Games are simply too short! 3:34!!!

[sardinha08@psn 3,179]

Just had a 3:44 game after a 5:01 one. My second kill didn't even had time to die.

[skaniol 421]

On ‎2016‎-‎09‎-‎10 at 2:03 AM, DocProfit said:

I wonder if we can break the 2 min mark...

Yes, we can. I've seen a game end in about a minute and a half. That was during the good old Golden Battles.

 

On ‎2016‎-‎09‎-‎21 at 8:48 AM, Dodo_Dud said:

I somehow doubt it. Survivor requires at least 5 kills.

On ‎2016‎-‎09‎-‎21 at 9:05 PM, kireta21 said:

My flyout in A-20: 3 player kills, some GT kills, Terror AND Survivor

Dodo_Dud is right. What kireta21 got here is just "Bulletproof". It's the weaker version of "Survivor". They are not exactly the same. Bulletproof becomes Survivor when you have at least 5 kills. Most of these awards come in pairs (regular and superb versions) and the explanations in the tooltips or the wiki are extremely confusing. They are often the same for both versions in the pair and many of them are extremely misleading as a whole. I had to make countless tests just to figure out when exactly you are supposed to win any of them... I am still working on this. Take for example Bulletproof->Survivor:

Quote

Didn't lose any vehicle and destroyed more targets than all other players who didn't lose any vehicle. If several players have equal number of destroyed targets, the award is given to the one with bigger score.

According to the first sentence I must be competing for the most kills with players who also didn't lose any vehicle only, instead of all players. The truth is that you need to have the most kills of all players, regardless of their survival. The second sentence implies that on a tie, you have to break it by score. This is also wrong. I have won Survivor while another guy had the same number of kills and he was ranked higher... I don't remember whether he had 0 deaths too. Maybe he didn't. Maybe I wouldn't have gotten the award if he had 0 deaths, like the first sentence implied. It's all guess work, endless tests and observations, until the devs decide to share with us the EXACT requirements.

 

The short games made the winning of the superb versions of these awards way harder. Take for example "Hero of the Sky": You need 12+ kills to get this instead of just "Terror of the Sky". A good kill rate is about one kill per minute, but the games rarely last 12 minutes nowadays. You have to be exceptionally good. On the other hand, the SL you get from these awards stay the same...

 

I haven't played the bomber hunter/protector recently, since during the hot summer I prefer to underclock my CPU/GPU and it's no fun to shoot at 10-20 FPS. Yesterday I played that role for about 25 games and it was such a suffer... Yes, the games definitely last longer, but this is pointless when your own team can't bomb. The enemy stream of bombers is just endless. It's almost impossible for the fighters to stop them all. I had two 6-7 games losing streaks simply because of the lack of bombers on our team.

 

So, if I play the bomber/attacker role the games end in no time and I become part of the problem. If I play the fighter role, I suffer defeat after defeat. You may say - why not both roles? The answer is simple - I can't spawn in both at the same time and I can't quickly switch between the roles mid-flight. RTB is too slow. It's out of the question. Bailing out of perfectly flyable plane is so realistic... then, it's not like I can afford to lose my top vehicles and slots so easy. Even then, how is this supposed to help? By the time I switch from fighter to bomber the enemy team has done so much ground damage that it's too late to out-do them. Then why should I ever switch from bomber to fighter? Jus to get some fighter kills while we are leading? If the objective is to destroy the ground, then that's what I should keep doing. The rest is just delaying the loss, because let's be serious here: how often the Ground Strike games end because of a time out or plane attrition? Exactly.

 

IMO, any plane should be able to complete a mission. When you start in one plane, you shouldn't be forced to switch to another.

 

Also, we must do something to stop the reckless kamikaze style gameplay. A team of 16 players can theoretically spawn over 350 planes with all these slots and backups. This is ridiculous, considering the amount of ground targets. No wonder that people don't care whether they die or not. They can always respawn. We have a fixed amount of ground units, but we don't have such for the air units. A proper team aircraft count limit is needed. For example, Ground Strike/Assault missions could have a limit of 25 air-to-air (fighters) + 25 air-to-ground (bombers/attackers) aircraft per team. If any of these counters goes down to zero, that team can no longer spawn in the respective type of aircraft. This adds another dimension to the gameplay, because now every kill/death counts. Survival matters. Saving an ally is also a lot more important, because your own ability to respawn depends on that too.

 

Of course, the above suggestion allows the trolls to abuse it. They could deliberately bail out or suicide just to hurt their own team by reducing the team counters. This could be fixed by the introduction of a crew lock within the battle itself. For example, if a player bails out outside the airfield or crashes (being shot down doesn't count) during the first 2 minutes after spawn, they receive a lock on all of their crews up to 2 minutes, so they are relegated to spectators until the lock wears out. A repeat of the offense in the same battle would be an immediate kick.

[kireta21 795]

I thought bombers WEP-ing into targets and ending battle in 5 minutes was high tier issue, but it seem I was wrong.

4 minutes 2 seconds, and Terror of the Skies with only 3 kills. Yay!

