Install Steam
login
|
language
简体中文 (Simplified Chinese)
繁體中文 (Traditional Chinese)
日本語 (Japanese)
한국어 (Korean)
ไทย (Thai)
Български (Bulgarian)
Čeština (Czech)
Dansk (Danish)
Deutsch (German)
Español - España (Spanish - Spain)
Español - Latinoamérica (Spanish - Latin America)
Ελληνικά (Greek)
Français (French)
Italiano (Italian)
Bahasa Indonesia (Indonesian)
Magyar (Hungarian)
Nederlands (Dutch)
Norsk (Norwegian)
Polski (Polish)
Português (Portuguese - Portugal)
Português - Brasil (Portuguese - Brazil)
Română (Romanian)
Русский (Russian)
Suomi (Finnish)
Svenska (Swedish)
Türkçe (Turkish)
Tiếng Việt (Vietnamese)
Українська (Ukrainian)
Report a translation problem
Discussions Rules and Guidelines
Report this post
Adding points for troops deployed/extracted would probably be the easiest and quickest way to correct the balance.
Good scouts are rare and imortant. Giving them higher rewards is good to attract players. Everyone can fly transport. So giving the simpler role less rewars kind of make sense.
Anyway, I would not complain if it would change. But reward points in general are no problem at all in this game.
this is true for people that already have everything unlocked, sadly it does not apply to everyone else thus you end up with teams of all attack and scouts because nobody wants to be stuck being the transport which wouldnt be a issue if the game simply didnt have any transport missions....
this has absolutely nothing to do with the point at hand, i feel like trump tweeted this at this point....
Everyone can fly a scout how much skill does it take to fly around mashing the spot key all the time? At this point im increasingly sold this is a Trump tweet....
In conclusion.... Trump is playing heliborne.....
If you fly a russian, you can even kill everything with it.
And you are telling me it takes a lot of skill to take your transport (lets go with a CH53 as it has no armament besides some gunners), fly to a point (deploy your mortars first),land and RTB while your gunners are killing stuff in between and watch the scouts giving you the points from your mortar teams? Generally you have tons of health to really take a beating. If you do not make enough points flying transports, than you are doing it wrong.
As a scout, you get points from spotting. A few have a very limited infantry load that could get you some points and some have a limited weapon load to get some points. But you are a glass cannon. Way harder to survive in a scout than in any other heli (at least when you have a higher difficulty). And to spot, you need to get close enough to be at risk while the AT choppers just shoot from far away and the transport waits for the AT to do the work or let the gunners kill the infantry.
If a good player gets more points while flying a transport or AT, why would he fly a scout? So you want to give the scouts the rewards to encourage good players to play them and help the team. A crappy scout player is actually a disadvantage and he will make more points flying transport or AT. And everybody can do that.
It took me less than 50 hours to unlock everything... so what are you complaining about?
I should know, I fly transports a lot.
The OP is discussing dedicated transport helicopters with limited ordnance on board.
It takes time, and, more importantly, lets the rest of the team do the "fun" part of the game which you do the brunt workhorse tasks.
This is blatantly wrong. Makes me wonder if you have much experience flying transports in the first place.
Damage in Heliborne, especially on higher tiers, racks up very fast. On Gen iV, a single LVT can drop you under 3 seconds if they manage to focus you, and heavy transports don't move that well. Incoming fire is a real danger to them, more so than any other type of a bird.
Clearly you're not playing the same game as I, and I have been playing it for a long, long time.
Your spotting nets you noticeably more points in a quick span of time than a transport heli will get spending several minutes capturing and reinforcing LZs. If you do not (to borrow from your parlance), you're playing scouts wrong.
Also, a lot of them have sufficient firepower to take out soft targets. Just because it's 7.62mm doesn't mean you can't sit outside AA range and clear out emplacements. That's assuming you're not supporting attacking gunships by painting targets for them, or using mortars for even more points.
Wrong again. Mobility and smaller hitbox in Heliborne offers much more survivability than a heli's durability. Because once you start getting hit, you'll probably keep on taking damage.
Scouts have the added advantage of much earlier threat detection system courtesy of automated longer-range enemy detection.
No, it's not, whether it's PVP or Coop.
I'm not even going to belabor such basic facts of game mechanics.
No, you don't. You can easily spot from way outside any fire (SPAA or AA, much less vehicles). Particularly since you can paint targets with "mortar spotter" magnification, whether mortar teams are deployed or not.
Sounds like you really don't know what you're discussing.
They don't. It's not possible, at all, and arguing otherwise is really making me question how much experience you have with the game.
A crappy "anything" player will get fewer points than a good "anything" one. Even if the crappy player flies a gunship.
Irrelevant to the scope of the discussion.
