Ok, so while I do love this mode, stuff like the osa’s and flarakpz’s are VERY annoying. It’s a mixture of their unlimited ammo, their apparent ability to fire on the move, and how when you eventually manage to destroy them, they just respawn.
I’m not against spaa reloads or even new vehicles coming in to replace old ones, but it’s the lack of dynamic stimuli that annoys me, for example, no convoy comes to replenish the SPAA at the vehicle depot.
Also while we’re on the subject, it would be cool where if you manage to detonate a fuel depot or ammo depot, it causes a chain reaction whereupon adjacent ammo/fuel depots go up with it.
3 Likes
the existence of this gamemode alone is contrary to that
Yeah, nuclear thunder plays with ARB EC concept.
But Gaijin said they will never replace the short fused ARB 25minute battle.
Even if ARB EC for < 11.0 BR is added with nuclear thunder as gamemodes, they’ll be like naval EC, tucked away and only playable on certain times.
sorry you been given wrong info. So the plan is this is a test of a new game mode which might be permeant or rotation base. As for new AF we might get an update on that in the summer major update
i dont want them to, theres always a place for a quick sortie team deathmatch type gamemode
permanent doesnt mean periodic, naval is played by relatively few people so without it either entirely replacing or being limited there probably wouldnt be enough people to fill it up without bots (which is already kinda cringe) but for air rb its a different matter as there is enough people to warrant a permanent, dynamic gamemode
1 Like
Huh.
Well I guess good news for you and me
Spoiler
I really hope they nuke ARB and replace it with it, that thing is the most flawed excuse of a gamemode.
2 Likes
The recent changes to sams in the mode is too much, before hand crafty players could get through defenses and now one sam can lock down an entire corridor by itself.
changing back max target angular change to what it used to be or half of what it is now would be good.
Id also like to say there is a large mis-step in balance when the pve is so difficult and still only rewards a small fraction of what pvp does.
I think considering how much easier pvp now is than pve, we need more sp, sl, and rp per ground unit. sp especially.
They are not free kills and should not be rewarded as such, I believe this is causing everyone to simply ignore the actual gamemode and simply pvp in the center just like air rb.
4 Likes
again i said with no burner
also cant the B52 carry the MK118 3000LB demo bomb ? why doesnt it have it ingame
Missile is fired from your right & you didn’t deploy counters. With the amount you get, You could of literally enabled it and left it on.
Also you’re meant to destroy the s300s before spawning that in, That’s the only counter to you. & spawn campers.
3 Likes
The reason is because they could club on weaker Russian aircraft with minimal resistance (both the Yak and Mig-29 aren’t common, nor undertiered like certain American aircraft in that BR bracket).
I do agree that the B-52 is more well known and wanted, but the amount of players who have a valid (and good) aircraft to use in the Russian side (especially in the upper bracket) is a fraction of the amount of players who have a valid American aircraft.
What is this supposed to mean? Also don’t accuse me of being any one single nation main either.
2 Likes
that is a very big ask in this mode as basically everyone playing it is a noob meaning theres only a few actually competent players not to mention the fighter spam meaning youll have 5 or more on you at a time the teams are no where near cordinated enough for that
not mention the the high tier version of the mode being the only version thats some what balanced for both sides
good idea for a mode poor execution tho
i think both 9Ls and R60Ms are op in this mode there way to flare resistant in front aspect
Worst April Fool’s event in War Thunder’s whole history.
No? Let’s dive from the fundamentals:
From the given vehicles, the MiG-23MLD vs F-4E matchup is still favored to the MiG-23 due to basically MTI and R-24s being unrollable, A-10A vs Su-25T is lopsided to the point the latter has rear aspect IRCMs and R-73s, and don’t get me started if I have to compare the Su-24 to the A-7E.
Russia has better variety on nuke carriers, whereas the US is stuck with the F-4E.
The only part where the US gets a tiny edge of advantage is in a closed 12.7-13.0 vacuum, and still the MiG-29 9-12/9-13 and Yak-141 are more than capable to perform and outmatch a variety of jets you mentioned, including the F-16A.
This is an opinion, as usual.
That the whole “America OP!!1!” around the gamemode is just loud panic without any resemblence of reality. The only vehicle that was unhingedly broken was the F-14 IRIAF and was banned within a day.
There was events in the past that were fundamentally unbalanced such as WW1, and even then, the matchmaker was still 60%/40% to 70%/30%, not the astonishing 95%/5% we are witnessing.
Just face the fact the US got the most attractive reward.
4 Likes
its cause the B52 actually looks new the TU95 looks like a plane from WW2
should have given the F4J as nuke carrier and fighter
nah bro, Tu-95 looks and sounds mean.
That’s why its my goat
2 Likes