Spawn Campers: And You're to Blame

[OXidE 15]

On 07/04/2020 at 03:03, RyotNZ said:

 

This would likely play into the camper's hands more than anything. Here's why..

Great analysis RyotNZ. Thanks for sharing. Energy prevails.  

[OXidE 15]

On 09/04/2020 at 15:23, xxKUNG_FUxx said:

have you ever looked through the book, 'In Pursuit: A Pilot's Guide to Online Air Combat', by chance?

 

@xxKUNG_FUxx thanks for sharing this reference and recommendation to check out the guide. An [IIAC] member has read it and recommended it to our squad, as well. It is a worthy read indeed. 

If anyone can find and share a link to it  ... gratitude  

[Renamed248537853 582]

On 07/04/2020 at 09:03, RyotNZ said:

This would likely play into the camper's hands more than anything. Here's why...

 

Interesting. Since I, among other players, have already suggested adding extra spawn points as a means of reducing the spawn camping 'problem' in the Spawn Camping thread  and have as yet to see any decent arguments against it, I'm curious as to what yours might be...

 

On 07/04/2020 at 09:03, RyotNZ said:

Excluding cases where there are multiple campers working together, in most matches, the majority of a solo campers kills come from picking off fighters and attackers that are nosing up at... let's be kind and say "ambitious angles". A solo camper generally won't take the risk of diving directly into fighter spawn, as it is way too easy to get jumped by either multiple spawning fighters, or an attacker spawning above you. It's often a much safer approach to get the buffet carousel rolling, as I put it, where you pick off a bomber or a slow attacker, and then wait for them to respawn in a fighter and climb for you. Then, like lemmings, their team mates will often join in one by one, and before you know it, you have a steady diet of stalled planes that are trying to exact frothing revenge on you from a very disadvantageous position, and you can just pick them off at will, snacking on the occasional bombers that spawn while you wait for the smouldering wreckages of fighters to respawn.

 

Not really an argument to start with, but informative as a description of the general way a spawncamper operates. Let's continue...

 

On 07/04/2020 at 09:03, RyotNZ said:

In very rare cases, the carousel just won't get started, and no matter how much pretty pink smoke I run, very few players are interested in climbing for me, or they return to the hangar after one death. These are not fun matches to camp, as it generally forces me to take more risks, such as diving on spawn or leaving spawn altogether to focus on other targets, just in the hope of getting a reasonable kill tally by the end of the match.

 

Translation: as a spawncamper, I hate it when people go play with other people instead of me because I want all of the attention. Nothing irritates me more than being ignored.

I have to say though that  it's quite amusing to see someone talk about 'risks' in a video game... I shudder to think how scary real life must be then lol. But anyway, let's continue...

 

On 07/04/2020 at 09:03, RyotNZ said:

So in short, the primary determining factor in how many kills a camper gets per match is the general behavior of the enemy team - whether they take the bait, or whether they don't.

 

Technically this is correct, though it doesn't say much.

Basically, it comes down to the prime tactic spawn campers and their apologists use to defend spawncamping: shift the blame and accept no responsibility whatsoever. The fact that a spawncamper spawncamps is not the spawncamper's fault, it's everyone else's fault. One would almost think that a spawncamper has no free will and just has to spawncamp, he just can't help himself...

That said: it's not really an argument against adding extra spawn points but rather an argument in favor of it. After all: to be able to take the bait at all, the spawn has to be camped. And with multiple spawn points, there are now spawns that cannot be camped because one spawncamper cannot camp multiple spawns simultaneously. As a result; the players that spawn in spawn points aren't being camped cannot be baited.

Basically, adding spawn points comes down to addressing the root of the problem instead of the symptoms. By comparison: though it might be advisable to lock all your closets in your house so a thief can't steal anything, it's far more effective to make sure the thief cannot enter your house in the first place...

 

On 07/04/2020 at 09:03, RyotNZ said:

Having multiple spawns would embolden the camped team to climb more, not less.

 

 

Why? Like I have demonstrated above: you're not much of a threat or an annoyance to the players who spawn in a point you're not camping. So, less players being shot down when spawning > less players being irritated and wanting revenge >>> less players trying to climb to shoot you down. Quite logical, isn't it?

So again: adding extra spawn points the player can choose from when (re)spawning will be an effective cure against spawncamping.

 

On 07/04/2020 at 09:03, RyotNZ said:

Changing the in-game mechanics wouldn't fix this flaw in player behavior.

 

Yes it does, but not in the way you would like to see it. It fixes the player behaviour of those that are camped by fixing the player behaviour of those that camp.

It's completely logical: more spawn points >>> more players 'getting through' without being shot down in spawn >>> less reward for the spawncamper >>> less incentive to spawn camp. As simple as that.

No one will claim that adding extra spawn points will completely eradicate spawncamping, but then again: it doesn't need to. All it needs to do is make spawncamping so unrewarding that hardly anyone will put in the effort.

I'm quite sure that by adding spawn points and giving it some time so players can get used to it, spawncampers will become amusing instead of irratating, and instead of baiting players you will become a laughing stock. Soon enough, players will be laughing at that silly camper trying to get kills, flying fruitlessly from spawn to spawn, only to see players choose another spawn point when he arrives...

 

But let's be honest: of course you know all this, and that's why you are against this measure. The game in it's current state totally favors spawncamping, so why would you want any change? It's in your best interest to keep the current status quo and frame the situation in such a way that you can shift all the blame and responsibility to others and away from yourself.

 

If you are a spawncamper and think this change would benefit spawncamping, you would be all in favour of it....

Edited May 12, 2020 by Renamed248537853

[Kosher_Locust 120]

 

6 hours ago, Renamed248537853 said:

But let's be honest: of course you know all this, and that's why you are against this measure. The game in it's current state totally favors spawncamping, so why would you want any change? It's in your best interest to keep the current status quo and frame the situation in such a way that you can shift all the blame and responsibility to others and away from yourself.

 

I couldn't agree more, your post sums up all the reasons spawn campers are a problem for the game and can't be reasoned with, they only want to win and win big every time, and they are against anything that could take that away.

[Lexing_ 241]

3 hours ago, sfpeter68 said:

 

 

I couldn't agree more, your post sums up all the reasons spawn campers are a problem for the game and can't be reasoned with, they only want to win and win big every time, and they are against anything that could take that away.

Then how about removing respawns in AB air, would take away any kind of spawncamping whatsoever. Truth is, people are going to defend what they like and attack what they dislike, the real reason that this hasn't been addressed yet is because as a community we have yet to tell gaijin what we want. Whether for them to leave it alone or not, and if not, how to alter it.

[Renamed248537853 582]

On 13/05/2020 at 04:48, ____Lexing____ said:

Then how about removing respawns in AB air, would take away any kind of spawncamping whatsoever.

 

*sigh*

See, this is the kind of non-arguments spawncampers use in the Spawncamping Discussion. The objective is to scare people away from wanting any change by making it look as if they have to give up something valuable to get rid of spawncamping. Don't fall into this trap.

Though the statement might sound reasonable, in reality it's just nonsense. After all, no one would claim that the only solution to people dying in car crashes would be to stop using cars completely. Everyone realises that it will suffice to keep the number of accidents as low as possible by having safety measures, driving licenses, etc...

It's the same here: adding extra spawn points the players can choose from will turn spawncamping from an irritation to a very minor nuisance so we can keep the respawns while enjoying games without spawncamping.

No one asks for spawncamping being made completely impossible because this isn't necessary.

