Thread 2137073

Devs refuse to implement the surrender button because Russians never surrender.

Tools:
>https://ba-hub.net/ - laggy but with detailed player and match statistics
>https://barmory.net/ - detailed unit stats and 1v1 unit combat simulation tool

Previous: >>2113255

The thread died a natural death, just let it be. There is nothing left to discuss since the devs are not doing shit and all the discussion we can have has run it's course

What are the good planes in the VDV spec?
All of them look really overpriced to me

>>2137126

All of them? They are the elite of Russian planes.

Su-35S is a pure Air Superiority Fighter. It has. It has a lot of AA missiles.

Su-34 is an excellent bomber.

Su-30SM is a powerful fighter bomber/missile truck

Su-57 is a deadly stealth fighter.

Mig-35 is a versatile multirole and SEAD plane.

>>2137153
Russian air stealth sucks balls compared to US air stealth. US air stealth is 1.75, RU air stealth is 1.25. This means US can sneak comfortably into AMRAAM range to unleash its load, while RU gets spotted well beyond R-77 range making it no better than a regular fighter at air superiority, gaining only a marginal advantage against 9k range missiles.

Still no 1vs1 matchmaking? No buy.

>>2137126
The Su-57 is the goat. Meta loadout is 2 cruise missiles and 2 sead. CMs are cluster and 2 will gib any tank, and are fast and accurate enough to snipe moving targets. Since they have extra range you complete your whole strike without getting close enough for radar to see you, and the sead is just a bonus.
Su-34 can run a KAB-1500 with 2x sead and gets a free laser designator so it's a good general purpose strike. The KAB will oneshot a tank if you laser its top armour and can still kill infantry, while the seas missiles just help it survive long enough to drop its bomb.

>>2137393
I'll give the devs a max of two dev updates until they stop following through

>>2137443
>What is this anon talking about? The SU-34 doesn't have any KAB-1500 mounts? Only KAB-500
>Oh, there's a barely visible fucking scroll bar I never noticed
epic

>Want to play BA
>realize it'd just be an effort in frustration playing against endless Cherno and cruise missile spam
>Don't want to play BA anymore
>
>
>Want to play BA

>>2137496
play warno :)

>>2137447
If they don't post something in the next few hours then they can't even say they've adhered to it in even the most extremely charitable sense.

A bunch of retarded euros didn't like me saying infantry was bad in the beta and started insulting me in the BA discord. I responded in kind and they immediately started crying to the admins. Self righteous faggot from slytherine permabanned (I think? Can't remember) me because I mocked them for whining to the admins.
And before you say I was probably spamming nigger, no, they literally were calling me an idiot and I responded calling them fucking morons. That was the interaction.

Anyway the point of the story is that it makes me so happy that this shit is failing.

>>2137507
Today's news is that the news is delayed to Monday
Lmao

>>2137496
The chemotherapy is just to play Stryker/SF, pack an absolutely fucking loaded inf tab full of Dragoons and all the best infantry in the game and treat them as expendable tokens while your air tab with 4x F-35As does all the work for you. It costs them 60pts to fire those super fast meta cruise missiles so it's barely breaking even hitting an 80pt Ranger squad and they're losing far more than that pt difference throwing units just to get vision or fix you long enough to land the strike. Just don't give them expensive targets to make their missiles worth it.

>Infantry spam?
JDAM it
>Barbaris, tank, IFV spam
JDAM it
>Katrans
Watch where they resupply and JDAM them on it

I'd actually argue right now that Stryker/SF is stronger than the meta RU shit but just harder to pilot. The same latency and sync issues that make cruise missiles uninterceptible also make it so that a laggy F-35 can perform its entire strike and rtb without appearing on radar, and if they pull up an ASF loiter to try and counter the stealth spam you can just bully it off the field with an F-22. As a bonus you might even catch their Tupalev out. People get caught up trying to play a conventional slow armour roll and obsessing over trying to counter uncounterable cruise missiles but this is just not a slow armour roll meta. We're in an "abuse the bad netcode with unstoppable airstrikes" meta and ground forces need to be light, mobile, cheap and dispersible.

