PENALIZE players for deaths, solve a lot of issues at once

Suggestions
1

There are numerous issues that are caused by players simply exploiting the respawn mechanic in excess.

  • Kamikaze Planes

  • Defenders Endlessly rushing line with infinite lives

  • Players burning through more tickets than what they should be in comparison to the effect they are actually having on the field

  • and more.

SUGGESTION:

Penalize players for deaths.

Reduce their score, and along with it, their silver and xp rewards.

  • Dying in an aircraft or tank will have heavier penalties than infantry squads.

  • Squads such as Flamethrowers, Machinegunners, and Paratroopers will have heavier penalties than Riflemen, Assaulters, Medics, etc. (As they are squads that have a much higher potential than standard infantry)

KEEP IN MIND:

If a player is actually efficient with their lives, and does a notable amount of difference, then their reward will far outweigh the penalty for the death of that squad.

Just simply breaking even should not be terribly difficult for players that use even a little bit of intelligence.

  • For those racking up 80+ kills with infantry, and have less than 10 squad deaths, youā€™ll be perfectly fine, youā€™ll still be getting tons of rewards.

  • For those that are in the 40> kill range, but have like 15 squad deaths, you may be more in line with breaking even.

  • For those that are just cycling planes and constantly kamikaze, You will actually penalize yourself to the point of going NEGATIVE

GOING NEGATIVE:
In the event of a player going negative, which keep in mind would require the player to be excessively inefficient, and overall be a massive detriment to the team, there would actually be a PENALTY to not just your rewards, but also to your silver balance.

If you are sitting on no silver (or not enough silver to cover the balance), then you are restricted from using higher value squads (planes, tanks, flamethrowers, MGs, etc.) until you *for lack of a better term, go back to basics and use standard infantry to get your silver back up.

I EMPHASIZE that this will not greatly effect players that are at least decent at the game and playing efficiently.
It will serve as a way to counter players that are exploiting the respawn mechanic and being a detriment to their team!

Additionally, it may serve as a way to help reduce the spam of extremely powerful squads (flamethrowers, paratroopers, MGs, etc) by making the penalties on these squads higher than basic infantry.

3

Horrible idea it will make bad players to stop playing game all together. And for good players it will only make them to find and camp in the unkillable camping spots where they only show the turret to the enemy exactly like in WT. Even without penalities game has awful silver gain and you want to punish us for every death? Yeah no thanks it will kill game for sure.
image
those guys from my last game must be thrilled about your idea to end the match with negative silver.

Flamthrowers and paratroopers already got nerfed to the ground i rarely see them in the matches, mgs were never overpowered due thieir recoil that is higher than Assaulters and non working bipod.

18 Likes
4

So let me get this straight. You are asking for the devs to add the mechanic from WT that took upwards of a decade to get even remotely balanced, the same idea that caused possibly the biggest shitstorm on the forums to this day, and the same idea that actively promotes the most hated strategies in the game (sniping, mortars, grey zone tanks and CAS). This is the mechanic you want?

Iā€™d laugh if I didnā€™t know you were being serious.

30 Likes
6

mrw someone is suggesting affixing penalties to a crucial in-game mechanic in a game where the economy is already harsh, with the side-effect of nuking all hopes for newer player progression due to inherent power disparities in equipment and troops between them and older players.

Youā€™re introducing what are essentially repair costs in a game that previously had no upkeep.
Even then, the economy is shit.

You really donā€™t think your suggestions through and just keep throwing them at a wall and hope they stick, donā€™t you?

8 Likes
7

What BR were you playing at?

8

BR1-3 as the US vs Axis (they were Axis)

10

Actually no.
ā€œLetā€™s reward players that are making EFFECTIVE pushes.ā€

There needs to be an end to the spam tactics that just promote blindly running in and getting massacred time and again.

Iā€™ve seen PLENTY of players capable of running into the objective and pulling this off, but they do so by using cover, being accurate, and actually trying to stay alive with that character rather than just spawning endless squads!

11

Typically? III. Sometimes V. Sovies are all a mix of I and II right now

12
  • Start Enlisted for the first time
  • Die to a guy playing longer than I have while I, at best have bolt-action rifles
  • Oh shit, a tank/MG/bomb is watching over our spawn
  • Get penalized for dying
  • Progression hampered
  • Problem remains a problem

Man. I didnā€™t expect the Poverty Trap economics theory to show up here.

18 Likes
13

no

4 Likes
14

Sounds like some Trickle Down crap to me. Whereā€™s Reaganā€™s grave? I got a surprise for him for how he ruined our economy

15

simple answer: its not possible to find a formula that rebalances points gain congruent with your idea, because there are countless contradicting mechanisms.

  • tank camping creates the best k/d in enlisted, but isnt overall beneficial for the game.
  • most players would start stay away from the object to avoid dying and simple become useless to the team, creating horrible matches
  • ā€¦ dozens of other examples
3 Likes
16

New players should simply not be trying to jump into using higher BRs without first learning how to operate even basic infantry.

Weā€™ve all had the issue where we get stuck with absolute crap teammates that waste away team tickets, often because they donā€™t have anything built up!

It encourages new players to stay in the lower BRs, build up their equipment, and learn to become more efficient before jumping into the higher tiers where they are nothing but a liability!

17

LOOK HEā€™S EVEN BLAMING THE VICTIMS FOR NOT BEING ABLE TO UPLIFT THEMSELVES

My brother in hell, you realize older players donā€™t just hang around in high BRs all day, right?

4 Likes
18

No it encourages new players to go play literally any other WWII FPS that ISNā€™T War Thunder: Infantry Edition. Repair costs is one of the most hated aspects of War Thunder. BR is bad enough. Donā€™t bring that crap into my favorite FPS game too

1 Like
19

Dang. Dude actually hates poor people. Guysā€¦I think Reagan reincarnated. Lol

20

No

8 Likes
21

With the changes made by the merge, the highest tier that new players would need to fight is t3.

As I said in the suggestion, the basic infantry squads would have significantly less penalty than the high value squads.
So for example, if a new player comes in, only has access to basic squads, they will only be getting hurt by penalties if they are losing 2-3 soldiers to every 1 soldier of the enemy.

Besides, most new players are in T1&2 fights. They are fighting bolt-action enemies predominately. If they canā€™t hold their own there, then letting them into anything higher than that is just going to hinder anyone they get teamed up with.

22

Except this is only going to punish people for making failed pushes, not reward anyone. Naturally, this is going to make players play more passively, which will lead to an increase the easy positive KDR strategies such as mortars, snipers, grey zone tanks and CAS. Sure, some people will have the skill to pull off the +100/0 infantry only games consistently, but most wonā€™t, and that will inevitably lead to people spamming the aforementioned things.

2 Likes
23

image
image1418Ɨ447 141 KB

Do you think the bottom 5 players from either team have profited off this match under your new system?

Do you think I was only equipped with bolt-action rifles?

This is low BR.

2 Likes