 

On 13/05/2020 at 04:48, ____Lexing____ said:

...the real reason that this hasn't been addressed yet is because as a community we have yet to tell gaijin what we want. Whether for them to leave it alone or not, and if not, how to alter it.

 

Well, actually the community IS telling Gaijin in the Spawncamping Discussion thread what they want. More even: they think constructively about changes that can be made to make spawncamping less of an issue.

It is quite telling though that it's a few spawncampers who keep trying to derail the discussion and be deconstructive by using silly arguments like the one above, changing the subject to Ground AB while you are clearly talking about Air AB, or simply make it personal by calling those who want change 'whiners' who just want the game to be 'dumbed down' and need to 'learn to play'...

Edited May 14, 2020 by Renamed248537853

[MasterBLB 3,764]

It is already very little nuisance, as spawncamping alone in Air AB does not much help to obtain objectives to win:

1) spawncampers don't share in pounding ground targets; they however help with destroying enemy bombers/attackers, or at very least pushing them to the low altitude where they can be intercepted by other team mates.

2) spawncampers don't help in capturing airfields in dominations.

3) spawncampers don't  help in air domination, as they are a way above the cap sphere, and the sphere is too close to the ground, below spawn point.

 

Also, spawncamper can be pretty easily avoided by fighters, a bit harder by attackers, and much harder by bombers (though still doable) by diving to the ground level just after respawn. Another point, spawncamping does not occur just because, it's a result of failed high altitude contest at the start of match - which is a perfectly valid tactics. For what the winner will use the won high altitude, be it spawn camping, or getting down to furball, or admiring the view from above, is up to them - but they have that choice because you allowed them. If you don't get it, neither you don't have skill to win the contest nor have wits to understand your fault you pathetic whiners deserve no better than be a frag donors. And the harder your butts will be kicked then perhaps the faster you'll learn how to prevent spawncamping, and that's the way - it is combat not babysitting, either git gud or be rekt.

[Renamed248537853 582]

54 minutes ago, MasterBLB said:

It is already very little nuisance, as spawncamping alone in Air AB does not much help to obtain objectives to win:

 

Irrelevant. The level of nuisance the spawncamper creates is not related to his helping or not helping win the objectives

 

54 minutes ago, MasterBLB said:

Also, spawncamper can be pretty easily avoided by fighters, a bit harder by attackers, and much harder by bombers (though still doable) by diving to the ground level just after respawn.

 

Spawncampers can be easily avoided by every type of plane by adding two or more spawn points from which the player can choose when (re)spawning. Prove me wrong.

 

54 minutes ago, MasterBLB said:

For what the winner will use the won high altitude, be it spawn camping, or getting down to furball, or admiring the view from above, is up to them - but they have that choice because you allowed them.

 

Translation: that Nigerian scammer took all your money because you allowed him. He absolutely cannot be blamed for anything.

('choice' is the keyword here)

 

54 minutes ago, MasterBLB said:

If you don't get it, neither you don't have skill to win the contest nor have wits to understand your fault you pathetic whiners deserve no better than be a frag donors.And the harder your butts will be kicked then perhaps the faster you'll learn how to prevent spawncamping, and that's the way - it is combat not babysitting, either git gud or be rekt.

 

Thank you for proving the point I made in my earlier post.

Why would it be that spawncampers react so agressively to any suggestion that might make it even a bit harder for them to spawncamp?

 

 

Edited May 14, 2020 by Renamed248537853

[Kosher_Locust 120]

On 14/05/2020 at 15:26, MasterBLB said:

For what the winner will use the won high altitude, be it spawn camping, or getting down to furball, or admiring the view from above, is up to them - but they have that choice because you allowed them. If you don't get it, neither you don't have skill to win the contest nor have wits to understand your fault you pathetic whiners deserve no better than be a frag donors. And the harder your butts will be kicked then perhaps the faster you'll learn how to prevent spawncamping, and that's the way - it is combat not babysitting, either git gud or be rekt.

Eyeroll....well wait, I need to put them back in, one rolled under the couch.

 

For one thing in AB most people aren't fighting as a team, and as spawn campers gleefully point out people do try to fight them, but almost always at an altitude disadvantage. In every game I played tonight there was at least one spawncamper, and in the one I left there were three. And no, I didn't get swatted, I saw what was happening and dived away, as that's about all you can do.  My entire side quit except for me and one other guy, and at the end they finally moved out into the playing field  and it was me against the three of them.  So I got "rekt," but put up a fight.  7 kills versus 8 (Wow!) deaths, while the top guy had maybe 9 kills on 3 deaths.  I guess I should take the Miracle Course at the Git Gud School of Flying.

 

On 14/05/2020 at 15:26, MasterBLB said:

It is already very little nuisance, as spawncamping alone in Air AB does not much help to obtain objectives to win:

1) spawncampers don't share in pounding ground targets; they however help with destroying enemy bombers/attackers, or at very least pushing them to the low altitude where they can be intercepted by other team mates.

2) spawncampers don't help in capturing airfields in dominations.

3) spawncampers don't  help in air domination, as they are a way above the cap sphere, and the sphere is too close to the ground, below spawn point.

 

No, they're not capturing arifields or air domination.  Their team mates are.  Made much easier by the spawncampers killing as much of the opposition as they can out the gate. Duh.  

Edited May 16, 2020 by sfpeter68
Typos

[Kosher_Locust 120]

On 12/05/2020 at 21:48, ____Lexing____ said:

Then how about removing respawns in AB air, would take away any kind of spawncamping whatsoever. Truth is, people are going to defend what they like and attack what they dislike, the real reason that this hasn't been addressed yet is because as a community we have yet to tell gaijin what we want. Whether for them to leave it alone or not, and if not, how to alter it.

 

They'd call it Realistic Lite, then.  It's also a straw man argument; the "fix" is to take away one of Arcade's biggest appeals, as we can't have fun if you can't have fun.  I can't remember if it was you or another camper fan who was insisting nearly any fix (Mine's was always have people spawn at a higher altitude than a nearby enemy aircraft) just couldn't work because it would be impossible or unrealistic to program it.  War Thunder can keep track of 18 or more planes through a game, one change in spawn altitude can't be done?  But no, excuses, denial, drink that Kool-Aid.

 

People are letting Gaijin know, but their interest in doing something about is probably economic, thinking it's better to have addicted players coming in over and over to get their "fix" while more casual players lose interest and quit, never mind the addicted ones are causing them to quit.  It's very similar to the Call of Duty games where broken mechanics like quick scoping and lag compensation were used to get an edge.  I can remember for a while there people were actively sabotaging their routers to get a high ping....solely to score better.  

 

And as for this whole "you like what you like, whatever it is, I like this" argument, it goes back to what I said the other day. Most of us play the game, and practically never get into arguments with other players.   However if people are messaging you how mad they're getting, even your own team mates, and before team killing was blocked you said campers would pre-emptively shoot down their own team mates just to keep that high score, and the opposing team is quitting because of you, then who's got the problem?

[Pope_Shizzle 4,180]

Spawn camping only happens one of two ways.  (1) One team refuses to contest it or (2) one team wins the right to camp.  In the case of the former, shame on the team that refuses to fight for the high ground.  In the case of the latter, just rewards from a hard won fight.  There is a huge advantage to having the high ground.  It's worth fighting over.  Just like you cant force people to play the objectives or bomb the tanks single handedly taking control of a runway, you can't force people to climb if thats not how they get their enjoyment. 