>>2137653
It's cute how you stryker-cucks are only now figuring out that SF gets completely unblockable backline strike capability facilitated by their stealth and their unassailable, utter and complete air dominance. I've been telling you this since the release day of the game. Wait until you figure out how Stormbreaker stealth-multi-striking works. Then you'll be wiping entire backlines in a single bombing run. SF is literally playing a different game from every other spec in the game. Their first and foremost directive, above all else, is to infiltrate sniper-teams into the enemy backline (by using silent hawks flanked by commanches) to scout out high priority targets for stealth planes to bomb. You have tools at your disposal to deal with every counter-measure to this strategy (including low-flying drones). Once the enemy backline is down, you have free reign to rape the frontline with whatever helicopter / plane / artillery you so please. Or you can just cart MAAWS+Pararescue AMPVs around to roflstomp anything that gets close enough.

https://steamcommunity.com/app/1604270/discussions/0/599662719724093686/
AHAHAAHA
AHAHAHAHAHAHAH
AHAHAH AHAHAHAHAHA AHAHAHA
SUB-5K DAILY PEAKS SOON BROTHERS

>>2137753
>we are going to post weekly updates
>stumbles and falls flat on their face right out of the gate
This is the BA I know. I don't think they have ever delivered anything on time.

>>2137753
>We're a little late, see you on Monday
Fucking kek

>>2137653
And then you just start getting subtlehacked. Every plane magically fails to chaff off any missiles, that TOS was either magically pre-aimed at your infantry, or he just had a cheeky faster aiming time. Your scouts just """"""""happen""""""""" to be discovered by a lone BTR beelining for them. Artillery never lets up because they restock at 300% speed, and they just plain have +100 more income than you. The game is just an effort in frustration.

>>2137857
Don't forget the cheeky +xx% ECM for planes and helis :) dumping 9 stingers into a Ka-52 and not killing it is perfectly normal gweilo, don't stress it

>>2137928
I actually tested this. Offline, the average number of stingers fired to kill a ka-52 is 8. Sometimes it's way more or way less, but the mean is 8. Ping makes that worse.
Stinger platforms are basically worthless as SHORAD. As the US the only good way to kill helis is to close within 1000m and autocannon them to death. No hacks are necessary here, Stingers are just worthless.

why play US when you can play RU?

>>2137496
Just play Russia
You don't even have to spam cruise missiles

>>2137928
>dumping 9 stingers into a Ka-52 and not killing it is perfectly normal gweilo, don't stress it
Very cute that you underestimate how hard this game sucks off Russian snowflake units. The Ka-52 is just retarded tanky. I honestly think it's almost a good thing that the Coastal Ka-52 is so braindead with cruises because if I had to deal with people actually using it with is magic super missiles I think I'd lose my mind.
>>2137948
To be fair, the stinger isn't actually bad. It's just that it's only a regular manpad missile, and the US these days just doesn't field any of the sort of mid-sized missiles that form the bulk of your anti-helo AA in this subgenre. Even if other factions are added this would probably remain a notable weakness of theirs.
It IS the dev's fault that the Ka-52 has 30 fucking armor, the TOR and Pantsir are overtuned as fuck, and SPAAGs are retardedly short range though.

>>2138017
>To be fair, the stinger isn't actually bad
The stinger IS bad. The reason all US SHORAD platforms use it is because IRL it's enough. This idea that the workhorse anti-helo missile can't hit helos and can't hurt them if it hits them because "muh blast frag, motherfucka" is purely vatnik cope meant to give a justification for obsolete cold war SAM systems to get a second life in this game as helo-hunters.

In game all infantry-carried manpads have too little pen, which basically makes their damage a decimal point at the edge of their blast radius against 'armoured' helis. SHORAD has a bad habit of detonating prematurely, scoring an AoE hit for minimum damage instead of scoring an actual hit. The practical result is that their direct hit rate is much lower than the ECM/flare effect of the enemy would suggest and most of their damage comes from AoE hits. But MANPADs usually AoE at 30m for 0.6 damage while the 'bigger' missiles with larger blast radius' and twice as much pen will detonate at 30m and still 3-shot a plane.

