False
2 Likes
That’s only a problem on maps without flank routes, and even then you can just simply let your teammates deal with em.
That’s plenty for side penning, not to mention it has APHE.
aka planes
the difference is armored cars don’t have radar and 2 fast firing 35mm.
There’s a reason Za 35 gets far more use than these “armored cars”
then that’s simply your problem
skill issue.
double skill issue
I agree, but that’s not reason the SPAA is spawned almost exclusively by low-skill noobs
aww yes, cause sitting in spawn and 1-shot planes with 1 out of 500 bullets you fired is extremely skillful.
Well guess we should give P-47s SLAPs and ballistics computers cause “We departed the land of realism ages ago”
They’re perfectly viable even without fictional ammo belts
It is in many cases.
AP pen means nothing for shooting down planes
cool. infrantry isn’t in Warthunder so all that matters is SPAA effectiveness against vehicles
the problem is your skill issue. None of your problems (e.g Bofors being too weak) is an actual problem, and is infact, just skill issue.
if you can’t dodge a 800-900m/s shell in a 500km/h moving aircraft from 1-2 alt a good chunk of your gray matter has to be missing
2 Likes
If you’re firing at planes outside your range then that’s your problem, not mine.
The tankers are already leaving all the time. My friends list is full of people who do not play this game at all these days. What you have left are the “tankers that are OK with flying”, or as I call them, “pilots”.
Some of the pilots make skilled tankers. Some are just in ground vehicles as needed to get into an airplane. (Those are the ones making the best rewards in GFRB) Some will want to come here and say how skillful those pilots are at tanking. I’m pretty sure you’ll see, if you watch their combats, that they are skilled in the minimum needed ground actions to get into their aircraft, and then quite skilled at slaughtering ground targets, especially SPAA and SAMs. (Mostly in ways such that the ground vehicles can’t shoot at them effectively before they are dead.)
Go play the Lvkv 42 and come back :)
He ain’t talkin bout Lvkv 42. I have the bofor truck though and it’s pretty good,
With gaijin’s calculator it wouldn’t go that high, its the same ammo as on the Bf 110 G-2’s gunpod.
But still a bit much for 3.3 I agree, though there is a ~67mm pen solid shot available too, and thus the APCR could be left to a different vehicle, maybe the Flakpanzer III. Or vice versa.
A WW2 apcr Having more pen than Modern apfsds Shells see Puma(the Modern One) and cv9035?
Will definitely be much lower in-game
The only time a fighter-bomber descends under 1 km altitude is during a bomb drop, which is probably not going to take longer than 1-2 seconds of pitching/rolling over, diving to 500 meters and pulling back out flying at very fast speeds at very high aspect to the SPAA.
Is that case, they’re only killing campers which deserve to die anyways.
From extensive experience using them: to write off the 50kg bombs is a mistake.
While they are indeed far more needy than large bombs, the Germans’ 50kg bombs do work when deposited correctly.
You commonly talk about this…but your math seems hazy and open to debate.
To be a tanker who flies, you pay for:
- The involved vehicles (both aircraft and ground)
- The costs to acquire and crew (plus, optionally, crew training too)
- Repair costs
Given the costs involved with GFs and the inferiority of earning rates for aircraft in RB GFs versus earning rates for aircraft in RB AFs, it seems far likelier that a skilled tanker using only tanks to good effect (while bypassing all aircraft-related costs by not using aircraft) would probably yield more efficient earnings than a tanker who flies as a rule.
Clearly, player skill variation makes these sorts of calculations a generalization…which is why I contest the claim.
3 Likes
It depends if they play ARB or not.
If they play ARB, this cost is effectively only relevant to the tanks AND I found it’s much easier to make a lot of SL in ARB over GRB in a short span of time. It does require jet tier planes (for the 5-8 minute in and out due to speed), but you can easily end a battle with 20-25K SL profit in the airspawn F84B/G, sabres and especially the F8U-2 (Missile bus surrounded by low level premium players who use mig21s to bomb bases: Space climb over them, yeet missiles, get 1-3 kills depending on the mig 21s awareness, get missiled yourself and die in 5 minutes. Go next for another 20-30K sl game). Base bombing/groundpounding likely offers even more consistent profits, and probably starts much earlier with props.
However, with this I agree but for a different reason.