[Kosher_Locust 120]

On 07/04/2020 at 02:03, RyotNZ said:

It's often a much safer approach to get the buffet carousel rolling, as I put it, where you pick off a bomber or a slow attacker, and then wait for them to respawn in a fighter and climb for you. Then, like lemmings, their team mates will often join in one by one, and before you know it, you have a steady diet of stalled planes that are trying to exact frothing revenge on you from a very disadvantageous position, and you can just pick them off at will, snacking on the occasional bombers that spawn while you wait for the smouldering wreckages of fighters to respawn.

 

The first time I ever brought up spawn camping on these forums it was two of your squadron mates, and you leapt in to defend your "Illustrious" squadron...and here you are giving a lecture on how much fun it is to spawn camp.  And the last time I saw you it was in something like a BR 3 match and you were the one camping.  

 

On 07/04/2020 at 02:03, RyotNZ said:

In very rare cases, the carousel just won't get started, and no matter how much pretty pink smoke I run, very few players are interested in climbing for me, or they return to the hangar after one death. These are not fun matches to camp, as it generally forces me to take more risks, such as diving on spawn or leaving spawn altogether to focus on other targets, just in the hope of getting a reasonable kill tally by the end of the match.

 

Yeah, it's not as much fun when zooming from a safe altitude to pounce on players rather than get out in the field, but how else could you get 15 or more kills on zero deaths and just tell yourself you're a gaming God even if the only way you can get those scores is by camping.

 

On 07/04/2020 at 02:03, RyotNZ said:

So in short, the primary determining factor in how many kills a camper gets per match is the general behavior of the enemy team - whether they take the bait, or whether they don't.

 

Excuse me, I had to go and tape my ribs as I was laughing so much.  If a spawn camper decides he won't lose enough altitude he'll pounce on the players "not taking the bait," as the only defense it to dive away.

 

On 07/04/2020 at 02:03, RyotNZ said:

Having multiple spawns would embolden the camped team to climb more, not less. And given that spawn points practically couldn't be located very far apart, the only difference I would expect to see as a camper is 2-3 smaller streams of stalled planes pointing up towards me, rather than one large one. This is safer for the camper, as I can just deal with one queue at a time, knowing that I have a bunch of other planes at a non-threatening distance on "stall-waiting", as I call it, trying to climb in low energy states, just waiting to be picked off.

 

Tell me all about it, Sunshine.  Any fix will either be impossible or embolden you more. Since I'm sadistic I'd really like campers to get some punishment, like their planes got into auto reload if they shoot in spawn or each spawn camp kill is actually a negative number, but fat chance of that happening.  How about this: making blacklist mean you not only never hear from them but also are never put in a match with them again (How about THAT as a fix?)  No programming fixes, no changing the mechanics, you just gradually get booted off the island.  I mean just imagine spawncampers finding they have to wait longer and longer to ever see a match.....

 

SLAP and 100 are the squadrons I've tangled with who basically ruin matches over over...and oh the irony I get chewed out in chat and next week the guy doesn't even remember me. That must be a lot of arguments.  However barring Gaijin doing something I can just boycott.  Blacklist anyone from SLAP or 100, also set them to ignore in the forums, and anytime I see them in a game turn around and quit.  I don't care what that does to my score and you won't get fun out of me.  My personal actions would only help me, but hey, you never know I may start a trend......

Edited May 15, 2020 by sfpeter68
Clarifying my insult

[_TasteTheRainbow 95]

19 minutes ago, sfpeter68 said:

The first time I ever brought up spawn camping on these forums it was two of your squadron mates, and you leapt in to defend your "Illustrious" squadron...and here you are giving a lecture on how much fun it is to spawn camp.  And the last time I saw you it was in something like a BR 3 match and you were the one camping.  

 

I've never denied that my squadron members, myself included, spawn camp. Our philosophy is to not enforce play styles, and that includes not prohibiting tactics that are explicitly deemed acceptable by the game developers. I'd be interested to see where you think I said otherwise.

 

22 minutes ago, sfpeter68 said:

Yeah, it's not as much fun when zooming from a safe altitude to pounce on players rather than get out in the field, but how else could you get 15 or more kills on zero deaths and just tell yourself you're a gaming God even if the only way you can get those scores is by camping.

 

I've had plenty of games with 15+ kills away from spawn. In fact, I have a video coming soon where I got 19 while also playing CAS. Make sure you are subscribed to me on YouTube!  

 

26 minutes ago, sfpeter68 said:

Tell me all about it, Sunshine.  Any fix will either be impossible or embolden you more. Since I'm sadistic I'd really like campers to get some punishment, like their planes got into auto reload if they shoot in spawn or each spawn camp kill is actually a negative number, but fat chance of that happening.

 

Why should the game mechanics be changed, just because you haven't figured out how to counter a particular play style? If you want to punish better players, then learning to play better yourself is probably the most productive avenue.

 

28 minutes ago, sfpeter68 said:

How about this: making blacklist mean you not only never hear from them but also are never put in a match with them again (How about THAT as a fix?)  No programming fixes, no changing the mechanics, you just gradually get booted off the island.  I mean just imagine spawncampers finding they have to wait longer and longer to ever see a match.....

 

Again, why should you be allowed to easy-mode the game and cherry-pick your opponents? All that would do is drive skilled players away from the game.

 

Air arcade is a PvP game mode, not a safe space. If you can't cut it against other players who are using legitimate tactics, then there are PvE modes like Assault Air Arcade, which may be more your style.

 

32 minutes ago, sfpeter68 said:

SLAP and 100 are the squadrons I've tangled with who basically ruin matches over over...and oh the irony I get chewed out in chat and next week the guy doesn't even remember me. That must be a lot of arguments.  However barring Gaijin doing something I can just boycott.  Blacklist anyone from SLAP or 100, also set them to ignore in the forums, and anytime I see them in a game turn around and quit.  I don't care what that does to my score and you won't get fun out of me.  My personal actions would only help me, but hey, you never know I may start a trend......

 

Good luck with that  

[_TasteTheRainbow 95]

On 13/05/2020 at 05:13, Renamed248537853 said:

Translation: as a spawncamper, I hate it when people go play with other people instead of me because I want all of the attention. Nothing irritates me more than being ignored.

I have to say though that  it's quite amusing to see someone talk about 'risks' in a video game... I shudder to think how scary real life must be then lol. But anyway, let's continue...

 

I think you are confusing "risk" with "fear". Many games and sports require players to assess and figure out the percentage play (highest reward for lowest risk).

 

A high-risk behavior in War Thunder would be going nose up at a camper when you spawn, for example, which is why good players who understand risk don't regularly die to spawn campers.

 

On 13/05/2020 at 05:13, Renamed248537853 said:

Technically this is correct, though it doesn't say much.

Basically, it comes down to the prime tactic spawn campers and their apologists use to defend spawncamping: shift the blame and accept no responsibility whatsoever. The fact that a spawncamper spawncamps is not the spawncamper's fault, it's everyone else's fault. One would almost think that a spawncamper has no free will and just has to spawncamp, he just can't help himself...

That said: it's not really an argument against adding extra spawn points but rather an argument in favor of it. After all: to be able to take the bait at all, the spawn has to be camped. And with multiple spawn points, there are now spawns that cannot be camped because one spawncamper cannot camp multiple spawns simultaneously. As a result; the players that spawn in spawn points aren't being camped cannot be baited.

Basically, adding spawn points comes down to addressing the root of the problem instead of the symptoms. By comparison: though it might be advisable to lock all your closets in your house so a thief can't steal anything, it's far more effective to make sure the thief cannot enter your house in the first place...

