Team spotting seriously needs to be removed from ARB

Game Discussion Realistic Battle
61

Rare plausible take from you, I like the idea itself, but it needs tons of polishing, which can compensate for the problem. Maybe nerfing team spotting instead of total removal would be easier?
I disagree about the current ‘just remove team spotting’ and pressed no on the poll.
Just for clarification, no, not because I dislike you personally. Because your take wasn’t golden enough to be agreeable.
I cheer your journey to improve the idea.

You called me, so I am your man. :/
Just saying, name-calling is a violation of the forum guidelines, mate.
I am wondering why you mentioned me as an example of a troll in the topic when I wasn’t here at all.

I don’t think so.
People disagree with you about this idea because they disagree with your idea, not because you are a troll.
If you made a stronger case with well-constructed supports and convinced others instead of stabbing dissenters, you probably had more people agree with your poll.

And as @Aegis270 said, why even you put up a poll if you are just going to ignore the outcome?

This part is a bit more complicated.
Tiger_Tank_1 is well known in the community for making bad takes, but if we read his take deeply,
we can see ‘why he made that awful take’. The reason for his complaint itself is sometimes hit the spot or plausible. The problem with his take is that he suggests the worst option as a solution when he concludes.

For example
“Stock modifications are awful as hell” ← This is a fair point
“So, we need to make base bombing easier” ← This is what Tiger_Tank_1 suggests as a solution, which isn’t fair point. there would be lot better solutions than this.

So, people can disagree about both sides if both of you and Tiger_Tank_1 suggested a bad solution.
This isn’t a contradiction, I guess.

Easy Example
Radical Meat Lover: “We need to remove plant farms with no hesitation and need to build animal farms in those places since plants are not as tasty as meat.”
Radical Vegan: “We need to remove animal farms with no hesitation, and need to build plant farms in those places since eating meat is bad for those poor animals”
Both of them are on opposite sides, just like how you and Tiger_Tank_1 were.
But both suggested the same awful solution, so others probably disagree with both.

If you want to remove team spotting from ARB, you need to convince others why it is needed to removed, not stabbing others with insults or name-calling.

1 Like
62

i agree with you on this but they should also implement an organic way to inform your team of enemies (not text chat)

like a keybind that would spot the enemy you have selected as a target and name it something like “relay enemy location”

i think this would eliminate the issue of zombers and such passively spotting a sneaky flank

2 Likes
63

This feature is already implemented, called quick radio message. Pressing 3 buttons should be organic enough.

64

sure but it doesn’t act like i suggested

65

You get a voice message and a marker on mini map plus blinking marker on radar hud if it is in range, plus a textmessage with name and plane. What more you want?

66

nvm i misunderstood what you said

that radio menu should suffice then

67

Tbf, I feel that’s just spotting in general.

Been playing a lot of Il2 recently over Warthunder due to there being a fun community event (Rhineland campaign, Apollo).

Biggest difference I found is…

Warthunder air sim: Your friendlies have a blue marker at around 0.8 km.
Il2: Great battles - no blue marker.
Warthunder air RB - Enemies have a red marker.

Result?

Air RB we all know has tons of crazy furballs.

Air SB ALSO has furballs develop and it’s quite easy to fly above said furballs to pick off enemies because you get IFF confirmed from 0.8 km out so no risk of friendly fire so furballs aren’t that dangerous.

Il-2? If I find myself in a furball I just… run away because even with radio comms I have no idea who is who. Much more consistent is to try and keep a strict formation with your friendlies so you minimize risk of friendly fire.

image

Who do you dive on? You won’t really know until you’re like 400 meters away.

image

And even up close it’s hard to tell (Is the guy near the bottom left friend or foe?)!

2 Likes
68

Im bumping this up, because I despise team spotting

It just punishes people who actually keep game sense and awareness to predict enemy positions on the map by making easy for their teamates to steal their kills or ruin surprise attacks (last one happens to me a lot) or worst case scenario, the enemy team slowly creeps up on you because you didn’t just kill the enemy with 1 blow or not even that, ended in 1 blow but now +2 people are after you.
Raise the skill floor just that little bit and allow for these new players do develop such important skill way earlier.

Make a looking at the killfeed or map an important skill, even more so with looking at the leaderboard.
Enemy with a lot of AI kills? stick to 1km alt and stand between the frontline and the enemy runway, if the killfeed shows a player killing AI, fly there and engage it.

Enemy with +1 ton of base bombing? camp bases, specially those with low health. Or even camp the airfield to catch them when trying to land after a run.

Lots of kills? Climb a lot and check “battle chat” (idk what it is called) to know the exact model or atleast airframe of your rival.