Research points. Any research point obtained flying a plane - whether as CAP or CAS - is worthless. You’re gaining aircraft research rather than ground research. You’d earn far more air research flying ARB even as a zomber/groundpounder, so getting air over ground research means you’re doubling if not tripling the time it takes to research your next desirable line-up.
This is something I*d love getting changed because right now the game severely punishes you for playing CAP. Like seriously, respawning your whole lineup and getting shot in each tank without earning any score will research your tanks infinitely faster than taking out your plane and shooting down 3-5 enemy planes.
2 Likes
Yes, that is true–because if you were going to be playing RB AFs anyway, the costs involved are subsidizd by this. (At that point, only the costs and earnings variation remains.)
I’ve had similar thoughts about SPAAs for a similar reason myself, given that many are played as wannabe TDs simply because of the time limitations associated with ‘waiting’ for the enemy (aircraft) to turn up. (My solution was to vary earnings by kill type, a la SPAA killing an aircraft = 4x RP earnings as opposed to SPAA killing a GFs opponent = 1x earnings)
As someone who often plays SPAAs aggressively to get some use out of them, similar factors facing patrolling aircraft is something I understand clearly. (I do encounter this with the aircraft myself too–though I usually have pretty good luck finding enemies to engage.)
4 Likes
That seems like a potentially good solution.
For aircraft, I’d say something like air kills contribute to ground reseearch. I’m fine with ground kills doing the same as well, but I’m open to ground kills only giving air research for planes since it’s much easier to achieve and thus would shorten the grind too much or whatever.
1 Like
To what?
I think you are missing what the OP meant.
A true GRB is what the OP is talking about . NO CAS, No planes just land vehicles. It’s a solution in itself.
The whole debate/argument of CAS in GRB goes out of the window. No more Airborne frustration and no more nerfing of peoples precious CAS.
The question is ,how and why do War Thunder players find the ultimate solution offensive?
If combined arms works well and you love the game as it is then fine but please dont spend the next twenty minutes typing an essay about how it needs " Balancing " or nerfing. Just get on with it and enjoy it.
If planes are ruing a potentially brilliant game then taking the planes out is the obvious answer.The game runs fine without them already so its no issue.
So the OP is saying that if TO does not effect those who like CAS so why complain about TO? Basically its just forum pettiness. Rival forum regulars who feel their ego isn’t being massaged enough by their opposition.
You can see that by the early answers. " Somebody was a bit rude to me so I say no to a TO game " etc etc .Some times this forum exits for its own benefit and I’m sure some people spend more time on here talking crap than playing the game
6 Likes
I got good at CAS playing almost extensively Japanese " CAS " and having to learn precision with the sub-250kg bombs. Got pretty good at dropping them right onto people’s foreheads. I’ve gotten kind of rusty in the last few years, but I’m still accurate 7/10 times.
They can be nice but you have to both get way too close and spend too much time right above the battlefield. I prefer to carry one or two larger ones, drop them quickly, and get going to intercept enemy aircraft.
This is extremely true, shooting down aircraft is a thankless endeavour.
To be truthful, it’s not CAS players being so vocal in thier opposition, but those who are advocates of this mode, shouting down anyone who dares to say no, so much so it just becomes a tyrade of abuse and 'how dare you’s until it becomes a mere statcheck fest, with dumb throwouts about skill and situationalism ignoring the points that SPAA isn’t that costly to spawn, backups are there, and that you can actually play indirectly compared to just having to take shots you aren’t going to make.
After all, this was dead for a period of 2 months, and it’s been spammed to all buggery because people aren’t happy with the game they want to play, which includes planes.
The real CAS problem is the SP cost. 1 cap or 1 assist is enough for a 2x1000pds fighter bomber. thats nonsense.
most games up to 7.7 is 8 vs 8 cas after 5min. you cannon counter this. when a team spawn 2-3 spaa, all dead after 10sec at spawn. and the averege fighter with bombs cost 540 sp maybe, becoz have 1000pd or 500/250 kg bombs. but with gun kills all spaas. bombers are 710 sp, but most are useless in ground RB. ok PE8 and Lancaster worth it.
i think attacker and fighter SP cost must have raise to 700+ sp.
after 7.7 until 9.7 is a cas is not a real problem. gepards, shilkas rule the air, but the most popular BR 4.0-7.7 the number of planes ruin the game. and gaijin promote this playstyle. kill 1 in ground, and bring a plane.
i dont play high tier, but after a new update, think will be more very strong plane
1 Like