 

Spawn camping is within the rules of the game, and has been explicitly defined as such by the game masters. The only "blame" you could assign is to those who made the rules, if you think they are unfair. But ultimately, how you feel about the rules is irrelevant, and certainly not the fault of other players who abide by them, no matter how much it upsets you. At the end of the day, you implicitly agreed to the same rules when you decided to play it.

 

On 13/05/2020 at 05:13, Renamed248537853 said:

Why? Like I have demonstrated above: you're not much of a threat or an annoyance to the players who spawn in a point you're not camping. So, less players being shot down when spawning > less players being irritated and wanting revenge >>> less players trying to climb to shoot you down. Quite logical, isn't it?

So again: adding extra spawn points the player can choose from when (re)spawning will be an effective cure against spawncamping.

 

Because like I explained in my original post, your average player does not properly understand how energy works. And yes, camping does annoy people and make them want to climb for revenge. So having multiple spawn points would encourage people who might have otherwise thought better of it, that they can "sneak up" on the camper, when in reality, they will likely run out of energy long before they get to the camper's altitude, and the same results will ensue, just over a slightly larger area.

 

On 13/05/2020 at 05:13, Renamed248537853 said:

Yes it does, but not in the way you would like to see it. It fixes the player behaviour of those that are camped by fixing the player behaviour of those that camp.

It's completely logical: more spawn points >>> more players 'getting through' without being shot down in spawn >>> less reward for the spawncamper >>> less incentive to spawn camp. As simple as that.

No one will claim that adding extra spawn points will completely eradicate spawncamping, but then again: it doesn't need to. All it needs to do is make spawncamping so unrewarding that hardly anyone will put in the effort.

I'm quite sure that by adding spawn points and giving it some time so players can get used to it, spawncampers will become amusing instead of irratating, and instead of baiting players you will become a laughing stock. Soon enough, players will be laughing at that silly camper trying to get kills, flying fruitlessly from spawn to spawn, only to see players choose another spawn point when he arrives...

 

But let's be honest: of course you know all this, and that's why you are against this measure. The game in it's current state totally favors spawncamping, so why would you want any change? It's in your best interest to keep the current status quo and frame the situation in such a way that you can shift all the blame and responsibility to others and away from yourself.

 

If you are a spawncamper and think this change would benefit spawncamping, you would be all in favour of it....

 

I'm not opposed to the idea because I think it will cure spawn camping. I'm opposed to it because it won't work for the reasons I've explained already. If they announced they were implementing it tomorrow, I would still play as normal, as I expect that nothing would fundamentally change.

Edited May 15, 2020 by RyotNZ

[Lexing_ 241]

1 hour ago, sfpeter68 said:

 

SLAP and 100 are the squadrons I've tangled with who basically ruin matches over over...and oh the irony I get chewed out in chat and next week the guy doesn't even remember me. That must be a lot of arguments.  However barring Gaijin doing something I can just boycott.  Blacklist anyone from SLAP or 100, also set them to ignore in the forums, and anytime I see them in a game turn around and quit.  I don't care what that does to my score and you won't get fun out of me.  My personal actions would only help me, but hey, you never know I may start a trend......

Dehumanizing your enemy is how you get accepted by your community, but in the process you also lose any way of understanding your enemy and their perspective. I've talked with people who disagree, and I used to hate campers until I saw Long5hot's youtube and found out that the best way to perform well in a fighter consistently is to put pressure on climbing opponents. Again, shooting up opponents isn't fun for them, but it's fun for the person doing the shooting. If you don't agree with this statement, then you shouldn't be playing an online mmo game at all. There is no way you can avoid someone entirely, everyone will somehow interact with everyone else on this planet indirectly, whether it's through friends, connections, the internet, etc etc. The point is your attitude in this game is what prevents you from having fun in matches where you are constantly being swatted around. Thinking that other players are ruining matches for the sake of ruining matches is foolish, cause we're supposed to shoot at each other. End of the day though, it all comes down to how you think about an online society, whether to learn from others or get mad cause "They ruin me experience they no skill hurr durr".

[MasterBLB 3,764]

I just say one last thing - try to join the "Dark Side of the Force", and preform a spawncamping on your own. You'll realize it's not as easy as it seems by n00bs, and perhaps from your failures you'll learn ways to prevent it for the future. Though considering your whinning attitude, unlikely.

[Stahlvormund101 12,039]

2 hours ago, MasterBLB said:

I just say one last thing - try to join the "Dark Side of the Force", and preform a spawncamping on your own. You'll realize it's not as easy as it seems by n00bs, and perhaps from your failures you'll learn ways to prevent it for the future. Though considering your whinning attitude, unlikely.

Spawncamping is not as easy as one usually thinks... but also not at all as hard as it is portrayed here either. I have been there.
I mean, it literally is all about giving yourself an energy advantage over an enemy by default.

Actually duelling an enemy on even or disadvantageous terms even and turning them around takes much more skill.

[MasterBLB 3,764]

Whinners keep to skip most important factors:

1) spawcamp to occur requires altitude advantage over spawn, and it is gained by contest for high altitude dominance at the start of match. Even most skilled players won't hold up alone against 5 or more enemies simultaneously, even if they have worse planes as long as they are not total flying potatoes.

2) spawncamping fighters spawn point without support is hardly doable, as fighters come into play with considerable amount of energy, not big enough to reach an enemy over bombers' spawn altitude, but certainly enough to keep up with one flying just over fighters' entry point; while one freshly spawned fighter might not be enough, next ones have pretty good chance to destroy/push away the spawncamper if they decide to join the fight immediately. Not to mention most attackers, and quite few bombers are also able to deal with enemy below then while these planes have initial energy reservoir, and they enter into play over such enemy.

[Renamed248537853 582]

18 hours ago, RyotNZ said:

I think you are confusing "risk" with "fear". Many games and sports require players to assess and figure out the percentage play (highest reward for lowest risk).

 

It's funny you mention 'fear' because indeed I think there is a distinct sense of 'fear' driving the spawncamper's actions: if anything, a spawncamper is probably more afraid of getting shot down than any other player because it will hurt his stats. That's one reason why a spawncamper generally doesn't respawn when being shot down: he knows he can no longer have the advantage so he rather takes his ball and goes home...

 

18 hours ago, RyotNZ said:

Spawn camping is within the rules of the game, and has been explicitly defined as such by the game masters. The only "blame" you could assign is to those who made the rules, if you think they are unfair. But ultimately, how you feel about the rules is irrelevant, and certainly not the fault of other players who abide by them, no matter how much it upsets you. At the end of the day, you implicitly agreed to the same rules when you decided to play it.

 

Ah yes, I was already expecting the 'I can do it because daddy said it's OK'-argument. It usually pops up as a last resort. A few things on that:

To begin with, rules are not set in stone for eternity. They are fluid, and can be changed over time. And there are precedents to this: for instance the bomber spam, that was addressed. The 'jumping out to deny kill' problem that has been complained about for literally years and Gaijin never felt it needed to be addressed until about half a year a go it finally was. Gaijin is a company and needs to create revenue. If for any reason Gaijin might realise that spawncamping might hurt its revenue, be it in monetary form or players leaving as a result of spawncamping, it will be addressed.

And I'm sure you, like many other spawncampers, know this, and for this reason react so emotionally and often agressively (just look at MasterBLB foaming at the mouth below) to any suggestion for this rule to be changed. The fear of a toy being taken away is really palpaple sometimes...

Funny anecdote about this: about a year ago Gaijin implemented a mechanic which made you partially lose control of your plane when your pilot was hit. Who do you think were the most vocal in their objections, complaining that it was 'unfair' and had 'no place' in the game? Indeed, it was the spawncampers: if rules disadvantage them they apparently SHOULD change. This didn't surprise me at all, because the campers reacted exactly as predicted, as least as far as I was concerned.