Teamate flying in weird patterns and not communicating? probably chased by an enemy (you can still 3rd party, but you need to be a lot more aware to see the opportunities)

at the start of a battle you can look at the runways and see where to expect at least a portion of the enemy team.

Commands like “attack X!” or “Attacking X!” would still work, but would simply place a fixed marker on the enemy’s position, since the exact model of aircraft will still be comunicated and maybe you can add an altitude bit as well, telling you if your ally wants you to simply clean it up (enemy below them) or try to clear their mind a bit (enemy above them).

Also cases like where you want to say that the enemy is at a runway, ARB players somehow understand just fine that “attention to the map!” above a runway means “dude on runway”, no matter how new they are.
Weird phenomenon just kind of there.

Bombers would be helped by this, no more being doxxed because an enemy light bomber flew near you. (if you don’t flank with a bomber you will still be killed, don’t be a dunce.)

Strike aircraft would love it too, they can choose to ticket bleed with a lot less worries behind their backs and even plan better ambushes.

Planes that find themselves in poor energy states will also have it easier, it is harder to see a plane flying below you without team spotting

Surprise attacks would be easier, since info is a lot more limited, but maybe that will slowly make a step back as players start to scan their surroundings a lot more

I’d also like to retract on this, you can still spot enemies just fine (4km at worse and 9km at ace crew I believe? and very dependant on your relative positions to an enemy, since as I said planes flying below you are spotted waay later than othe planes).

You just can’t depend on every ally being a flying AWACS.

Also it is just unreliable, no matter if the enemy is only 2km away from you, you can’t lock the command on them, same if they are actually spotted, dropping this command on a red name YOU spotted all by yourself won’t say a thing.

Right now ARB just rewards good aim, game sense and basic strategy are all thrown out of the window if you are handed the position of everyone and the battle is decided by which furball survives the most amount of time.

No wonder people say they meet a lot of dumb pilots in ARB, they are thrown into combat without actually knowing basic prediction and are rewarded by simply following a “leader” and stepping on each other faces for a, drum roll, a strike plane which can barely fly above sea level.

2 Likes
69

I think we need to keep team spotting, we should keep markers, but significantly reduce the maximum detection range for those two things. Here is what I’d propose:

[Suggestion] Active Scouting Mechanic and Spotting Revamp for Air Battles

Introduction: Air RB currently has two visibility-related problems that undermine tactical depth. First, visual markers appear at unrealistic distances regardless of altitude, speed, or terrain: a fighter hugging a valley is just as visible as one silhouetted against the sky at 5,000 meters. Second, there is no meaningful reconnaissance mechanic: a spotted contact is instantly shared as a full 3D marker for the entire team, removing all incentive for dedicated scouting.

This suggestion addresses both issues in two parts: a visual marker overhaul (passive) and a new active scouting mechanic rewarded by the economy system.

All numerical values below are indicative and should be validated through live testing, ideally during a dedicated weekend event.

PART 1: VISUAL MARKER OVERHAUL

Click to show details

1.1 Detection Range by Rank

Standard on-screen markers (3D nameplates) and minimap markers currently appear at the same distance regardless of aircraft performance. The following ranges, scaled by Rank, would better reflect the visual and electronic capabilities of each era.

On-screen markers (3D nameplates):

Rank Maximum Detection Range
I – IV 3 km
V – VI 6 km
VII+ 12 km

Minimap / tactical map markers:

Rank Maximum Detection Range
I – IV 5 km
V – VI 10 km
VII+ 20 km

1.2 Terrain Masking and Look-Down Nerf

The current terrain masking system exists but is inconsistent and difficult to predict. The goal here is not to introduce a new mechanic, but to make the existing one stable and readable: when an aircraft is flying low against the ground, through valleys, or masked by ridgelines, its on-screen nameplate detection range should be cut significantly and behave predictably.

Rank Maximum Detection Range (low-altitude / masked)
I – IV 1.5 km
V – VI 3 km
VII+ 6 km

Tactical impact: A ground attacker or tactical bomber flying at low altitude becomes genuinely difficult to spot from above, enabling surprise strikes on rear infrastructure or ground columns. This is a role currently made irrelevant by the flat detection system.

1.3 Ally Contact Propagation

Currently, if an allied aircraft is in visual contact with an enemy at 30+ km, the enemy’s full 3D marker is shared with the entire team regardless of distance. This removes all information asymmetry from the game.

Proposed change: A spotted contact should only appear as a minimap/tactical map icon for teammates outside its own direct detection range. The 3D on-screen nameplate should only appear for players within the standard detection ranges defined in 1.1. Teammates further away see a map dot, not a floating red label in the sky.

