas on hill tops (Spaags’s and SAM type ZSU-23-4 M4)
Ships [highseas coastal and river ones] (no SAM from ships untils Anti-ship missiles are added)
In generally this is what confuses me most about queue time complaints.
Which is better?
20 minutes of action with decision making, dynamic changes in odds of success that engage you fully for the full time with ~5 minutes to take off/land/fly to encounter…
But! You need to queue for 3 minutes or so.
OR
~5-7 minutes of gameplay INCLUDING taking off and flying out
But! queue is over in 30 seconds
(Current gameplay at jet BRs the last time I touched my F8s and kfir and F5))
we agree on that, but that’s mostly due to players all rushing mid-maps (or at high tier, being already at Fox-3 distance from one another in 15seconds after spawn)
More AI ground targets more AI attack aircraft and larger bomber formations as well as other objectives like recon could be added to EC maybe give helicopters some utility in the ground battles that push the frontline boundaries be it either player controlled or AI
Actually really like the AWACS idea
This is part of what I mean by more diverse objectives
I wouldnt say have players that are only in helicopters but definitely limit how many jump into helicopters at any one given time Plus this would give helicopters more utility outside of GRB and the current dreadful implementation of helicopter EC
I kind of like the system you see has where you can utilize a whole lineup though and maybe have EC specific vehicles that you can control if you want kind of like how GRB has the predator drones maybe add recon vehicles and such for different battle ratings and nations to do other side objectives but this is all just spitball ideas
Maybe the maps also have cruise missile launchers or very long-range artillery that can affect the ground battle also that would be good to take out
I remember when they added the feature of tank permanenece
(Tank wrecks did not despawn after the user stopped spectating his own corspe)
In the main menu there was a poll (Url redirect) Asking if this change affected your performance and other metrics.
Hard disagree for several reasons not withstanding the fact that the CC question was basically snuck into the post without any detailed explanation that goes along with it like the other questions in the post.
CC videos are already often forwarded to developers as feedback for developers.
A lot of the currently popular CCs roll in the same social circle, and oftentimes have a lot of the same opinions, and are at times exclusionary to certain members of the community. Some of them engage in bullying behaviors, corralling users/members to have the same opinion as theirs and coordinating their opinions. Their feedback being amplified greater than it currently is would not be good for the game. This does not go for all content creators but a great deal of them.
Some of the most popular CCs already tried to coordinate and manipulate threads regarding lowering multipath which they said would lead to deterioration of the game.
I am not. I find it to be too linearly designed with little thought put into anything but TDM gameplay. The TDM gameplay itself isn’t that good either because of the airspawns above 10.7, cluttered map design, skinny maps, and poor spawn point choice.
I don’t think any mode like that is currently needed. They should be useful to win in all modes, but you shouldn’t need them. Air sim gets this balance well done, because you can win fully on either fighters or bombers, but you don’t need either of them win.
It’s not a bad win condition, but we need more than just that.
That’s something we need for RB EC, and not regular air RB. Ideally RB EC would fill the niche of longer matches, while air RB will fill the 10-20m match length.
I agree.
I’d also like to see multipathing reworked, as well as more spread out players.
Fair enough. I though CCs would be better than whatever developers are cooking since we know it’s trash and the community already shot down a test for a realistic overhaul of an existing feature.
To be honest having the entire community decide on things is also an awful idea. You would have to filter out a very specific profile but not to narrow so that you have enough people for objective decisions.
I thought that maybe some CCs that are invested in ARB would be something players that are realistically unfit to balance things might accept as a compromise.
If gaijin absolutely cannot be assed to rework the gamemode from the ground up the easiest fix imo would be to spread the objectives more throughout the map and increase the ticket bleed from completing said objectives.These could be done completely within the current format.
A more radical proposal is to ditch the “kill all enemy players” as a win condition.If a team isn’t willing to actually influence the battle on the ground (and protect the planes capable of doing so),why should they win?
As a sidenote, maybe gaijin could replace the shitty aa protecting the convoys and pillboxes with more effective stuff as the br increases up to pantsirs and IRIS-Ts.