The point remains that a transport player has much lesser ability to earn points than somebody flying either a scout or a gunship. This has been the case since EA, and I've argued several times already for point changes to make transports more viable choice for players who do need to unlock things.
Deploying a soldier on an LZ should give you points per soldier, not just set amount for landing. Capturing and LZ wouldn't hurt to give 5 points more, either.
As noted already, you get no points for deploying ammo or repair crates, and you should. It takes time to get them in place, and you should be getting decent amount of points for every teammates that uses them. Preferably based on % durability restored (in case of repair crates) and "ammo points" reloaded, rather than set amount per repair/rearming.
Flying a transport already takes away from a lot of the "fun" parts of the game (pew-pewing and blowing things up, or sneaking around in a scout). It's far less engaging for the most part, and the least transport players could get from it in return is some decent amount of points comparable to flying other, much more "fun," heli types.
About the only thing that can give transport player some similar level of point gain is mortar squadron, and that depends on teammates using them (or flying a scout yourself, which is inapplicable to the specific scope of this discussion). While you're flying mortar-heavy to deploy them, you're not capping points, either.
tl;dr version: Transports absolutely have much lower point gain rate than other helis. If you think otherwise, you either don't play them, or are not paying attention to it.
So I leave you as pro-player to you opinion. You have yours, I have mine. And as you already said, flying transport takes away the fun for you and there are more fun helicopters... why don't you simply fly those and be happy.
Again, the whole point is that compared to other bird types, transport helis have the lowest amount of point gain for the time investment a player has to make.
If you're talking Coop, then flying scouts or gunships isn't all that much more dangerous, unless you're dumb enough to strafe fully defended LZs without the skill to clear them on that one go. Coop particularly encourages hanging back and clearing from safe distance completely outside AA range - there are no enemy players to surprise you. So there's no particular reason why the other two classes should get more points, all the while being a far more engaging experience - transports have to do their (boring) work, too, and often in more dangerous conditions than either scout or gunship, that can either spot or clear enemy presence that much faster.
In PvP, transports are essential. Heavy transports are pretty much sitting ducks, too, especially once you hit Gen III where ATGMs become primary engagement weapons. Meanwhile you don't get kill points (on either ground or air targets), and the points you do get from doing the work that actually wins the match (boots on the ground, brah) are laughable in comparison to what you can score with the other two archetype classes.
And yes, I am pretty damn certain I have far more experience with this game than you, because that's true for all but a handful of Heliborne players.
But I never see a lack of transport in a game - so, no issue there. Actually for some maps, there is more TPT flying around than needed. So a lack of rewards can not be a major issue.
I have always a lineup of 1x TPT, 1x AT and 1x Scout. I select what is needed and not what gets me most points. So I play everything and not only one role and most players do that. So everybody flies TPT for a while and has the chance to scout for a bit. Again, no issue there.
I do actually fly primarily TPT and scouts. Although currently my most played Heli is the CH53. Do I have less fun for getting a bit less points? no!
And I do this since I play Heliborne. I find it quite enjoyable to fly, land and drop of some troops.
As I said, progression in this game is so fast anyway that progression is and was never an issue.
Although I have to agree with you that transporting the ammo and repair crates should be more rewarded, however, players would simply lift already deployed crates and drop them again just to get the rewards. This would be abused so hard that I totally understand why it does not give you more rewards than the good feeling that you help out your team.
Points when another player arms/repairs at a crate you moved, is a good idea. Again, there shouldn't be too much work for the devs as the mechanism already exists in the way mortar and recon support is rewarded.
Although it's not straightforward to do, the missions could be more interesting too. Too many of them translate as "move troops to/from X" and we do enough of that anyway.
If the current "move a crate to X" objective was adapted to "set-up a FARP in the marked area", it would be a more interesting objective, promote co-operation and reward a vital job that benefits the whole team.
Getting a FARP up is perhaps the second most important job for anyone playing transport and at the moment we do it for free!
Someone else suggested adapting the "rescue downed pilot" objective: instead of being random, when one of your teammates get shot down, you have to rescue them.
so lets say landing 4 crates = 4 consecutive ATGM kills. time invested in these tasks is massively different.
normal duo game start for me and Valkyrie, I spawn my HH with 32 mortar troops, pick up ammo and head to our FOB field. he spawns a AH or scout and clears 2 hostile bases and does the 1st mission. by the time he is done, I have dropped the crate and mortars gone back for 32 normal dudes and the 2nd crate for the FOB. once I drop the crate I go capping the points he cleared.
thats when I switch to scout for missions.
at this point in time who has earned more point do ya think. just in ATGM (16 shots if you do it right) thats 4x20 points and badges just on bonus. not counting kill points. where I get 8 maybe 12 points for capping points and hopefully 10 points from mortars IF he takes a scout. meanwhile he suckles at the tiet of my FOB the entire game.
