all im saying is.
not everyone can make god instrument work. i’m shit with XP-50
From my own experience although i haven’t flown it that much since i prefer UT version of Yak-9, the K variant has pretty poor acceleration and weak engine. On top of that armament is very lacking for air to air combat.
Ofc it doesn’t matter as much if you know how to aim the 45, but you should be expected to throw away a few rounds (i’d say at least 5 and probably even more than half of it if you don’t aim as well) of your very limited 45mm ammo supply in each a2a engagement since a single 12,7 can’t do much.
And don’t get me wrong i think Yak-9K deserves to go up in GRB a bit, but definitely not to 6.0 as author of the post has suggested
Oh boy, wait until you hear about the Pe-3, or about any bomb above 500kg.
29rds of 45mm APHE has a lot more killing potential than a 500kg bomb. 3 shots per kill is GENEROUS and that still puts you at 10 kills without reloading.
7 Likes
Count in all the potential misses and all the ammo you waste in air2air engagements since you ain’t shooting anything down with 12,7. You also need to account for being more exposed to SPAA due to flying in straight lines all of the time.
Although Yak-9K could use slight BR increase, it’s not anything outrageous. It onky wrecks havoc when you allow it to.
No more than with bombs, and you get the benefit of being able to stay much further away since you don’t need to be almost on top of someone to bomb them.
If you have a somewhat competent teammate in a fighter or decent SPAA coverage you can keep doing CAS, but even then the 9K isn’t bad at all against aircraft. You will still have much more killing potential than other aircraft even after a dogfight.
Oh, it’s just a conicidence, that you have never, ever played any yak plane, yet you keep talking about it
get some experienec first little bro, your opinion is discarded as you lack necessary knowledge about the topic you want to discuss
With Bombs you are not even clsoe to being as exposed as you are with guns. I don’t deny Yak-9K needs to go up a bit, but this is sheer nonsense.
If you have bomb sight you can just simply stay away out of AAs range entirely and even if you don’t, as long as you are any competent, you can drop bombs from altitude of over 500m and you don’t even need to fly directly at the said AA to do so, making you much harder to hit.
And if you happen to have unguided rockets like F4U-4B for example it’s even simplier.
Gun CAS is in fact the most vulnerable type of CAS to SPAA.
Since you often dive from high altitudes and try to keep being as high as possible, cover from your own SPAA won’t be of much use unless your teammate is one of those hardcore Wirbelwind mains which refuse to play anything other than Wirbel or Ostwind 2.
With fighter coverage you can avoid threat from other planes, but AA will be just as dangerous as ever
1 Like
There are zero fighters with a bomb sight.
Takes way more skill than pointing your nose at them and clicking.
Which again, like others have pointed out, means the -4B is UNABLE to engage competent air threats for as long as it keeps those rockets. The 9K never has to ditch its 29rds of 45mm APHE.
Russia gets some of the best SPAAs at these BRs.
1 Like
Yeah, I guess. It’ll be a lot nicer for people to make reasonable counter-arguments like this fella rather than asking what drugs I use.
The game should not be as enjoyable for the loser as for the winner. War thunder is a competitive game. There should be a large incentive for people to win. One of the main reasons why I was and am still against anything that increases rewards for losing games.
A lot more than with bombs. Bombs you can toss and drop while maneuvering, and from longer ranges. Strafing requires you to point DIRECTLY at someone. If you need to be directly on top of something to bomb it effectively you are horrible at bombing.
The 4b is very competent in engaging other planes with ordnance on in grb.
Competitive requires both sides having an equal chance at victory using appropriate tactics at the same BR bracket. CAS by default removes that - there’s nothing you can do in a tank against aircraft. Having to spawn a fighter of your own does not qualify because you’re no longer playing a tank. SPAA barely qualifies - SPAA would be justifiable if we had role queue and skill-based matchmaking - then it’d fulfil a similar role as supports in Dota and League. However, as we have neither role queue nor SBMM - SPAA is again on thin ice for satisfying the requirement for a competitive game.
Spitfire Mk Vb vs Bf109F4 is a competitive scenario.
F6F-5 vs Bf109F4 is a competitive scenario.
Yak-3 vs Bf109G14 is a competitive scenario
P-51D30 vs Bf109K4 is a competitive scenario
Also insert tank pair of choice. I won’t name tanks because I’m not as confident in what the theoretical “right” approach is.
Notice the commonality though? The match-ups listed are all asymmetrical. If one side plays into the other’s strength, they lose. if one side plays into their strength, they either win or the engagement gets reset (enemy realizes they’re being baited and disengages to try and force their advantage). This creates engaging gameplay where you know you failed because of skill issue (you made the wrong decision 5 minutes ago, you couldn’t ride the edge of your plane’s performance as well without killing yourself, you got baited/greedy, you mismanaged your engine) rather than get punished for daring to exist (as is the case with all tanks and CAS). With CAS vs tank, there is nothing you could’ve done to threaten the plane in your comet/centurion/tiger/IS/etc. In the plane example, there might be one side that’s favored in the example match-ups for skill-floor or skill ceiling performance, but that’s the same as Meepo having a very high skill ceiling and phantom assassin being braindead - this doesn’t make meepo bad or PA good.
