Updated Nuclear Escalation: Vietnam!

[Master_Teaz]

I will in future, take a lesser load

But on the test flight it took off fine with such a load

this is doing all possible prep for takeoff; turning 180 to get a little more runway, and holding brakes while the engine spools up, and only deploying flaps at rotation, which is enough to get any other aircraft in the sky without issue

And it would need returning to hangar to make a new loadout, and considering i got into a match that just started, rather than half-finished, I wasn’t going to do that

[CASツ]

What a nice way to waste big boosters. Start matchmaking, get into game that is lost in 3 minutes. Profit.

Who tf decided that if I have turned off “join ongoing matches” I should be put in game that´s literally over.

[putcheeseonit]

Thank you (its still a WIP)

[Morvran]

As its 100% still relevant, as nothing I pointed out was addressed, Im just gunna link to my review of the last one

@Morvran_

Full feedback from more than a few matches, and I’m disappointed that this is the best the devs can come up with after 9 months of apparently working on nothing else.

AI Balance

This is a massive issue that needs to be addressed urgently. The AI SPAAGs are still as overpowered as they have always been over the past 5 years. If anything, they’ve gotten worse, because they can now shoot down incoming missiles. Time and time again the effectiveness of AI controlled SPAAGs have been brought up, often referred to as “death-spheres” for good reason. You enter within their engagement radius, and you die.

Non-radar assisted SPAAGs (whether that be because of a lack of radar or the radar has failed to locked onto a target) have greater effective range than some SAMs in GRB have, and even those with a radar, don’t always use it to give you an RWR warning.

Changes that must be made:

• AI MUST use radar if available before being able to fire
• AI without a radar should have heavily limited range (1-2km at most) with heavy accuracy penalities
• With or without radar, the accuracy of the fire needs to be mitigated, I would suggest using the same code added to the naval AA recently to add induced spread.

It is time the devs stop ignoring the playerbase about this issue, because I don’t know how many more times we can bring up this issue, whether in regard to NE or ASB. It has definitely been a consistent complaint in all the previous NE events, but has still yet to be addressed. This time round is especially apparent, because many aircraft are attacking with unguided weapons and cannot avoid the death-spheres. This renders the aircraft basically unplayable in a ground attack role.

Doesn’t even really change when talking about other types of AA. The Hawks start firing at you the moment your wheels leave the runway, the SACLOS SAMs on the Charles F Adams are laser accurate, and basically impossible to dodge, if you get any warning at all. (This is the same issue with OSA at the higher BRs, so it’s clear no feedback has been considered regarding that)

So overall, every single PvE target having aimbots just isn’t fun and renders a lot of aircraft unplayable due to this.

Carrier vs Carrier

I genuinely do not understand how such a glaring and obvious imbalance made it into the game. Baku does not have a catapult, meaning most naval aircraft cannot take off from it without a massively lightened payload and using every inch of space. Forestall has a catapult, everything can take off from it easily.

This gives Bluefor side a massive advantage when it comes to attacking naval targets and flanking the battle. Also the carriers are generally a lot safer to take off from than the airfields, as they are better protected and less likely to be nuked.

Let alone arrestor wires to allow the carrier aircraft to land back onto the carrier after a sortie.

Now the soviets lack any meaningful naval aircraft at or around this BR, so for them it wouldn’t necessarily matter, but many bluefor nations are always paired with the soviets, and so this blocks them from using their carrier aircraft from a carrier. Either enforce true Bluefor vs Redfor, or add a Catabar carrier to both sides or neither side.

Anti-Naval

I really don’t know how I feel about the anti-naval role. On one hand, it’s fine. Spawn in, fire off some ASMs, and you’ve killed some naval targets. Sometimes they snipe every single ASM out the sky, sometimes they don’t. It’s random.

But good luck using any bombs against them, between the SACLOS SAMs and the HE-VT, you aren’t getting close. It’s basically impossible. This renders naval targets basically un-attackable if you don’t have ASMs, and a lot of aircraft don’t have ASMs.