yes transporting could be more rewarding and deffo have more depth. but in the end even with me doing it I unlocked most of what I needed and wanted out of a tree in a few hours of play. next week most the russian will be unlocked even tho I have no interest in playing them. its far from holding me back, like say warthunder does. I know its a bit of an apples and oranges comparison but still.
that said tweaking the current mission reward can't be a hard thing.
here comes the derailment of the topic,
honestly I would much more like them to add the workshop. so we can add maps missions and other fun stuff. I doubt the devs will keep developing this game for much longer ( that comment is based on zero facts, I don't know anything that's just my opinion) , workshop should give the game some longer legs.
and I don't know why the tone in this thread went so agro. there is no need for it.
Most people will not stick to single heli class anyway. Heliborne doesn't really have much of a "point grind," and even flittering around in transports (as long as you're being useful with it) will get you enough points trickling in.
The argument, and I will stand by it until things change because it's one I've been making since late EA, is that point gain for the contribution toward team effort is the lowest for transport pilots.
It is also something pretty easily corrected, since Jetcat just needs to tweak numbers. Awarding points for each deployed soldier (rather than a set amount) rewards heavier transports more, while lowering the point gain a multirole heli gets - simply because the first will have that much more point earning potential on board. It also means that an OH-6 landing on an LZ with one piddly trooper does not get the same amount of points as somebody reinforcing 4 AA emplacements (8 troopers). Make it a few points per deployed trooper, and suddenly transports actually start getting points at comparable rate as other classes doing their jobs.
IMO, this should be added on top of capturing LZ set reward (which wouldn't hurt to be 5 points more rewarding, either). This means capturing neutral LZ with one or two troopers (that can get easily cleared by enemy) would end up being much less rewarding than a heavier transport landing and fully manning the AA emplacements.
I have no idea why there's even an argument against this change, since it would still not make transports point-pinatas. Moving between LZs takes time (especially for slower heavier transports), and sooner or later you need to RTB to reload your boots, which takes even longer.
of course there are exceptions - but most of them are like that. So it's not as if it's a "super-duper-mega-class", though I agree that it's point earning potential is very high, specially on hard difficulty PVE, and flying alongside anyone with a brain. I've seen too may gunships/Tranports players just going head into a hot area before giving the scout a chance to do his job and dying in a split second as a result, leaving the scout to deal with the baddies with it's limited arsenal to know that being a scout can be quite tough at times.
In scouts you rely on others to earn most of your points - and that's something no other class really depends on, exception made of transports deploying mortars. Not a big deal when playing with competent players - but as in every other online game, most players are not like that.
I don't truly know wether the idea of transports being THAT gimped is accurate. Most of them have door gunners (with very good accuracy) which means you have a degree of situational awareness attack choppers do not, for instance. Many, many times, I've been pretty much blind while receiving fire from several angles in ,say, a hind, and the only option being to GTFO before being mauled as I really can't see what's firing at me. A Mi-8 in that situation will be returning fire on automatic aiming with door gunners, and mowing down enemy soldiers. And then you get your proper manual weapons to do everything else - most transports come with a great selection of weapons to choose from. Granted, some do not, but more on that later.
As for vulnerability goes, while it's true that if a heavy AAA piece focuses you (And if it's several of them things get really bad really soon) they do have a degree of immunity from light arms due to their armor that scouts do not, allowing them to move into infantry zones and letting the gunners (and rockets) do their job, while receiving limited damage in return. That's VERY noticeable in Afghanistan PVE matches, where your biggest and almost only enemies are manpads and vehicles - because regular soldiers and HMGs you mow down with your door gunners. In that map, in fact, a MI-8 with a lot of rockets is BY FAR a better choice than a gunship, just for that very reason. So the idea that transports are gimped in earning points because they can't kill stuff is just not true.
Most transports have a good arsenal of offensive weapons. Not all, true, but if you're flying a. say, HH-53 instead of flying a properly weaponized MH-60S or ACH-47 is because you chose what you chose, you had properly armed alternatives, yet you chose something that had no offensive weapons. You can't balance a whole class just because a handful of them lack offensive weaponry. Because then the ones which get that offensive weaponry in loads will get out of hands balance wise.
That problem, BTW, is privative to a couple american transports (UH-60A and HH-53) each of which have more than enough positives to compensate for it (UH-60A is fast as heck and has devilish powerful door gunners, and HH-53 carries a ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ of troops).
Soviet transports just do not have this problem - all of them are armed to the teeth and then some. Again you can't balance a whole class based on a couple instances. If you don't like the limits attached to your limited weaponry, then choose another transport. Simple.
I do agree that deployed weapons/repairs should give points to the player who deployed them. But that's about the only thing I think transports are lacking point wise.