Claiming CAS vs tanks is “competitive” in a game without role queue and SBMM is the same as claiming Ariete (plane) is competitive vs the Horten. They’re not, and that’s why Ariete is 9.3/9.3/9.0 and Horten is 6.7/7.0/7.7.
5 Likes
Flawed logic.
If losing is not enjoyable, then why attempt a comeback against an opponent superior to you? In fact, why bother fighting an unfair fight (IE: uptiers) to begin with if the prospect is just going to be painful?
You just don’t want people to be rewarded for losing, which is also ridiculous in its own way. But generally, good competitive games aren’t balanced so one side is allowed a functional power fantasy over the other, and the side with the odds stacked against them is up for an experience that is not enjoyable. In fact, that’s actually a terrible way to make a game competitive. It’s poison to competition. You literally believe that poison to competion makes competitive games better.
The incentive to winning is being able to receive additonal rewards over the losing side, which should be enough. Many players also agree that players showing “valiant resistance” despite being on the losing side should be rewarded for fighting until the end and performing well, even though they’re ultimately let down by their team’s poor performance.
3 Likes
Both sides have an equal chance of winning using appropriate tactics. Spaa should ALWAYS lose against air. Why? Because it’s a less expensive vehicle to spawn in. To properly counter a more expensive unit you need to spawn more cheap units or a more expensive unit. Like all games that rely on some sort of spawn/production cost work like this. What does spawning a plane not qualify you for??? There are things you can do in a tank versus planes. Wtf is meep or pa? I never claimed cas vs tanks is competitive, stop putting words in my mouth. Your entire last paragraph is irrelevant because you go off on something I never said.
In your first paragraph you answer your own question. In your second one, which side has an advantage over the other? Please explain what you mean by power fantasy because you are throwing it around willy nilly and with very little context. By the way, uptiers are really not unbalanced at all, or in theory are not. You also seem to like putting words in my mouth. I said losing should not be AS enjoyable as winning, not that losing should not be enjoyable at all like you imply.
You should read the entire thread instead of cherrypicking one line to disagree with. I’m not going to spoonfeed you the context behind the imbalance that would be called a power fantasy.
Which is the current reality of the game, and if it gets worse as you want it to be, it will end up in the extremes I describe. You want to poison the competitiveness of the game. That is not going to make players want to fight anything other than a fight stacked so far in their favor that it’d be impossible to lose.
I did. Which is why I ask. You do realise that the current economy rewards losing almost as much as winning right? Due to a horrible player convincing the majority of the other horrible players that they will NEVER be good enough to consistently win, and thus voting so losing would give more rewards and winning less.
A model where losing gets less rewards than now would literally increase competitiveness, because there would be a larger difference between winning and losing and thus a larger incentive to win. This is basic logic. Once again, what team is so stacked against the other that it would be impossible to win. You can also just keep dodging the main questions like you did now though, as there isn’t any team that is overwhelmingly stacked against the other.
How the economy works:
Relevant parts:
Google doc screenshots for sake of "i wont click random links."
Key take-away:
Win: Play time x activity x coefficient x RP multiplier x 2
Defeat : Play time x activity x coefficient x RP multiplier x 1.34
What do we observe looking at the screenshots and the above formula?
The game significantly rewards staying alive without respawning and maintaining ~1500 RP/15 minutes in ARB perspective (and something comparable for GRB).
Staying alive until end of match , getting 9 kills for Skill Bonus (or 4 for air RB) and winning is where the bulk of your income comes from. Rather notably, as one can see from the formula - skill bonus is multiplicative with win/loss. To claim " “rewards losing as much as winning” is to be grossly uninformed on how the rewards system works. Now, it is true that the way the economy works and the way probabilities stack up (can you get a 70 to 90% activity on a second respawn 5 minutes in? 10 minutes in? 15 minutes in? 20 minutes in?), there are scenarios where respawning to try and force a match win provides lesser rewards than ODLing and going next without risking a low activity period due to how much of your RP gain/battle it makes up (1 kill is worth 47 RP in RB, plus change for crits/hits. That’s equivalent to staying alive for 50 seconds at 100% activity if you lose the match, 33 seconds if you win)
The only game mode where winning/losing THE MATCH makes no significant difference is in air simulator battles, as you only get a small SL bonus for winning with no change to RP gain. This makes sense given ASB is rewarded in a 15 minute cycle and you can join/leave ongoing matches without limitation. On the flipside, as you pay silver lions to spawn (not repair), and you only receive 80% of the reward for surviving the full 15 minute cycle and must return and land to gain full reward - ASB massively enforces winning to maintain a positive silver lion income… but also shafts winning very hard (2 kills is worth the same as 8 kills due to being paid by the minute rather than individual actions). This has the nasty consequence that you have dead BR brackets where spawn cost is 18k, max possible reward is 19.7k - meaning you need to survive and get 2 kills/15 minutes twice (30 minutes) and land both times to afford to respawn a second time. This occurs at 7.0-8.0 with likes of horten, shooting star and meteors.