Then after all that, the rewards are pitiful. Basically none

And Carriers…. Well Carriers have always had stupid damage models, been brought up 100 times before, never got fixed when naval AI actually got proper damage models like 3 years ago. Basically the only way to sink them is to drop dozens of bombs on their deck, or nail the turrets (at least on the Forestall) and start a fire. ASM is basically a waste of time to use against them.

All the while, you have aimbot accurate HE-VT being fired at you. (I think it might even be hit-scan and not even modeling actual shells hitting you, so it’s largely impossible to dodge)

So overall, it’s usually not worth going after the Carriers, sink everything else with ASMs from a safe distance and then just leave the Carriers alone.

The match cycle

The match cycle is pretty boring overall. You spawn in your aircraft, if its CAS, you pray you have some sort of guided weapon to deal with SPAA, if not, get ready for a lot of Kamikaze runs. If you are CAP, then it’s an easier time, but then again, the BR range is compressed to hell, and the devs won’t fix that. So you might be hopelessly outclassed in A2A combat.

Once you eventually get enough SP for a nuke carrier, all CAS aircraft become obsolete. Why take the risk of using unguided bombs or rockets against a depot or convoy when you can just throw a nuke at it. Let alone the Airfields which can only be damaged by nukes. Even the SAM sites, if you can get close enough to deal with, are easier to take out with a nuke than any other non-ARM weapon.

Then the match ends not that long after that. What should be quite a drawn out, enduring conflict-esq gamemode, becomes a short, arcadey gamemode with little in the way of actual tactics or gameplay.

Economy.

The issue is that the gamemode is ENTIRELY balanced around throwing nukes at each other and an assumption that each nuke drop is going to take out a lot of AI, probably an Airfield and maybe even a few players on said airfield. It is not at all balanced around the idea of dropping a 1x 1000lb bomb onto a tank, or firing some ASMs or even ARM at targets, and just walking away with a few AI kills per sortie. You get basically no RP, and the SL rewards are low, and that’s without factoring in the repair costs which are high, and due to the overtuned AI, very common.

The SL and RP rewards need a significant increase to actually make the gamemode viable as a method of actually grinding a tech tree, rather than it just being a sandbox gamemode which you are only playing for the fun of it.

BR ranges

The chosen BR ranges result in some aircraft being good, and others DOA, and if it remains with static BRs, then you will have your Meta aircraft, and then nothing else. The solution though exists. It’s in ASB, and is one of the only good things the devs have ever actually done for ASB in the past decade. Rolling BR brackets. Every 48 hours, what is meta changes, good aircraft become bad, and bad aircraft become good. Everything gets a turn.

This is the only fair thing to do.

Lag/Server issues

I have yet to have a single match where it didn’t lag out, or there wasn’t massive desync that made the SPAA look like it was firing in the opposite direction but still hit you. I have a solid connection most of the time, usually no issue at all. But NE, lag fest every time.

RWR

RWR spam is far less prominent at these lower BRs, especially with the reduced number of things pinging the RWR, but it is still time for an RWR overhaul, with filter options, a few times so far ive missed an RWR warning because it was buried under a dozen others.

Let alone the issue of trying to play anything that doesn’t even have a radar, especially if its a medium - high alt aircraft. Tried to take the Lightning F6 out, and immediately got killed by a Hawk. No warning, no defence, just dead.

Conclusion.

Fun for 1 match, if you are in the mood, but boring after 2 or 3 matches. Even playing different aircraft, trying different things…. Just…. Gets old quickly.

Too much emphasis is placed on being in a nuke carrier, and none is placed on being in anything else.

And the worst part, I feel like I’m not contributing if im doing anything other than playing a nuke carrier. I can take out multiple SAMs, I can take out the entire enemy fleet, I can go hunting players, etc etc. and unless im throwing nukes at Airfields, I might as well just be sat AFK, because im not really helping much, other than drawing attention away from anyone in a nuke carrier.

So what would I change.