Apart from that though, your remark is irrelevant because adding extra spawn points will in no way make spawncamping impossible so it doesn't break this rule that's so precious to you.

 

18 hours ago, RyotNZ said:

Because like I explained in my original post, your average player does not properly understand how energy works. And yes, camping does annoy people and make them want to climb for revenge. So having multiple spawn points would encourage people who might have otherwise thought better of it, that they can "sneak up" on the camper, when in reality, they will likely run out of energy long before they get to the camper's altitude, and the same results will ensue, just over a slightly larger area.

 

This is of course all conjecture, not in the least because you contradict yourself: you earlier stated that you actually had to 'bait' players to get the 'carrousel' going.

Logic however dictates that if there are more spawnpoints, there are more players that can spawn without being baited and thus have no reason to 'sneak up'. Why on earth would you want to climb up to that silly player that's flying from empty spawn to empty spawn and being no threat whatsoever? Let him fly, he's just too funny....

 

18 hours ago, RyotNZ said:

I'm not opposed to the idea because I think it will cure spawn camping. I'm opposed to it because it won't work for the reasons I've explained already. If they announced they were implementing it tomorrow, I would still play as normal, as I expect that nothing would fundamentally change.

 

Well, like I explained above; you might be terribly disappointed.

Just makes one wonder though why you put so much effort in trying to counter a suggestion that would make make no difference to you when it was implemented....

 

18 hours ago, ____Lexing____ said:

...and I used to hate campers until I saw Long5hot's youtube and found out that the best way to perform well in a fighter consistently is to put pressure on climbing opponents. Again, shooting up opponents isn't fun for them, but it's fun for the person doing the shooting.

 

1 - Did Long5shot put pressure on climbing opponents above the spawn?

2 - Do you think the amount of 'not being fun' when shot down is the same when it happens in the spawn or when it happens during a dogfight? In other words: is it possible that people care less about being shot down when dogfighting than when shot down right after spawning?

Take your time and think carefully...

 

18 hours ago, ____Lexing____ said:

End of the day though, it all comes down to how you think about an online society, whether to learn from others or get mad cause "They ruin me experience they no skill hurr durr".

 

You mean like MasterBLB here who I can only imagine typing while foaming at the mouth and gritting his teeth?

 

14 hours ago, MasterBLB said:

I just say one last thing - try to join the "Dark Side of the Force", and preform a spawncamping on your own. You'll realize it's not as easy as it seems by n00bs, and perhaps from your failures you'll learn ways to prevent it for the future. Though considering your whinning attitude, unlikely.

 

Thanks but no thanks. Judging from your comments and others', spawncamping apparently makes me more likely to become angry, aggressive and frustrated.

There are many things a high kill count cannot compensate for...

Edited May 15, 2020 by Renamed248537853

[Kosher_Locust 120]

51 minutes ago, Renamed248537853 said:

Thanks but no thanks. Judging from your comments and others', spawncamping apparently makes me more likely to become angry, aggressive and frustrated.

There are many things a high kill count cannot compensate for...

 

Thanks for offering insightful and thoughtful replies on this without getting drawn into the spawncamper's rage and giving it back to them, as I end up doing more than I'd like.

 

As with all video games it's a balance between enjoying something that is engaging and interesting, and can be an investment in time and money, versus being drawn into some people's monolithic thinking, approach, and desire apparently just to argue for spite. I'm making the right choice by disengaging, blacklisting and just walking away from any spawncamper, and maybe some day Gaijin will pay attention to the years long complaints about this.

[_TasteTheRainbow 95]

5 hours ago, Renamed248537853 said:

It's funny you mention 'fear' because indeed I think there is a distinct sense of 'fear' driving the spawncamper's actions: if anything, a spawncamper is probably more afraid of getting shot down than any other player because it will hurt his stats. That's one reason why a spawncamper generally doesn't respawn when being shot down: he knows he can no longer have the advantage so he rather takes his ball and goes home...

 

Most campers return to hangar after they die because win rate is not important to us. Why respawn in a second-choice plane, when you can hangar and take your first-choice plane again in a fresh match?

 

5 hours ago, Renamed248537853 said:

Ah yes, I was already expecting the 'I can do it because daddy said it's OK'-argument. It usually pops up as a last resort. A few things on that:

To begin with, rules are not set in stone for eternity. They are fluid, and can be changed over time. And there are precedents to this: for instance the bomber spam, that was addressed. The 'jumping out to deny kill' problem that has been complained about for literally years and Gaijin never felt it needed to be addressed until about half a year a go it finally was. Gaijin is a company and needs to create revenue. If for any reason Gaijin might realise that spawncamping might hurt its revenue, be it in monetary form or players leaving as a result of spawncamping, it will be addressed.

And I'm sure you, like many other spawncampers, know this, and for this reason react so emotionally and often agressively (just look at MasterBLB foaming at the mouth below) to any suggestion for this rule to be changed. The fear of a toy being taken away is really palpaple sometimes...

Funny anecdote about this: about a year ago Gaijin implemented a mechanic which made you partially lose control of your plane when your pilot was hit. Who do you think were the most vocal in their objections, complaining that it was 'unfair' and had 'no place' in the game? Indeed, it was the spawncampers: if rules disadvantage them they apparently SHOULD change. This didn't surprise me at all, because the campers reacted exactly as predicted, as least as far as I was concerned.

Apart from that though, your remark is irrelevant because adding extra spawn points will in no way make spawncamping impossible so it doesn't break this rule that's so precious to you.

 

This is quite a straw-man argument. I've never said that spawn camping will always be within the rules of the game. But for now, it is, so I and my squad mates who choose to, will continue to do it.

 

The reality is that there is no obvious way to mitigate against it in air AB, without the measures implemented either being totally ineffective, or adversely impacting on other styles of play. This is why the spawn camping forum topic is well over 120 pages long, and no consensus has been reached on how you would prevent it.

 

As for spawn campers being emotional and aggressive, I do find that quite funny. I have hundreds of screenshots of rage messages, ranging from the usual low-brow name-calling all the way up to death threats - many from people that I played with back when I was a ground-pounder  Conversely, I haven't met a single rager in the spawn camping community - in fact, they are overwhelmingly very kind people. So I am afraid that assertion just doesn't stand up to my own experience.

 

5 hours ago, Renamed248537853 said:

This is of course all conjecture, not in the least because you contradict yourself: you earlier stated that you actually had to 'bait' players to get the 'carrousel' going.

Logic however dictates that if there are more spawnpoints, there are more players that can spawn without being baited and thus have no reason to 'sneak up'. Why on earth would you want to climb up to that silly player that's flying from empty spawn to empty spawn and being no threat whatsoever? Let him fly, he's just too funny....

 

Yes, you bait a couple of players up, kill them, and then they (once respawned), and their team mates who watched them get mauled, jump on the lemming express - until the camper dies, they all die, or the match ends. People are not going to suddenly become more disciplined about their energy management and quell their thirst for vengeance, just because there are multiple spawn points.

 

Let's also not forget that having two spawn points would likely just encourage campers to squad more than solo, so you would just see one or two campers covering each spawn. This would increase the chance of a spawner bring killed by a camper, since there would be less targets at each spawn to hide in, and more campers per match. How would you mitigate against this?

 

5 hours ago, Renamed248537853 said:

Well, like I explained above; you might be terribly disappointed.

Just makes one wonder though why you put so much effort in trying to counter a suggestion that would make make no difference to you when it was implemented....