[edit]

Oh, forgot to say it's 3.0 lineup

Edited October 19, 2016 by kireta21

[ganJ 2,692]

In Arcade Tier 4 br 5-6 is unplayable... And if you play US you will score "null" before you reach altitude for them or you attack bomber and glorious Yer or P3-8 will one shot you with gunner, yaaay I mean Arcade should be "FUN" something like year ago I could use like 5-8 US planes in one battle and receive decent kill nad money score ~10kills and 50k SL, some ground targets, now we have bomber horde (people who want to spade them or get more money because bombers and ground targest are best ways to get SL) 5-8 minutes and  battle is over :/ (don't forget that after 1.59 planes and  especially bombers are ridiculously "strong") Where is the fun in this ?
What do you think about "AND" of objectives ?: something like 6 strategic targets, airfield and ground targets like: tanks artillery and bunkers and we should destroy ALL of them to win battle like ground strike?
I rather lost all my planes and go back to garage then use 2 planes and score nothing, maybe elimination of enemy team could happen more often, still it would be more "fun" than it is now.

[kireta21 795]

As I said in different thread, things could get fixed by replacing ticket bleed with score system. Simply putting, battle is over when one team gets required amount of combined points.

How's that better? First, and most important, goal could be easily adjusted to require more points than possible to get for GTs and minibases alone. Second, it makes air kills contribute to victory.

Lastly, this system would allow GTs to spawn in waves, since killing them all would no longer be the only goal. Team would have to keep their bombers safe before another wave arrives to get bombed. That could lead to situation where team consisting mostly bombers wipes out GTs... only to get wiped out by enemy fighters, before second or third wave of GTs spawn. And since air kills give points just like ground kills, victory could be decided by points from air kills.

Edited October 16, 2016 by kireta21

[Stick44 50]

it;s getting hard to like a game where you wait 5 minutes for a 4.17 match....but on the plus side I know how long it takes to climb a AR 234 to 20 thou...4.17.

[Jagdmann 238]

I guess Gaijin has Problems in distributing the length of games :)) In Sim. Enduring Confrontations we have 3 hour Matches where you are let alone with the game after at least 2 hours. Then you are to bum around for another hour and Show them AIs what you are made of.... How about some polishing in the gameplay of all modes dear Gents at Gaijins??? OOOORrrr naaaahhhhh lets just watch the income Counter´, right?! Watch it, it may reduce earlier than late if you approach your customers like this!

[DocProfit 2,663]

The less they listen - the less I play.  Simple.

[jutland_ace 330]

I've been noticing more frontline game modes mixed in recently. Those tend to be (a lot) longer than ground strike. I would still prefer an even mix of all the various modes, but maybe this shows that Gaijin is listening to complaints about the length of games?

[Venatores 309]

The problem starts at the beginning of a players start in warthunder. AAA and armored cars are the primary objective instead of teaching them to kill planes and learning the basic mechanics of flying a fighter byplane. 

This continues in higher tiers due to the amount of exp players gain from killing tanks, pilboxes and ships. Reduce the exp gain from that and hopefully it will slowly alter the bombing spam we currently face. 

The only thing stoping the games from being done after 1 minute is that 70% of the bombers think bombing bases is the fastest way to win. Imaging if the all went for tanks.. game over after first wave. 

Additionally increasing the chances of airdom and domination maps would be a good idea.

[l_AM_GOD 1,959]

4 hours ago, LuckyScrub said:

Additionally increasing the chances of airdom and domination maps would be a good idea.

 

^

[sidchicken 721]

5 hours ago, jutland_ace said:

I've been noticing more frontline game modes mixed in recently. Those tend to be (a lot) longer than ground strike. I would still prefer an even mix of all the various modes, but maybe this shows that Gaijin is listening to complaints about the length of games?

Possible.  They've apparently made changes like adding some ticket bleed to airdom without an announcement (thereby addressing one of the most glaring issues with airdom, the tendency to end in a double-loss even though one team was clearly winning), so a stealth tweak to the map selection algorithm is not a ridiculous idea.  I've been grinding BR 5.3 German a lot lately, and I've noticed a high percentage of frontline myself.

[I_am_Scrub 205]

On 10/19/2016 at 2:32 PM, DocProfit said:

The less they listen - the less I play.  Simple.

Same. PLENTY of other games I can spend my entertainment time on. (I'm only on the forums for a minor break to read gossip, and sometimes I post something. It doesn't mean I'm a WT fanboi.) I had high hopes for this game as being able to play realistically with mouse and keyboard is a HUGE deal for flight sims. It massively lowers the barrier to entry and is to my knowledge the first game to do that.

 

But if they're going to blow off polls with hundreds of responses on these forums, then where are they getting their input from? Nobody from Gaijin is polling ME in game, asking how satisfied I was with the last game I played, or why I haven't played X nation in months. 

 

I note that a different game (WoWs) did exactly that on game end and on quitting out, and I was both surprised and pleased to give them my answers. They have huge balance problems so my answers weren't all positive, but at least they asked, and at the exact right time to get me to answer.

Edited October 23, 2016 by Milspec

[I_am_Scrub 205]

On 10/20/2016 at 3:17 AM, LuckyScrub said:

Additionally increasing the chances of airdom and domination maps would be a good idea.