• Fix the stupid SPAAG code to get rid of Death Spheres. Seriously, 5 years of complaints and it still hasn’t been fixed in a gamemode all about SEAD.
• Get rid of Nukes, or at least make them really really expensive so they are rarely seen.
• If Nukes remain, Add nukes to all aircraft that can carry them as a loadout option, so you aren’t dependent on a level 1 pilot, no modifications and no CMs. Potentially even a weak aircraft on top of that.
• Add proper objectives to attack with conventional weapons, we have seen refineries and large factories from the SEAD and Deep-Strike event prior to Nuclear Thunder and then never seen them ever again. Why? Rather than destroying Airfields being the objective, it should be to destroy these heavily defended targets
• Add CBUs, especially anti-Runway weapons such as JP233, to replace nukes for damaging Airfields.
• Increase the map size. I still don’t know why NE is on a postage stamp sized map, when the map is huge
• Rebalance naval, make sure both sides are on an equal footing. Either replace BAKU with something with Catabar, or remove Forestall and replace it with something that lacks Catabar.
• Overhaul Carrier damage models
• Remove the ability for Ai ships to repair, so a hit is a hit, and maybe even a fatal hit
• Add rolling BR brackets, like we have in ASB.

This could be a fun gamemode you could play over and over again, but right now. Just like every other gamemode, it is fun for 1 match, but then gets stale after the second.

[JapanWeeb89]

Feedback:

1. If you guys aren’t nerfing the accuracy on M163s then might as well actually model their real limitations for the mode, currently the M163 is using the 3000 RPM mode(like the rest of the M163s in game really) while firing continuously in automatic mode, this is inaccurate and should only be firing in bursts while using the HI mode according to the manual, in order to fire like it is in game the fire rate should be reduced to 1000 RPM
   

   
   
   
   

2. Same manual also mentions that the gunner must keep an steady and smooth targeting failing to do this will give inaccurate firing meaning that sudden maneuvers should impact the accuracy of the gun and once a lock is loss the system needs at least 2 seconds to re-calculate the parameters this way imitates the real firing procedure and not just perfectly damages you while being far away

3. M163 shouldn’t be firing on the move or at least shouldn’t be firing accurately and/or going very fast not only because is ridiculous but considering we are fighting in a hot climate the M163 shouldn’t be going very fast for extended periods of time to avoid damage to the engine according to the manual, either reduce the speed of the convoys or make them stop every so

4. Think about the 8.7-9.7 bracket, currently the only vehicles capable of attacking a deposit side are the J22s because magically they have gps guided weaponry in the supposedly Vietnam war(and IR guided agms too) meaning that anyone with no CCIP/CCRP can’t event get close to the deposits because you will be shot down even if you go with a lot of players

If you aren’t gonna nerf the accuracy then model the restrictions of the system itself…or just ignore all of this and just ruin the entire mode

Also seriously the A-10s are still allowed?

[Fluffy_Bucketles]

@Morvran_

remove Forestall and replace it with something that lacks Catabar.

Give the yanks Ark Royal and they’ll still have a more useful carrier than what pact get lol

[Morvran]

Yep, but alas, they wont do it because Redfor must be made up of soviet AI vehicles and despite the fact that Britain is matched with Redfor 100% of the time, they are not classed as a redfor nation.

[Fluffy_Bucketles]

Was more meaning Ark Royal in an initial configuration as a replacement to Forestall would still be far and ahead of what pact get, as an indictment of just how bad the selection was. Kuznetsov is modeled, but nope. Wouldn’t even bring them to parity, but at least some things could take off without ending up in the drink.

[Morvran]

Ah, I see yeah that is true.

Or swap Forestall for HMS Invincible, then it blocks catabar aircraft from taking off from bluefor side as well.

[Fluffy_Bucketles]

Except it has a ramp so they might actually still be better off lol

The way they’ve done this is a travesty.

[Morvran]

Yeah, but it would certainly mitigate it a bit, but yeah, it is. They really didnt think any of this through. The advantage bluefor get with flanking and attacking naval targets is massive compared to Redfor.