I will concede that if you have a premium account, the skill bonus’s benefit is significantly reduced as the 100% acts on the base income rather than premium income, leading to scenarios where it only increases your total reward by a measly amount (something like 1/4? I cant remember how shafted you get) if using both a premium vehicle and a premium account.
Looking at the aforementioned 7.0-8.0 dead BR zone in SB. Do you know what happens?
People spawn in their planes and are in -18K SL in debt. You have people fly to objectives and compete. It’s a 3 hour game mode with respawns.
One side beats the other. The winning side has barely offset their debt. The other side now asks the question: Do I double my debt, or do I quit and go to next lobby hoping the enemies are worse than me?
The losing side makes the logical choice (not double their debt) and now the lobby is dead without enemies to fight with.
That’s the outcome you desire.
At prop BRs where spawn cost is 3K and max income is ~9K, or even spawn cost of 10K and max income of 18K or so - this occurs less consistently. Statpadders will still ditch lobbies if the enemy can threaten them, but others will stay and fight to the bitter end (or exhaustion/boredom. Or the teams got too unbalanced and you’ve no desire to fight 6 vs 12) and there’s actual competition and a chance at improving your piloting.
Turns out, where losing doesn’t punish you as much, people stay in the game and fight to improve and it’s actually competitive rather than “stomp once and enemies give up.”
Tell me how a comet can kill a yak-9k or a F4U-4.
Tell me how a centurion Mk 3 can kill a P-51H.
For planes, you can pick 2 fighters within a 1.0 BR step (that aren’t seriously under/over-tiered) and find a legitimate way to force a victory for one side. Maybe it’s something boring and requires strict discipline like “BnZ the japs in your mustang and keep your energy high at all times.” Maybe it’s something more fun like “spiral climb the spitfire in your messerschmitt” or “drag the yak into a spiral descent in your hellcat” or force one-circle/two-circle. There’s a plethora of options, some more fun than others, some easier than others but they exist.
Tell me how a comet can kill a yak-9k or a F4U-4.
Tell me how a centurion Mk 3 can kill a P-51H.
Even if the F4U-4 has massive skill issues, you’re not killing it in your comet. Okay, maybe if the F4U-4 decides to land in an open field or flies with gear & flaps out at 100 meters altitude. Just for sake of covering all bases - yes, there exist scenarios where a tank can get kill credit on a plane but those scenarios are rather contrived and more of a freak accident.
You grind planes by playing AAB/ARB/ASB. Planes use entirely different controls and playstyle to tanks. To expect players to play planes is absurd. Even if someone really enjoys playing planes, maybe they don’t enjoy the same bracket as they play tanks in or maybe they don’t enjoy the game mode (either they only want to play planes in arcade or sim but like GRB for tanks (or play GRB because GSB doesn’t let you play whatever tank whenever)).
Expecting plane use when you want to use a tank is a non-justified argument.
And Expecting SPAA per…
This requires teamwork.
Which requires role queue (in Dota 2, I queue for pos 5 and my team is guaranteed to have a hard support. I queue for pos 1 and my team is guaranteed to have a hard carry and so forth.).
We have no such thing for Warthunder.
Teamwork also requires SBMM. Imagine trying to play Dota as at 3K MMR equivalent when your pos 1 is at 1500 MMR equivalent. Or imagine trying to play Dota at 3K MMR equivalent when the enemy pos 3 is a 6000 equivalent.
You can’t.
Using SPAA to hit planes is significantly harder than planes to hit planes.
SPAA are on a 2D plane shooting at a vehicle in a 3D plane. SPAA are stationary, planes fly at 350-550 km/h at prop tiers. SPAA are always shooting with significant altitude difference. Planes don’t.
In a plane, you can neutralize speed differences with maneuvering and aligning your fuselage with the enemy plane’s and getting on their six. In a plane, you’re almost always shooting at the same altitude. In a plane you control your distance for shooting. And in SB, in a plane you have gunsights that tell you how much to lead and give an estimation of distance. Oh, and in planes you have vertical targettting and convergence that allow you to put the enemy dead-center of your gunsight, pull the trigger and boom goes the yak/ki-84 even if you’re using the fridge launcher.