 

Letting me choose the game mode I want to play would be a better idea. I might want to, oh I don't know, PUT MY GOOD PLANES IN FOR THE AIR DOM FFS. 

 

Yes I know "Gaijin recommends a balanced lineup blah blah". NO. I want to put the best planes I have in for a given mode, so I can play the best game I can in that mode. This Is Not A Wrong Way Of Doing Things.

 

In fact, I just realized it's how American-owned multiplayer game companies have always done it. Pick your game type from the server list, pick your class to play, tweak your equipment and in you go. You've had complete control over your choices, if there's any problem with your performance you are likely to take responsibility first rather than blaming the game. 

 

But Russian companies like Gaijin and Wargames both break that common-sense model. They have you pick your class (plane, tank or ship) and then assign you a random game type which may or may not be any good for your class, then let you tweak your equipment a bit.  So of course we're going to have a suboptimal game experience. We'd have to luck out on the match type to have a good one. And of course the game company is an easy target to blame. They did take the most important choice right out of our hands, so they actually have responsibility.

 

Yeah, I see the whole game mode choice thing as being essential to solving the long-standing problems with the player experience. 

 

Oh inb4 "we can't, the queue won't let us". Yes It Will. You will fill the same number of games with the same number of people, just sorted into the categories they've selected. Only the very last players in each category will be mixed in order to fill up games. 

Edited October 23, 2016 by Milspec

[ATsoldier 11]

Time 2:36. Did anyone enjoy this match? I doubt that they didn't. Atleast I didn't.

Squad doing the wager probably lost theirs, because didn't have time to get enough kills (unless rookie or officer).

 

[SHID_MY_JORTS 1,863]

1 hour ago, ATsoldier said:

Time 2:36. Did anyone enjoy this match? I doubt that they didn't. Atleast I didn't.

Squad doing the wager probably lost theirs, because didn't have time to get enough kills (unless rookie or officer).

 

Faced that Armanian squadron a couple times before,everytime atleast 2 of them immediately rush in Do-217's, the groundstrikes were over in less than 5 minutes. I've faced them once on a front line map, 3 of them had 10 or more deaths. The spam is real.

 

Edited October 24, 2016 by Vectorize

[Light_Flight 269]

These are very telling screen shots. When a full squad line up agree to go for ground targets and bases, the result is inevitable. Maybe part of the answer could be to restrict squadrons to a maximum of 3 in Air Arcade?

[DocProfit 2,663]

3 wouldn't make much of a difference.

 

They need to add an air kill component to the formula, so you have to kill the ground + get 'x' air kills to win.

[kireta21 795]

1 hour ago, DocProfit said:

They need to add an air kill component to the formula, so you have to kill the ground + get 'x' air kills to win.

It can be done by increasing amount of tickets so there's simply not enough GTs to win battle with groundpounding alone.

Deaths, crashes and J-outs would deplete tickets as well. This way air kills and ground kills would supplement each other in ticket bleed.

If battle drags for too long, game could still spawn additional GTs like it does in RB.

Edited October 25, 2016 by kireta21

[Saint_StuG 1,282]

I get the feeling that after 1.63 they start to last a little longer, but that might in part be due to the fact I play them less than before

[sidchicken 721]

 

This was depressing... climb to alt, start looking for a target... aaaaaand GG.

[DocProfit 2,663]

At this rate the average queue time is going to be longer than the average game time 

[sidchicken 721]

11 hours ago, DocProfit said:

At this rate the average queue time is going to be longer than the average game time 

The game above was the worst I've had to date - 4 or 5 minutes is typical for that BR (it was a 5.3-6.3 match).  If I'm playing just to play, and not trying to grind upgrades, I much prefer BR around 3.0.  Games tend to run longer thanks to less effective bombers.

[Teslakis 6]

18 hours ago, sidchicken said:

This was depressing... climb to alt, start looking for a target... aaaaaand GG.

 

But hey, thank God you won and got a good match bonus...

 

In all seriousness though, it might have something to do with the sales because many people might be doing wagers. Tbh I have had quite a few 8-10 min ground strikes recently at BRs over 5.0 which was extremely rare until a week ago. Or maybe it was just my good luck.

Edited October 28, 2016 by Teslakis

[Wundsalz 574]

On 10/25/2016 at 9:49 PM, DocProfit said:

3 wouldn't make much of a difference.

 

They need to add an air kill component to the formula, so you have to kill the ground + get 'x' air kills to win.

I'd rather have deaths draw a significant amount of tickets from the team in ground strike, assault and frontline. Having multiple different and unrelated win conditions for a game mode is silly.

 

On 10/24/2016 at 5:48 PM, Vectorize said:

 

Faced that Armanian squadron a couple times before,everytime atleast 2 of them immediately rush in Do-217's, the groundstrikes were over in less than 5 minutes. I've faced them once on a front line map, 3 of them had 10 or more deaths. The spam is real.

 What have those guys been doing? Even if I spam to win, I barely ever spawn all my planes (9 for US, 11 for Germans). Especially with Do 217 they should have been able to end the match within the first few minutes...