This pen issue only exists so that RU helis which have armour protecting them from small arms after flying into a hundred ambushes in afghanistan make sense in a game where you don't normally fly into small arms range.

>>2138069
Essentially every other military fields middleground air defense vehicles like the russians, anon. The reason that the US considers the stinger "good enough" is in no small part an expectation of complete aerial superiority and thus few enemy air assets (which is a fair expectation realistically) alongside ballistic anti-air being more than enough against helos in the real world.
>But MANPADs usually AoE at 30m for 0.6 damage
This is hyperbole. You can shoot down choppers with them, the problem is that it's unreliable and not fast enough even in the best case from SHORAD. Hitting them with the same cost worth of on-foot MANPADs will take down chopper reasonably reliably.
>In game all infantry-carried manpads have too little pen...
>This pen issue only exists so that RU helis...
Every single unit in this game is far tankier than it should be, if your problem is realism. The Helo-AA interaction just plays out worse than most.

What loadout should I use for the Su-34?

>>2138154
See >>2137443.
You can also load it with the big Air-to-Grounds, fly low, and lase tanks in theory.
Really though you shouldn't be thinking "what should I take on this plane" you should be thinking "what plane can deliver the weapons I want best". Planes are ultimately just weapons delivery platforms for the most part, kind of excepting stealth planes.

>>2137590
>>2137753
kek, -1 to the dev update count
Monday's update will be the last consistent one and then they'll go back to posting shit whenever they feel like

is the game good yet?

>>2137091
I cant believe such a promising game is getting drowned in a shallow puddle with blitheringly incompetent post-release support.
This could have been their golden goose and they're fumbling it like pocket change lost in the backseat of a soviet era taxi.

>>2138493
Lol no, check back in 6-18 months, and dont buy without at least a 50% discount

>>2138498
We're just in mourning. It's all part of the process.

I think they will eventually recover and start making good updates. However, this is going to be a very rough several months while they are fucking around learning how to do their job. Probably only the die-hard niggers will remain at which point they will have to start fighting to win back their casual audience all over again.

>>2138541
They have the Chinese faction up their sleeve, there's gonna be a huge resurgence in popularity once they drop it.
Obviously not gonna happen until 2026, so devs have time to figure things out.

>>2138541
The causal audience is already gone. They will not been reporting. That ship has sailed weeks.

>>2138546
>Figure things out
It took them four years to figure nothing out

>>2138541
It won't get better, anon.
Personally the game would be fine for me if it just had a fucking leaver penalty and surrender option. If they get that shit out they can fuck off for all I care. But it does leave me gobsmacked that they had record-breaking player levels on their launch week and could have made this into one of those forever games where paypigs buy skins and DLC every month but they managed to crater not only their player numbers but literally all of the good will the playerbase had in the span of a few months. Making a good-enough game is fucking hard; keeping players from hating you while they've got a good-enough game in had is fucking easy.

French and russians working together are capable of levels of incompetence and self-sabotage the rest of us could only dream of.

Nothing like dropping from 1760 elo to 1580 in a series of matches where your team quits before end of phase 2. I wish I knew any1 who plays this game. This is so fucking bad.

>>2138541
What make you think there will be a good updates despite the fact they havent release one since open beta almost a year ago?

>>2138541
>I think they will eventually recover and start making good updates
By that point they will have lost all of the regular players. The game will be filled with nothing but sweaty lobbies, which is not fun to play, and thus it will not resurge. Either you support games like this from start to finish, maintaining and fostering a healthy community, or you leave it to rot for a few months and then it dies. The devs did the latter.

>>2138925
Nobody was ever going to play a game like this for more than a week or two that isn't "sweaty" but the definition of someone like you.
But more broadly, Wargame maintained an ever returning playerbase of middle level players for like 15 years, and we haven't just all gone away. It's not like Warno is stepping up to the plate or anything else can scratch this subgenre's very specific itch.