[PacketlossRedux]

Invisible FlakPanzer missiles are back…if they were ever fixed

[KhorneFlakez1337]

@Master_Teaz

Increase the number of tickets for each time, the matches end too quickly with how many targets Nuke bombers can take out

100% agreed

@Master_Teaz

Reduce the accuracy of AI controlled gun SPAA, they are accurate to the point of ruining the gamemode, seen most hilariously here

So that’s the real issue, not them tracking the incoming missiles and guided bombs, but rather that they have laser accurate guns lol

@Master_Teaz

Make the min/max BRs of each bracket change periodically. I.E one 12 hour period 8.7-9.7 + 10.0-11.0 would be the range used, then another 12 hour period have it be 8.7-9.3 + 9.7-11.0 and then a later bracket be 8.7-10.0 +10.3-11.0 as to allow for some vehicles to enjoy being top of the bracket (I.E F-4C / F-105D for example) and not constantly the bottom of a bracket

If the brackets were to shift around, they should remain within the 1 BR boundary, so no 8.7-10.0/9.7-11.0 or anything like that

@Master_Teaz

Provide a target in the mountainous region, currently it is a dead area, with nothing. With the addition of ships on the other side, it would be nice to see some targets up the mountain path, be it even a simple convoy / depot

Make more use of the map in general, everything is too cramped right now

@Master_Teaz

Change the russian carrier to the Kusnetsov instead of the Baku, as the Kusnetsov, being longer, having a ski ramp, and featuring arrestor wires, provides non VTOL aircraft that see the Baku as the carrier on their team, more of a chance of taking off

Give each side a regular catapult carrier and a ramp carrier if necessary. I don’t care that it would be unrealistic, both sides should be able to make use of their carriers!

@Master_Teaz

Make nuclear bombers harder to spawn SP wise, or force them to take off through the middle/rear bases only. Currently way too many are being spammed causing the matches to end too quickly, and targets to be removed from conventional bombing aircraft

100% agreed

@Master_Teaz

Increase RP rewards. Destroying an airfield with Napalm (4x bombing runs) with A-7D only granted 8k RP on its modifications (around 1 modification). Given the effort and time it took to do such that reward is pitiful given the time taken

Also, fully agreed

[KhorneFlakez1337]

Just give both sides a catapult carrier, it’s silly to not have one on both sides

[Morvran]

That would also work

[Morvran]

@Master_Teaz

Make the min/max BRs of each bracket change periodically. I.E one 12 hour period 8.7-9.7 + 10.0-11.0 would be the range used, then another 12 hour period have it be 8.7-9.3 + 9.7-11.0 and then a later bracket be 8.7-10.0 +10.3-11.0 as to allow for some vehicles to enjoy being top of the bracket (I.E F-4C / F-105D for example) and not constantly the bottom of a bracket

I would just copy ASB here. And do 48 hour Periods using the exact same bracket as we have in ASB

[Master_Teaz]

@KhorneFlakez1337

If the brackets were to shift around, they should remain within the 1 BR boundary, so no 8.7-10.0/9.7-11.0 or anything like that

I’d agree, but this is just a test, and a limited BR range

When this is a permanent mode I’d hope to see a bracket system like SB

@KhorneFlakez1337

Give each side a regular catapult carrier and a ramp carrier if necessary. I don’t care that it would be unrealistic, both sides should be able to make use of their carriers!

they’re adding a chinese carrier that has CATOBAR soon iirc, which can take its place, but until then Kusnetsov is the best we can get without mirroring ships (which gaijin does not want to do)

[KhorneFlakez1337]

If they don’t want to mirror the carriers, they’ll have to make sure that no blufor nation ever gets put into the redfor side, but that would result in way longer queues

They really are backing themselves into a corner with arbitrary decisions like that

Like, this is a mode in which people just spam nukes, why do they draw the line at having blufor carriers on redfor?

[Draconianate]

I know the mode is being tested still and was just curious if there were any plans for players to be able to use the Longer range SAM/AAs since the map is big enough to use those types of AA/SAMS. I would love to be able to use SAMS on maps as big as the ones used in the mode and would give a chance for those without much Aviation unlocked to play it as well in their own way.

[ZeroKills_suny]

I would really enjoy being a same operator too