PLEASE gaijin, reduce the players number
9 Likes
I came here after the air superiority update, And I agree that it should be brought down to 8 v 8 ONLY for the top top tier [I would go lower but whatever], at br ranges including Fox 2s and up. However, I do believe that simply reducing the player count will not help reduce furball cases, it will only reduce the size of the furball which tbh at this state of air rb would also be a reasonable change. IMO, not only reducing player numbers but also adding two main runaways in the back and limiting the player spawns of that airfield to half so each airfield so that one half of each team primarily plays on one side of the map while the other half on the other. [now sure there may be players that decide to just go to the centre of both sides which is player opinion so it is fine] [there may also be planes that are incapable of air to air combat a-10 su25, at least “not designed for those tasks” well war thunder can lock the 8v8= 16 players as fighters and only fighters and add 2 or 3 more slots each side for cas related vehicles AND MOVE THEIR OBJECTIVES (ground targets bases) Away from the main battle happening a little bit further out giving them some time to properly ground pound until the eagles come for their prey]. if you think this is a good/ bad resolution just reply.
9 Likes
Except the only challenge is how many cores your neural processor has, to take in the information about 100+ missiles every game.
Think about it.
BVR meta returns.
ARH missiles can be introduced.
NEZ become a known thing.
Teamwork becomes emphasised.
Circular high low high combat becomes a thing just like IRL.
What’s there to lose?
This, coupled with larger maps and greater first kill rewards will encourage more players to work harder rather than faster.
Plus, strike aircraft will have purpose and modern bombers can be introduced with larger maps.
Even datalink and AWACS becomes a possibility
14 Likes
yes there’s just too many positive aspects to it, it HAS to be implemented. But more runways to take off from and more spread objectives will also help.
10 Likes
exactly. cant believe i missed these points tbh lol
3 Likes
exactly what they need to make space for is BVR engagements right now considering we’ve already got the f15, make the necessary changes and then add the missiles and new radar, plus think about TWS in what scenario are we able to use tws in a fucking furball where there’s many overlapping circles like a damn black hole you need targets at distinguishable distance between each other target**
5 Likes
I feel like the reason some people are against air rb being made smaller is because they came to top tier after the T-2 controversy and them upping matches to 16v16, also dunno if someone mentioned this but smaller matches could mean a return to semi historical team matchups like pre T-2
3 Likes
When I try and engage the fur all but all I see is red upon red and have no idea who the fuck is coming towards me or not. Having 8 vs 8 would allow for some more strategic decisions to be made instead of just stay low and fast. Would allow some jets to actually shine as 100 missiles are not flying your way the moment you above the deck.
11 Likes
i second this. In a perfect world the best solution would be air RB EC, with 3-4 airfields to take off from, and 6v6 or maybe 8v8 players. basically the same setup as SIM EC. This would give attackers/bombers the space to do the groundpounding work, while the fighters do their fighter jobs. This will also give space to finally do proper BVR combat, and will be able to make you use your planes strengths and exploit the enemies weaknesses (and vice versa ofcourse).
But that will never happen knowing gaijin, so the easiest solution for now would be to just half the playercount in air RB matches.
what i just want to ad is that right now, like some other person said, you can do everything right and still get incredibly bad results because of the amount of players. you will always get 3rd partied by someone if youre flying defensive
4 Likes
Needs to happen. 16v16 is awful.
8 Likes
Dogfights always turn into a 3 vs 1 eventually. Just depends on how quickly it happens.
EC in rb is the perfect outcome with how big the maps are and how spread out all the objectives are. However an even better solution would simply be to spread out all the ground objectives on the normal air rb maps and not have it all clustered in the centre making mig alley basically on every map. We need actual objectives and maybe sim games with rb settings.
12 Likes
Max player count should be a multiple of 4 on each team. You know, because squad sizes are a multiple of 4. That way there can be a nice even number of squads on a team instead of a squad or two and some randos.
For BR 9.0+ I’d say 8v8 with 12v12 for EC maps.
1 Like
Voted for 8v8
Keeping your head on swivel is difficult enough already without active radar missiles and it’s very easy to get overwhelmed by the amount of missiles in the furball
7 Likes
PLEASE.
Been asking for this too for awhile now because there’s just TOO much going on now. It was oook before but still bad. Now it’s several times worse. It’s just sensory overload to the max and you still die to some random ass IRCCM missile. With a chance it came from a team mate no less.
Gaijin you have all this attention to detail and realism in the game. I beg. Add some realism and fun to the damn game modes too.
Have multiple objectives. Enduring conflict with respawns. Missions. Maybe front lines that get pushed back.
Like ffs do something different. We aren’t in props anymore.
Hell I rarely play now since the addition of IRCCM furbals and vowed I’ll not spend another dime on this game until something changes. Because the current state of top tier ARB is just shit.
4 Likes
Keep in mind that if they do go lower than 16v16, it will take you a lot longer to farm anything since you will get far fewer kills per game, and they won’t make smaller maps ever again, that’s guaranteed.( amraam coming )
they can always adjust the rewards accordingly. But even if they don’t, I prefer the team size reduction. I play to have fun aswell, not just to grind.
5 Likes
I support 16v16 cause it’s something I always wanted for War Thunder, as the only other place where I could experience such pressure was DCS.
1 Like
There is no such pressure in DCS, it’s much less dense and furballs are not common
5 Likes
On the servers you played on maybe.
I sought out the realism servers with high aircraft counts.
yeah uh, I don’t see 16 v 16 furballs in dcs. most of us who want 8v8 are looking for that strategic dcs gameplay, gameplay that gives you time to think, gameplay that allows you to have proper BVR engagements, which then turn into proper merged dogfights if your bvr kill wasn’t successful, gameplay that allows you to choose a proper flank on the map itself rather than always “following the pack until merging with the enemy pack”
11 Likes