 

I don't have a vested interest in whether it is implemented or not. My whole point is that it would not take much for a camper to adapt to it, so its neither here nor there for me.

Edited May 16, 2020 by RyotNZ

[WalterZoomie 50]

Buncha snowflakes up in here got lots of participation trophies.

[Renamed248537853 582]

17 hours ago, RyotNZ said:

Most campers return to hangar after they die because win rate is not important to us. Why respawn in a second-choice plane, when you can hangar and take your first-choice plane again in a fresh match?

 

Well, backup behicles are quite easy to get for free nowadays but of course it's a bonus that in a fresh match there are no players waiting for you. It's an interesting explanation though but I'm quite sure you wouldn't like it if everyone acted like you, would you? Let others take the risk of respawning, right?
Talking about risk: everyone should take note of this statement. It shows that if you have a spawncamper in your team and want to win the match, he's a liability, not an asset...

 

17 hours ago, RyotNZ said:

This is quite a straw-man argument. I've never said that spawn camping will always be within the rules of the game. But for now, it is, so I and my squad mates who choose to, will continue to do it.

 

And nor have I ever claimed that you said that. But you could have deducted that my proposal didn't need any 'rule' about spawncamping to be changed. So again: why even mention it?

 

17 hours ago, RyotNZ said:

The reality is that there is no obvious way to mitigate against it in air AB, without the measures implemented either being totally ineffective, or adversely impacting on other styles of play. This is why the spawn camping forum topic is well over 120 pages long, and no consensus has been reached on how you would prevent it.

 

How strange then that ever since it was first suggested, no one - you included - has been able to demonstrate how adding two or more extra spawn points will NOT be totally ineffective and WILL adversely impact the game. The fact that the spawn camping topic is 120 pages long has in part to do with it dealing about spawncamping in general, Ground Forces included. But it's also due to a small group of spawncamping(apologists) who do their very best to derail every constructive comment by posting non-arguments, obfuscation, or simple derogatory comments. Once again I need to emphasize the fact that spawncampers do not want any change because the current status quo benefits them. But even then: the outright fear of any change that might take away their advantage, their precious toy...it's palpable.
However, it is important to acknowledge that there IS a discussion. No one in his/her right mind will expect a totally 100% solution and it is only logical that things take time to change. After all, it took Gaijin years to address the 'bail out to deny kill' problem but eventually action was taken.
The mills might grind slowly, but they grind exceedingly fine...

 

17 hours ago, RyotNZ said:

As for spawn campers being emotional and aggressive, I do find that quite funny. I have hundreds of screenshots of rage messages, ranging from the usual low-brow name-calling all the way up to death threats - many from people that I played with back when I was a ground-pounder  Conversely, I haven't met a single rager in the spawn camping community - in fact, they are overwhelmingly very kind people. So I am afraid that assertion just doesn't stand up to my own experience.

 

 

I have no doubt that you get a lot of rage messages. But to be honest, I'd consider you socially handicapped if you didn't at least expect them. And if you were really honest, you would say that you like it this way. After all, spawncamping feeds off negativity; you need to get people annoyed and angry enough to climb up to you. It is of course no surprise that some spawncampers even flaunt their hate mail...
The flip side to this is of course that it is highly unlikely that people who need to instigate negativity in order to reach their goals, have a very positive attitude in life. The fact that you call your 'fellow' spawncampers 'kind' doesn't say much: after all we tend to look more positively towards those of our own ilk. I'm quite sure that KKK-members will consider those in their group to be good and kind persons. You just don't see the other side because you haven't been on the receiving end of it.
I have conversed with these 'overwhelmingly kind people' often enough, in the game and outside of it. It started - as always - with a lot of hubris and edginess. But the more I pierced through their weak justifications of spawncamping, and the moment I held up the mirror to them, the masks fell off and the insults came quickly enough. Together with the death and **** threats. Of cours in game they'd use a second account because that's how courageous they are....as expected.

17 hours ago, RyotNZ said:

Yes, you bait a couple of players up, kill them, and then they (once respawned), and their team mates who watched them get mauled, jump on the lemming express - until the camper dies, they all die, or the match ends. People are not going to suddenly become more disciplined about their energy management and quell their thirst for vengeance, just because there are multiple spawn points.

 

It doesn't have so much to do with discipline as with getting people to grips with certain game dynamics. Currently, a player chooses the plane to spawn in, and that's it. If a player chooses a plane, but then has to actively look at the mini-map to choose his spawn, his attention will automatically be drawn to the red dot that's present there and he will be able to take corrective action before spawning. Give it a few months after implementing and suddently, by the prices of salt dramatically dropping, players will notice that the 'thirst for vengeance' can be quenched by just choosing a spawn that's not being camped. After that, there will be laughter...the camper that used to be an irritation becomes a laughing stock. And after that, spawncampers will be simply ignored...plenty of more interesting things in the game that deserve attention.

 

17 hours ago, RyotNZ said:

Let's also not forget that having two spawn points would likely just encourage campers to squad more than solo, so you would just see one or two campers covering each spawn. This would increase the chance of a spawner bring killed by a camper, since there would be less targets at each spawn to hide in, and more campers per match. How would you mitigate against this?

 

First off: I suggested adding two or more spawn points, so there would be at least three. However, there's no need to mitigate because the spawncamper's greed will take care of this. Just ask the question: why should spawncampers need to team up when there are multiple spawnpoints? Why don't they do it now? Simple: spawncampers don't want competition: they want as many kills as possible for themselves. And even if - in the very rare case when they team up - they will get less kills than they got in the current situation. It just won't be worth it and only the very desperate or bone-headed will keep on trying. Sorry, not a convincing argument.

 

17 hours ago, RyotNZ said:

I don't have a vested interest in whether it is implemented or not. My whole point is that it would not take much for a camper to adapt to it, so its neither here nor there for me.

 

Well to be honest you didn't make a point because - like I've just pointed out - you failed to prove it. As such, you have stated only an opinion. Which is perfectly OK of course.
But if it's 'neither here nor there' for you I suspect you'd want to end your participation here...unless you would like to argue for the argument's sake of course.

In the mean while, I keep waiting for anyone who can demonstrate how adding two or more spawn points the player can choose from will NOT have negative impact on spawncamping while at the same time having no negative effect on gameplay. It seems however, that this solution is able to conserve its energy very well and no spawncamper has been able to shoot it down..

21 hours ago, sfpeter68 said:

I'm making the right choice by disengaging, blacklisting and just walking away from any spawncamper, and maybe some day Gaijin will pay attention to the years long complaints about this.

 

Which is perfectly reasonable and OK. You're perfectly justified in choosing who you do or do not want to play with and don't let anyone tell you otherwise.
Without wanting to be derogatory, it's best to see a spawncamper as a scammer. Like a scammer he will want to incite certain emotions in you in order to prey upon. Put it in the spam box, forget about it, and move on. You win by not playing his game.

 

 

Edited May 16, 2020 by Renamed248537853

[_TasteTheRainbow 95]

1 hour ago, Renamed248537853 said:

Well, backup behicles are quite easy to get for free nowadays but of course it's a bonus that in a fresh match there are no players waiting for you.

 

You're not addressing my original point - why bother bringing a backup or a second-choice plane when you can just join a fresh match?

 

1 hour ago, Renamed248537853 said:

It's an interesting explanation though but I'm quite sure you wouldn't like it if everyone acted like you, would you? Let others take the risk of respawning, right?

 

Unlike you, I don't care how other people choose to play the game.

 

1 hour ago, Renamed248537853 said:

Talking about risk: everyone should take note of this statement. It shows that if you have a spawncamper in your team and want to win the match, he's a liability, not an asset...

