except 70% of players in a match dont even do anything and yes it happens that sometimes I get stupidly killed too, but thats because some maps literally allow players to kill themselves spawn to spawn
they dont even recognize that the maps are total garbage
most maps are either drive simulator or literally meter to meter killing
wanna know why people dont want to cap the point when theres clearly no one there? they are too scared to try and cap only to get killed and lose however much SL
Today I literally watched people not even wanting to attack because they would lose SL most likely, so people ofc don’t even wanna risk it while they are having at best 10k SL balance
In a match theres at least a 30-40% tax on SL if you get killed but still do 2-4 kills, so its very annoying to see your actual earnings get cut and the people that struggle at low tier will probably never achieve a positive balance at any higher tier while the game doesn’t even encourage actually learning what to do and etc, they just encourage you to go and fight close quarters and let ur performance based on luck or angle camping through cities
The BMD-2M seems to be the best BMD down the list. It has an 2A42 and two kornet tubes, with I think another two missiles in the backup. Would be 10.0 ish, similar to the BMP-2M but only has half the kornet count. Faster, and armor wise like, none of them has any.
1 Like
Still wondering if Gaijin remember F89C, when they remove the F89D, it’s time to use F89C to replace the position.
This thread is not supposed to be for bizarre citation needed claims and personal diary entry tangents…
Yep. It’s actually really impressive that a multiplayer vehicle sim game has managed to not only stay active for over a decade, but also expand significantly too (vehicle types, eras/tech, etc).
No game is perfect of course, but it’s always funny to see people yelling about the game being “dead”, and/or that it needs “massive major overhauls” to not die… despite it being how it is (in a core sense) very much being why such a niche genre game has continued to do this well.
3 Likes
That’s fair, I do find it weird that someone who seems to hate the game so much is also an active forum member, but you’re right, we got carried away lol, back on topic
3 Likes
Same here I know this is from chatgpt but why the hell not at this point lol.
ChatGPT view on 90,000 Average player base
A game with 90,000 average players can generally be considered quite successful, depending on various factors such as the game’s genre, platform, and goals. Here are some aspects to consider when evaluating whether 90,000 average players is good:
1. Game Genre and Expectations
- MMOs, Battle Royales, or MOBAs: Games in these categories often see larger player bases. For example, games like Fortnite, League of Legends, or World of Warcraft have millions of players. In this context, 90,000 could be considered modest compared to the biggest titles but still respectable.
- Indie Games or Niche Genres: If the game is an indie or a niche game, 90,000 average players is excellent. Many successful indie games see player bases of tens of thousands, and sustaining 90,000 can indicate a strong, dedicated community.
2. Platform
- PC/Console: On these platforms, a game averaging 90,000 players is usually in a good position, especially if it’s been around for a while and maintains consistent engagement.
- Mobile Games: Mobile games can sometimes see much larger player bases, so 90,000 might be smaller relative to the scale of other mobile games, but it’s still impressive for an ongoing, active player count.
3. Active Engagement
- Are the 90,000 players active and regularly playing? A high active player count is often more valuable than just a high total number. If players are consistently engaging with the game (logins, play sessions, or active involvement in community events), that’s a good sign.
4. Monetization and Profitability
- Revenue Generation: A game with 90,000 players can still be very profitable if it has a good monetization strategy (microtransactions, battle passes, DLC, etc.).
- Player Retention: If those 90,000 players are loyal and stick around over time, this is a sign of a healthy game. Good player retention is critical for long-term profitability.
5. Competition and Market
- If the game is in a highly competitive market (like battle royale or FPS games), 90,000 average players can be considered quite successful, as many games in these categories struggle to maintain long-term player retention.
- If the game is in a less crowded genre, 90,000 could be seen as modest or average.
6. Community and Support
- A game that supports 90,000 average players might have an active community, social features, tournaments, or events. A strong player base often indicates a healthy ecosystem, with enough players for multiplayer modes, content creators, or fan-driven events.
7. Historical Context
- How does this compare to when the game launched? If the game started with 10,000 players and grew to 90,000, that suggests positive momentum. However, if the game peaked at 90,000 and is now declining, it might indicate a loss of interest or player retention problems.
Summary
Overall, 90,000 average players is typically a good number, especially for games that aren’t massive AAA titles. It suggests a solid player base, community engagement, and potential for profitability. The context of genre, platform, player retention, and competition all matter when assessing the success of a game.
When do we think they’re going to add next gen IR missiles to the game, the Python 4 has been in the files a while now, and I believe they’ve considered adding it once before?
Gonna be very interesting to see how they handle this, given Python 4 is much better than what we have now, but still beneath most other countries ‘next gen’ IR missiles.
I feel like immediately after adding Python 4, you’re going to see uproar asking for 9X / ASRAAM / IRIS-T etc, which will cause ISR players to ask for Python 5 which is the true counterpart of those. And before you know it, top tier is unplayable because everyone has game ruining IR’s lol.
1 Like
I feel like for the next gen of IR missiles they’re going to have to artificially nerf the seeker strength, make them easier to flare than they are IRL because otherwise like you said top tier will become unplayable, like having those missiles with effectively an AIM-9M or R-73 level seeker right now might not be too bad, and that allows us to enjoy the advance missile flight performances without the isnta-kill death bubble around every aircraft.
Don’t get me wrong, I’m not saying they should come this next patch, just that it may be the only way to introduce them without killing the gameplay
I’d imagine we would get some upgrades to the top missiles already in-game when Python 4 is added. Sort of like 4.5 gen missiles
I believe there is a version of the AIM-9M with the seeker from a Stinger, there’s also the R-73M which should be fine, PL-8B, Magic 2 could get another buff, and even the AAM-3 is underperforming iirc, that should pretty much cover everyone, though of course I don’t think any of them are as good as the Python 4 could be so we’ll have to wait and see.
This is not to say that kfir is very cool. I personally liked the J-7D a lot more. Now it’s advantageous to play a fighter rather than a bomber, and kfir is much more focused on hitting the ground.
J-7 is cool, but nothing is as satisfying as killing someone with those DEFAs, maybe not the best gun but certainly one of the most satisfying, so many kills end in the other guy just exploding it’s great
Guns are great, but I’d like some good rockets, at least two. 9G is disgusting
1 Like
Although he earns experience really well. A half week later, I almost took rank 8. I’m thinking about a couple more days. I don’t want to rush the F-15I, to be honest, baz meshupar and Barak 2 are much more interesting to me. I think it’s better first of all.
I’ve always liked the Israeli F-16s, I’m really looking forward to eventually having a Sufa with Python 5s though that’s still a long way away. It’s definitely worth playing the Ayit if you’re grinding the Israeli tree, and the F-16s are all quite good though the Netz is at a bad BR at the moment, constant uptiers to 13.7, I’m hoping for some BR decompression again soon to fix that
Which is better first? I really want the F-15C, to be honest, even though I understand that the F-15I is superior in everything. Although the F-16C is also very interesting to me.