>>2138993
wargame's balance issues are also even more frustrating than this game's a lot of the time
like fighting invincible russian orc vehicles is obnoxious but i definitely dont want to go back to getting 100000 atgms that oneshot m1a1s to the front shot at me every time i leave smoke

>>2138993
how people can argue wargame is better than warno, i'll never know. you have to be deadset in your ways, so there's no point even arguing.

>>2139006
I don't think anything in Wargame was nearly as obnoxious as cruise missile spam but we also haven't had to deal with that for like five years without a balance patch. Longbows still give me PTSD even in this game.
>>2139007
Personally I can just never get past the division system. It just left so little room for the kinds of armorycrawling and theorycrafting that was Wargame's backbone for me. Each division very much had a preset playstyle, a limited set of good units and basically built itself, baring some optimization. Broken Arrow satisfies that desire much better with the ability to mix two divisions.

But more generally, the point wasn't that Wargame was better or worse than Warno, it's that the playerbase for all three games is gonna stay around. And to an extent that I'd still rather play BA even in its current state than either of those in 2025 overall.

>>2139014
broken arrow maps are also way bigger than wargame maps so theres a lot less "f-15/buratino blankets literally the entire attack corridor in boom boom and wipes your push" even with the 16 cruise missile spammer or whatever

>>2139014
i think the removal of the phase system from the steel division series hurt the theorycrafting, but i still think theres a good amount of variation you can get in a decent amount of divs.
every game will have its meta units to pick though, and it's hard to get around it.

>>2139016
Yeah, though assets coming back can kind of enable more obnoxious support play in not entirely dissimilar ways. You have to worry far less about suiciding a plane if you aren't down it for the rest of the match. I think that's gonna be a problem regardless of balance of the day here. Even if you kill the Ka-52 somehow, they're just gonna get it back, etc.
>>2139017
>every game will have its meta units to pick though, and it's hard to get around it.
Yeah, obviously, but for me it's about having incentive to play around and outside the meta via different decks and conditions. Having the freedom to chose a random minor or a different coalition or an unusual spec and trying to make it work. It gives you a lot more ground to explore units, both in strength and weaknesses. Or to chose decks with a wider breadth of units that's more freeform to build. There's nothing in either Warno or BA that's quite like the variety you got in a spec Blufor unspec Soviet deck in Wargame.

In BA there's at least some of this. Even if specops is meta and has some busted units, there's four different things it can be paired with which recontextualizes your unit choices.

dont worry guys
broken arrow 2 will be good

You know, I think you could literally double all weapon ranges in the game and nothing would be hurt. Maybe some changes around the airgame but for ground / helo combat? It'd be completely fine and feel far better.

>>2139123
The ranges are already surprisingly long. I don't think people realize just how far 2km actually is in game, helicopters are basically flying artillery. Most ground units never actually fight at their max range because the sightlines just aren't wide enough.

>6/6 of the game lost today purely because at least 2 (usually 3) people quit before whase 2 even ended
This is not a playable product. Sad that Steam wont issue a refund for this reason

>>2139228
Yes.

The issue with Wargame / WarNo is the limited supplies you have to work with. It makes no sense whatsoever that a massive wide front would go completely without any means of calling in external supplies. Broken Arrow's "you can call in as much supplies as you need but you pay for them" is a much better system. It lets you actually use the pieces at your disposal, rather than sitting on them waiting for the enemy to run out of supplies / units.

Similarly, the unit trickle-back in Broken Arrow makes a lot more tactics (like meat waves) possible. A game of Broken Arrow isn't over until the score board shows, a game of Wargame / WarNo might as well be over once you lose your "queen". This leads to overly conservative gameplay and artillery slap-fights rather than actual engagements. More realistic? Maybe. More fun? Hell no. These games shine when you're having city-wide close-quarters shootouts.

>>2139282
if we were being realistic there wouldn't even be a real engagement until one side had a comical 2 or 3 to one numbers advantage because thats how real war works

>>2138546
That will be the final nail in the coffin for them. It will be a resurgence of chinese players, which is not good for everyone else. A horde of new cheating chinks will also push out any non chinese that are remaining.