Well i personally have nothing against 16vs16 lobbies, apart that we need 2 airfields/team located in maps corners and forcing players to be spawning evenly on those 2 airfields
There is overall more action, more tension, and more targets ^^"
About your furball arguement: have you ever heard of Defeating ennemies in details? Currently a Napoleon tactic, which proved to be useful more than 1 time, and kills the 1v1 arguement you have.
Can we get to voting then?
action and tension are not what 16v16 offers… it simply offers a system where someone can effectively take advantage of blindspots and utterly ass spotting mechanics and snag multiple kills.
top tier isnt the battle of britian in the skies where furballs were a thing, modern jets dont do furballs let alone dogfighting now. thats why they rely on BVR anmd long range weapons.
sorry but at top tier it shouldnt be what it is now.
I agree with you that current 90% of community is not fighting accordingly to IRL tactics and use.
I personally don’t go in furball, yet i often rack up more kills than most of my teammates
I never stated that reward changes were likely, just a possibility. Discussing the likelihood of it is difficult given that Gaijin works in mysterious ways. That being said, I do highly disagree with your reasoning for it being unlikely.
I strongly disagree when you say that people would or even could complain about Ground 12 v 12 or Naval 8 v 8 not getting reward boosts. They have an entirely different system of calculating rewards and are rewarded differently. Complaints from those camps would be missing the point entirely.
I also disagree with your point about a non-zero number of smaller matches. I don’t believe I have ever seen a small match in top tier currently. You are not wrong about it being a possibility though, but there are ways around this. Increasing the lower limit for 16 v 16 could be done (from 6 to 10 / 12?). There are many ways to easily solve this concern.
Telling the difference between an 8 v 8 match and a 16 v 16 match is not a needed concern. They would be classified as a different mission under maps. Which could easily be manipulated to give different rewards.
Finally, regarding my proposal, the matchmaker would not be split into 3 ways at all. It would be split into 2. 16 v 16 and 8 v 8. You would get either only 16 v 16 missions, both 16 v 16 and 8 v 8, or only 8 v 8. Warthunder’s system of likes, dislikes, and bans makes this very much a possibility. Depending on your toggle it would ban or allow certain missions on the backend. This would help a lot with queue times, given that there is still a pool of players queuing for both. If queue times are bad, simply queue for both. Problem solved.
I do want to close this by saying, I do not entirely disagree with you. We can go back and forth all day talking about the likelihood of a reward change but would get nowhere. As I said, the fact is Gaijin works in mysterious ways. 8 v 8 is, by a large margin, what the community has requested. Yet, we only get 12 v 12. Who knows but the devs themselves. They have other things to consider as well and air is but one of 3 game types.
It’s quite a different situation when IRCCM and ARH missiles are a part of the mix…
Yeah I do the same, its a nice change for once but then that also leaves you lost for words when your team is gone and your cruising at altitude doing the IRL tactics :D I do agree more airfields need to be added. the issue with furballs is everyone congregates in the same area because the airfields are always in the centre.
I think 12v12 maximum can work (maybe 16v16 but only for EC with imo 4+ airfields to pick from) and 2 maybe 3 airfields on the smaller maps
Finally, skill-based matchmaking
That’s not about that,… how can people be so off-topic?
Even 16vs16 is frustrating for a Korean War jet main like me.
There are tons of useless attackers and bombers on your teammates, making it even harder for you and your teammates in fighters to carry teams.
You can see tons of F-84F, A-4s gets insta wiped by CL-13 or MiGs, G.91s etc.
Yes.
Don’t force people to grind for longer (that’s what reduced team sizes does to some extent).
Yea I think that a separate game mode or toggled option for 16 v 16 only
As mentioned a bit earlier by another user, the war thunder wiki states:
Nothing about a minimum is stated, and I’ve confirmed with many of my friends and other players that this does happen and a large majority of them have witnessed it.
I don’t play Air RB much nowadays (it’s a hellhole lately) but I can try to hop into a few matches to see if I can find an instance of this happening and give you the session ID. If you’d like me to try to get a session ID lemme know and I’ll try to grab one later today.
I hope this can develop into possible ranked battles in war thunder so players who just want to improve can show off and lvl up rank
Now make it the default option, not the alternative.
Just activate it…
Again, no reason to limit this option to a specific BR range. It makes more sense than the night battles BR limit, but still. At least lower it to 9.3 where supersonic aircraft become common.
just listen to the Playerbase once man…add a seperate 10v10 mode for the people want to play a playable game and keep the 16v16 mode seperate for the new people who just bought high tier premium packs…and make it for all BRs not only 10.0 how hard can that be??? like literally just tell me HOW HARD CAN THAT BE
people don’t want a chance to play small matches, people want to play small sized matches(8v8-12v12) all the time.
Hmmm, it’s worded poorly.
I guess we’ll have answers on dev server.