Limit the number of vehicles per player

You fucking sure about that?

I mean, the axis just got a rocket shooting minigun and I didn’t see a single post about it, they also got a tanks that is invulnerable to most allied tanks in Moscow and I didn’t see a post about it, Normandy allies capacity to counter German heavy amor got seriously affected with the M8 fix/nerf and nothing about it also.

But since I am here I saw complaints about the Jumbo, T-28, PPD/34/48, PPD-40, PPDh-71, T-50, T-34, KV-1, P-47, P-38, M3 Grant, Sherman II, Fedorov, AVS-36, AS-44, Vickers, Drum Thompson and the list goes on.

It is a hell of a false equivalency saying that they/me/us all complain when it clearly isn’t truth.

Do you think that perhaps you glaize over some of the Allied complaints being an Allied main? I know I do.

I play and enjoy all factions, but Germany the most (so basically a German main). And I know I just pass off most of the German complaints as doing something wrong or sucking(no brethren of mine!!!) so I dont remember them.

But I do pay alot more attention to the frequency of the Myth of Stalinium t-34 that shows up here all the time, 75mm long 1 shotting t-34 (after armor fix). Or at points in time STGS or mkbs are overpowered when they have an equally powerful weapon that is not restricted by class (mkb got class restricted on complaints I believe, while AVT-40 did not…hilarious), M2 carbine not being equal to STG, MP40s doing more damage per round, fg-42s (I myself wish it was less common) panthers, tigers.

There is a long re occuring list (for everyone)

1 Like

Last week when someone complained about IS-2 weak I was the first one to call the bullshit on the guy who posted it.

The guy today complaining about Japan is a complete fucking joke.

That’s the difference, when is the other way around you will see a specific certain group of people here that always like the posts with the “Germany suffers” theme.

But damn, I can try to be more aware of those if they are really as frequent.

1 Like

Penalizing a suicide run of a plane is a though decision.

A new player is learning while he play the game would be bad for them to get penalized when they need all the help they can find to be better pilots.

Also there is human error, didn’t pull in time, plane had damage, I want to be on the ground ASAP etc…
It’s a canundrum

1 Like

Whatever happened to the old way??? If you crashed while bombing, you recieved no credit/points for the kills. Would just be world kills.

I didnt mind that at all.

1 Like
  1. The training range exists. They should be spending an ample amount of time there adjusting controls, learning to fly, etc.

  2. Its pretty obvious when the intention was a kamikaze run. They don’t even ATTEMPT to turn or pull up. That’s not a case of “oops I’m new”.

As I said earlier, I think this would be the best solution to the issue. Once or twice is one thing, but when it is occurring pretty consistently, or even constantly in the case of people that have multiple plane slots, is when it really becomes an issue.

What happened to me was just the opposite.
Novice players will be careful to avoid crashing when flying a plane.
Some experienced old players prefer to use suicide attacks, because this is more efficient and avoids the time of returning to replenish bombs, and then continues to deploy the next fighter carrying bombs to conduct another suicide attack.
It is true that the current rebirth time of suicide attacks will be longer, but compared with the time of returning to replenish bombs and returning to the front line, it is not short enough.

1 Like

What’s worse is that if you are the defender, there is almost no punishment for this behavior, because the defender has unlimited manpower.
Therefore, aircraft are like missiles that can constantly stop attackers, especially in some open strategic points. Suicide attacks are very efficient.

2 Likes

Maybe we can make the manpower of the vehicle independent, and both the attacker and the defender have vehicle manpower. When the vehicle is destroyed, this manpower pool will be deducted. When the manpower is consumed, the vehicle cannot be deployed.
This can prevent some experienced players from excessively abusing the vehicle mechanism, such as unlimited suicide attacks. At the same time, there will not be too many restrictions on novice players.
The attacker will not die due to excessive abuse of vehicles by novices, causing the basic manpower to dry up quickly.

It’s still a suicide and the enemy is still killed. Why cut the xp from the one that dropped the bombs?

Incentive to avoid it. You still can, the job gets done (tank kill etc) but you dont get the score. Not a punishment persay, you just didnt earn it. Makes accidents unfortunate (you do better next time) and deliberates not so interested as there is no payoff. The choice becomes for the team, or for yourself

IMO it was a neat feature and a pretty interesting solution (even if it was not intended)

2 Likes

I would like to point out, as I agree with you, that this most often done as a way to stack score insanely quickly. I would like to point out this post:

In which I did specify that it may not apply to vehicles, but that vehicles should get some kind of equivalent mechanic. So if not fix the issue from reducing their spawns, at the very least incentivize them to stay alive and continue attacks that way, but still need a score quota.

1 Like

Tank spam in certain campaigns is obnoxiously bad sometimes. Eg Allies moscow or Berlin.

My favorite solution to this was rhe system within the titan event where you had to earn points to spawn vehicles that got progressively more expensive.

1 Like

@Shiivex I think the developers should at least add this feature for customs gamemode.

1 Like

Regarding training: different planes are VERY different. If I’ve spent a few days playing Moscow or Berlin and then jump into Normandy, I promise you I’ll belly land a few P-47’s without meaning to. This applies all over the place. I’m not going to training every time I switch campaigns. I may crash. It’s a game.

Regarding intention: I don’t think I agree with that.

Overrated problem.