PART 2: ACTIVE SCOUTING MECHANIC

Click to show details

2.1 How It Works

All aircraft have access to the active scouting mechanic via a dedicated keybind. The interaction is deliberately simple:

  1. Press the scouting key: a search circle appears on-screen, similar to the acquisition reticle of a heat-seeking missile.
  2. Maintain the target inside the circle for a few seconds (exact duration to be tested).
  3. Result: The target is locked and its position is shared with the team as a minimap icon only (no 3D marker appears on screen) and as an automatic coordinate message in team chat, similar to the existing “I am attacking [target]” system.

Fixed structures (airfields, factories, depots) cannot be scouted via this mechanic. They must be overflown within visual range to appear on the team’s map, rewarding deliberate reconnaissance flights into enemy territory.

2.2 Identification Range by Rank

The nature of the scouted icon depends on the distance between the scouting aircraft and the target at the moment of lock:

Rank Identified (full color icon) Unidentified (neutral icon)
I – II < 7 km > 7 km
III – V < 15 km > 15 km

Beyond Rank VI, airborne radars begin to fill this role naturally. Rather than extending the scouting cone range at high BR, the logical next step would be to relay what the aircraft’s onboard radar detects directly onto the tactical map and into team chat, leveraging existing systems rather than adding new ones. This is flagged here as a natural extension of the same philosophy, for a separate discussion.

2.3 Specialization Bonuses and Dedicated Reconnaissance Aircraft

A tiered scouting system naturally opens the door to specialization bonuses for aircraft whose historical role was observation and reconnaissance:

  • High-altitude interceptors already in the game (Ta 152 H, Welkin, etc.) could receive a moderate scouting range extension bonus, reflecting their superior altitude performance and optical conditions.
  • Dedicated reconnaissance variants currently absent from War Thunder would be the natural top tier of this system. Aircraft like the Spitfire PR Mk.IV, P-38 F-5 Lightning, Mosquito PR Mk.I, or Ki-46 have no meaningful role in the current game despite being historically significant. A scouting mechanic with tiered bonuses would finally justify their addition to the tech trees.

The exact range bonuses for each category are left deliberately open here. This is precisely the kind of parameter that requires community debate and live testing before any values can be proposed seriously. The goal of this section is to signal that the mechanic has this potential, not to define it prematurely.

2.4 Economy Rewards

To make scouting a genuinely rewarding activity rather than a side mechanic players ignore:

  • Spotting reward: A small Silver Lions / RP reward is granted upon successfully locking a target, consistent with the existing Ground Battles scouting economy.
  • Destruction assist: If a scouted target is subsequently destroyed by a teammate, the scouting player receives an assist reward, mirroring the Ground Battles system.

Conclusion: These two changes work independently. The visual marker overhaul can stand alone without the active scouting mechanic, and vice versa. Together, they restore meaningful information asymmetry to Air RB and give dedicated reconnaissance aircraft a tactical identity they currently lack entirely.

A note on compatibility: It should be said clearly that both mechanics would likely be counterproductive in standard Air RB as it currently exists. The 5-minute fur-ball format simply does not provide the time or space for reconnaissance to be meaningful. These suggestions are primarily intended for longer, objective-based formats such as a reworked Air RB EC, or a Nuclear Thunder-style mode adapted for propeller aircraft. As for the existing Sim EC mode, Part 1 (visual marker overhaul) is largely redundant given the absence of on-screen markers, but the active scouting mechanic of Part 2 is directly applicable and worth considering in that context.

As stated above, all ranges and timings are indicative starting points. A weekend test event would be the appropriate venue to collect real data and adjust accordingly.

What do you think?

Do you think Air RB needs a visual marker and scouting overhaul?

  • Yes — both the marker overhaul and the active scouting mechanic.
  • Partially — the marker overhaul only.
  • Partially — the active scouting mechanic only.
  • No — the current system works fine.
0 voters

Which aspect of this suggestion interests you the most?

  • Scaling detection ranges by Rank.
  • The terrain masking / look-down nerf stabilization.
  • Limiting ally contact propagation to the minimap.
  • The active scouting cone mechanic.
  • The scouting economy rewards (SL/RP + assists).
  • Radar-based scouting relay for high-Rank aircraft.
  • Specialization bonuses and dedicated reconnaissance aircraft additions.
0 voters
2 Likes
70

You sure about the 3km cap on props?
I’d say +4km is the “safe distance”, or basically the separation bubble boom and zoomers use

I like the scout mechanic tho

1 Like
71

Honestly, this is difficult to assess, it’d need proper testing, this is the beginning of an idea. I believe the overall idea would be very beneficial to the game.

4km maximum marker spotting (props), and no shared markers would be incredible for this era of planes.
If I understand your point about the distance, you are worried that we would not have enough time to react to boom and zoom threats with 3km, compared to 4km ?

1 Like