 

Not really. Even if I die and leave a match, chances are, I have already made more of an impact than 90% of my team who are mindlessly furballing in zero-sum engagements.

 

1 hour ago, Renamed248537853 said:

And nor have I ever claimed that you said that. But you could have deducted that my proposal didn't need any 'rule' about spawncamping to be changed. So again: why even mention it?

 

You presented a counter-argument to your own and debunked it as though it was my position. That's called a straw-man argument.

 

1 hour ago, Renamed248537853 said:

How strange then that ever since it was first suggested, no one - you included - has been able to demonstrate how adding two or more extra spawn points will NOT be totally ineffective and WILL adversely impact the game. The fact that the spawn camping topic is 120 pages long has in part to do with it dealing about spawncamping in general, Ground Forces included. But it's also due to a small group of spawncamping(apologists) who do their very best to derail every constructive comment by posting non-arguments, obfuscation, or simple derogatory comments. Once again I need to emphasize the fact that spawncampers do not want any change because the current status quo benefits them. But even then: the outright fear of any change that might take away their advantage, their precious toy...it's palpable.
However, it is important to acknowledge that there IS a discussion. No one in his/her right mind will expect a totally 100% solution and it is only logical that things take time to change. After all, it took Gaijin years to address the 'bail out to deny kill' problem but eventually action was taken.
The mills might grind slowly, but they grind exceedingly fine...

 

I've provided plenty of reasons why the multiple spawns option, along with the other suggestions in that topic, would not be tenable. It's pretty arrogant to dismiss opposition to your position as "non-arguments, obfuscation, or simple derogatory comments" without reasoned arguments, particularly given that you do not spawn camp yourself, and therefore only have a limited perspective on the topic.

 

1 hour ago, Renamed248537853 said:

I have no doubt that you get a lot of rage messages. But to be honest, I'd consider you socially handicapped if you didn't at least expect them.

 

Excusing verbal abuse (which is actually against ToS, unlike spawn camping) by blaming the target of it for the rager's actions is a pretty morally repugnant position to hold. Would you universalize this position of yours to real life scenarios?

 

1 hour ago, Renamed248537853 said:

And if you were really honest, you would say that you like it this way. After all, spawncamping feeds off negativity; you need to get people annoyed and angry enough to climb up to you. It is of course no surprise that some spawncampers even flaunt their hate mail...

 

Other people's reactions to my play style are not my concern. Although if people are going to become verbally abusive over a video game, I don't see an issue with laughing at them  

 

1 hour ago, Renamed248537853 said:

The flip side to this is of course that it is highly unlikely that people who need to instigate negativity in order to reach their goals, have a very positive attitude in life. 

 

Like most of your "arguments", just more baseless and irrelevant conjecture.

 

1 hour ago, Renamed248537853 said:

You just don't see the other side because you haven't been on the receiving end of it.

 

No, I have been on the receiving end of it, and instead of whining about how the rules need to be changed to accommodate my lack of ability and poor situational awareness, I applied myself to becoming a better player  

 

Can you stop making baseless and incorrect assumptions about my position and experience? It really isn't constructive to the discussion, and it just makes you look like you don't know how to have a mature conversation.

 

1 hour ago, Renamed248537853 said:

It doesn't have so much to do with discipline as with getting people to grips with certain game dynamics. Currently, a player chooses the plane to spawn in, and that's it. If a player chooses a plane, but then has to actively look at the mini-map to choose his spawn, his attention will automatically be drawn to the red dot that's present there and he will be able to take corrective action before spawning. Give it a few months after implementing and suddently, by the prices of salt dramatically dropping, players will notice that the 'thirst for vengeance' can be quenched by just choosing a spawn that's not being camped. After that, there will be laughter...the camper that used to be an irritation becomes a laughing stock. And after that, spawncampers will be simply ignored...plenty of more interesting things in the game that deserve attention.

 

Players can already look at the mini-map before and when they spawn and see the camper if there is one present. Judging by the number of players who just fly straight, and do not take evasive action when engaged, it seems the majority of them do not use this function as it is. So again, player behavior (situational awareness, in this case) will not improve by changing game mechanics.

 

1 hour ago, Renamed248537853 said:

First off: I suggested adding two or more spawn points, so there would be at least three.

 

Unless there are more than 4, a full squad can still cover them. Or is your suggestion that there should be 5 or more spawn points?

 

1 hour ago, Renamed248537853 said:

However, there's no need to mitigate because the spawncamper's greed will take care of this. Just ask the question: why should spawncampers need to team up when there are multiple spawnpoints? Why don't they do it now? Simple: spawncampers don't want competition: they want as many kills as possible for themselves. And even if - in the very rare case when they team up - they will get less kills than they got in the current situation. It just won't be worth it and only the very desperate or bone-headed will keep on trying. Sorry, not a convincing argument.

 

Spawn campers regularly fly in squads already - why do you think most of us are in squadrons?

 

1 hour ago, Renamed248537853 said:

Well to be honest you didn't make a point because - like I've just pointed out - you failed to prove it.

 

Just because you didn't understand the point, does not mean the point was not made.

 

1 hour ago, Renamed248537853 said:

But if it's 'neither here nor there' for you I suspect you'd want to end your participation here...unless you would like to argue for the argument's sake of course.

 

You are right - this is the point where I will be disengaging from the discussion with you. My intention in this thread was to provide an insight into the issue from the often under-represented position of a spawn camper, not to rebut personal insinuations and debunk false conjecture. Your mind is quite clearly made up, and since you will not engage in a way that is mutually respectful and constructive, engaging with you further would be pointless.

Edited May 16, 2020 by RyotNZ

[Lexing_ 241]

27 minutes ago, Renamed248537853 said:

Well, backup behicles are quite easy to get for free nowadays but of course it's a bonus that in a fresh match there are no players waiting for you. It's an interesting explanation though but I'm quite sure you wouldn't like it if everyone acted like you, would you? Let others take the risk of respawning, right?
Talking about risk: everyone should take note of this statement. It shows that if you have a spawncamper in your team and want to win the match, he's a liability, not an asset...

I for one would love to see arcade remove respawns. As I have said before it is the simplest, least linear way to solve the problem. But no, some people like respawns, I get it, but if you respawn you subject yourself to the physics engine of the game again, which means your new plane can die as soon as your new plane loses spawn protection, regardless of where you are on the map. 

 

31 minutes ago, Renamed248537853 said:

And nor have I ever claimed that you said that. But you could have deducted that my proposal didn't need any 'rule' about spawncamping to be changed. So again: why even mention it?

 

If you don't need something to be against the rules to bombard the person doing it with cuss words and death threats, I wouldn't think rules would change that. When they inevitably find something else to exploit, complaints will pop up again due to how many people refuse to admit that such elementary concepts such as potential and kinetic energy has any place in a flight simulator.

33 minutes ago, Renamed248537853 said:

How strange then that ever since it was first suggested, no one - you included - has been able to demonstrate how adding two or more extra spawn points will NOT be totally ineffective and WILL adversely impact the game. The fact that the spawn camping topic is 120 pages long has in part to do with it dealing about spawncamping in general, Ground Forces included. But it's also due to a small group of spawncamping(apologists) who do their very best to derail every constructive comment by posting non-arguments, obfuscation, or simple derogatory comments. Once again I need to emphasize the fact that spawncampers do not want any change because the current status quo benefits them. But even then: the outright fear of any change that might take away their advantage, their precious toy...it's palpable.
However, it is important to acknowledge that there IS a discussion. No one in his/her right mind will expect a totally 100% solution and it is only logical that things take time to change. After all, it took Gaijin years to address the 'bail out to deny kill' problem but eventually action was taken.
The mills might grind slowly, but they grind exceedingly fine...

My purpose was never to demonstrate how adding two spawn points would be detrimental to the game. The reason the spawn camping topic is 120 pages long and counting is not what you think, rather being a culmination of people constantly throwing arguments around without adding anything substantial.  Again, the people who "spawn camp" are usually the best of pilots, being able to shoot down multiple players while maintaining awareness of exactly where everyone in their vicinity is. I don't think anyone here really understands what sorry state this game is in. Kudos to Gaijin, I'm sure they're trying their best to balance this game, but sometimes fall short because of the demands we place on them. For example, the spawn points make it that the airfield AAA that was supposed to protect freshly spawned players useless, because Gaijin had to address that by nerfing their accuracy due to a growing strain of people who were complaining that AAA was shooting them down 6-10 km away, or 4-7 miles for you freedom loving patriots. This however made spawncamping infinitely easier as now you could venture down to 1.5 km and you would still be relatively safe if no fighter pounced on you. Same with the 'J-out to deny kill' problem you mentioned, as solving it meant that if you crashed into someone else after being critted they would still get credit, which increased the number of suicide headons. Honestly though I expect that nothing will change in the near future unless Gaijin does something, as energy was and will continue to be the single most powerful deciding factor in any aerial engagement.

59 minutes ago, Renamed248537853 said:

 

I have no doubt that you get a lot of rage messages. But to be honest, I'd consider you socially handicapped if you didn't at least expect them. And if you were really honest, you would say that you like it this way. After all, spawncamping feeds off negativity; you need to get people annoyed and angry enough to climb up to you. It is of course no surprise that some spawncampers even flaunt their hate mail...
The flip side to this is of course that it is highly unlikely that people who need to instigate negativity in order to reach their goals, have a very positive attitude in life. The fact that you call your 'fellow' spawncampers 'kind' doesn't say much: after all we tend to look more positively towards those of our own ilk. I'm quite sure that KKK-members will consider those in their group to be good and kind persons. You just don't see the other side because you haven't been on the receiving end of it.
I have conversed with these 'overwhelmingly kind people' often enough, in the game and outside of it. It started - as always - with a lot of hubris and edginess. But the more I pierced through their weak justifications of spawncamping, and the moment I held up the mirror to them, the masks fell off and the insults came quickly enough. Together with the death and **** threats. Of cours in game they'd use a second account because that's how courageous they are....as expected.

Even if something you do enrages someone else, that still does not excuse the fact that there are real people behind those online accounts that can feel pain the same way you do. I'm still struggling with the fact that I might not be able to see any of my distant relatives ever again due to the tensions between Uncle Sam and China. I have been on the receiving end of spawncamping, and I have gotten mad before, but quelling the desire for revenge and instead going somewhere else for kills. I knew that the second I committed myself to become the most efficient fighter pilot I could be there would be people who hate me, as only fighters have the capability to repeatedly shoot down other planes. 

Regarding if someone who instigates negativity to reach their goals is negative in life, this is a damned video game. We're supposed to shoot at other planes for enjoyment. That's the whole point of this game. Yes I will concede that we tend to look more positively towards our own kin, however that doesn't excuse negativity at others for playing differently. I don't use an alt, never have, never will. I want my bad days to influence me in my decisions and analyze replays to better myself, not to blame my bad day on someone who outplayed me.

1 hour ago, Renamed248537853 said:

It doesn't have so much to do with discipline as with getting people to grips with certain game dynamics. Currently, a player chooses the plane to spawn in, and that's it. If a player chooses a plane, but then has to actively look at the mini-map to choose his spawn, his attention will automatically be drawn to the red dot that's present there and he will be able to take corrective action before spawning. Give it a few months after implementing and suddently, by the prices of salt dramatically dropping, players will notice that the 'thirst for vengeance' can be quenched by just choosing a spawn that's not being camped. After that, there will be laughter...the camper that used to be an irritation becomes a laughing stock. And after that, spawncampers will be simply ignored...plenty of more interesting things in the game that deserve attention.

Again, discipline comes with time, and it never can be truly mastered. However, assuming people will pick this up this would have some effect, but not enough to discourage camping. If anything, I would say that this would make spawn camping and aerial control more important than now, as being able to lock down all three spawns is automatically a huge advantage to the team. Regarding ignoring campers, good luck doing that. With how people play right now, not even bothering to check their surroundings even after they spawn, spawnkilling will probably become even easier as you don't need to commit to the risk of the entire team going after you, rather only 1-3 persistent opponents.

 

1 hour ago, Renamed248537853 said:

First off: I suggested adding two or more spawn points, so there would be at least three. However, there's no need to mitigate because the spawncamper's greed will take care of this. Just ask the question: why should spawncampers need to team up when there are multiple spawnpoints? Why don't they do it now? Simple: spawncampers don't want competition: they want as many kills as possible for themselves. And even if - in the very rare case when they team up - they will get less kills than they got in the current situation. It just won't be worth it and only the very desperate or bone-headed will keep on trying. Sorry, not a convincing argument.

I don't think you've ever managed to talk to a spawncamper in a constructive manner. What I personally want is for a few fighters to have such an impact that it decides the outcome of the match. I'm perfectly content to play bait at 6.0 in a J2M2 for my K4 buddies. I want competition for kills, that way I'm not left alone when I get myself into a bad spot. Your judgement that "it won't be worth it" is actually contradictory, as having multiple spawns would also make locking down spawns even more ludicrous and even more valuable than now. For example, a three man squad of campers can effectively block any attempt at climbing from the three spawn points. What's more, if people continue rage climbing, even if there's 5 spawn points three or even two campers can effectively create a barrier that allows bombers to traverse above safely. If anything, adding multiple spawnpoints would make games even more lopsided.

1 hour ago, Renamed248537853 said:

Well to be honest you didn't make a point because - like I've just pointed out - you failed to prove it. As such, you have stated only an opinion. Which is perfectly OK of course.
But if it's 'neither here nor there' for you I suspect you'd want to end your participation here...unless you would like to argue for the argument's sake of course.

In the mean while, I keep waiting for anyone who can demonstrate how adding two or more spawn points the player can choose from will NOT have negative impact on spawncamping while at the same time having no negative effect on gameplay. It seems however, that this solution is able to conserve its energy very well and no spawncamper has been able to shoot it down..

Again, you fail to see that this will have some effect on gameplay, some positive, some negative. Even now most of my kills come at around 3-4 km away from the spawn, not directly in it. Realistically the spawns can't be more than 3-4 kilometers apart, which means that some very energy-intensive planes such as P-47Ds can be used to BnZ through all three spawns at once, which brings up the question, why would you need multiple spawns in the first place when it just gives the spawn campers more chances to kill more planes. I could see the solution working if everyone understood that they had to use free look to look for threats, but as of right now I just don't think it would do much.

 

1 hour ago, Renamed248537853 said:

Which is perfectly reasonable and OK. You're perfectly justified in choosing who you do or do not want to play with and don't let anyone tell you otherwise.
Without wanting to be derogatory, it's best to see a spawncamper as a scammer. Like a scammer he will want to incite certain emotions in you in order to prey upon. Put it in the spam box, forget about it, and move on. You win by not playing his game.

Again, choosing who you play with is only going to limit your view as a player. I would advise to look at spawncampers and see how they play in order to counter them. Only by studying your opponent will you succeed in defeating them. Knowledge is power.