Welcome to symthic forums! We would love if you'd register!
You don't have to be expert in bit baking, everyone is more than welcome to join our community.

You are not logged in.

## CTE Battlefield Roots Initiative

Hey! If this is your first visit on symthic.com, also check out our weapon damage charts.
Currently we have charts for Battlefield 3, Call of Duty: Black Ops 2, Medal of Honor: Warfighter and Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3

Posts: 120

Date of registration
: Nov 29th 2016

Platform: PS4

Location: Florida

Battlelog:

Reputation modifier: 5

Sunday, March 5th 2017, 12:15pm

### Quoted from "Zer0Cod3x"

Is that a balance problem or a playerbase being bad problem?

Neither. It's a game design problem.

Look, the problem with assaults running from tanks, other classes not picking AT options, and everyone not shooting at planes has a ridiculously easy solution... points.

Imagine a world where Mr. Teamplayer assault, who lays down his life for a measly 40 points when his two AT nades hit, maybe 55 if he sneaks in a rocket gun hit before getting derped, gets more than 55 points and a quick trip to the respawn screen. Meanwhile, some guy comes along and puts a k-bullet in it from 100m, and nets 1,000 points and several kills.

WHY ISN'T VEHICLE ASSIST A THING??? Upon a vehicle meeting it's fiery end, EVERYONE who contributed any damage to said vehicle in the last 30 seconds (less, more? idk) gets a nice, fat 250xp "Vehicle Assist Bonus".

I mean, hell, I can get 100xp just for spotting the damn thing before it blows.

Trust me, they implement this, and you'll see way more coordination with randoms; no chat/VIOP required. Everybody and their brother will be shooting at planes. LAT nades and k-bullets will become much more commonplace. I do think the disable threshold could be lowered for planes vs small arms, tho.

Posts: 445

Date of registration
: Mar 25th 2014

Platform: PC

Battlelog:

Reputation modifier: 7

Sunday, March 5th 2017, 12:21pm

### Quoted from "Legion"

Increasing small arms damage vs planes is not needed.
What people here need to remember is that fighter planes take full damage from infantry weapons with attack planes receiving 25% less damage.
A BAR can technically already kill a fighter plane in 3 magazines with an attack plane going down during the 4th magazine, though realistic situations usually call for more due to inaccuracy on side of player and weapon. It is not unfeasible for a squad that notices a fighter attacking it to retaliate and kill it.
And that shot from a sniper rifle? That's 8-10% of that plane's HP gone, depending on rifle and distance.
So, unless you feel that taking off 24-40% of a plane's health with a sniper rifle shot, or 6-8% with a hit from a BAR, is balanced, I would refrain from saying that infantry damage vs planes needs to be tripled or even quadrupled.
Your assumptions have no effect in how things actually play out.

### Quoted

It is not unfeasible for a squad that notices a fighter attacking it to retaliate and kill it.

Never seen it happen on publics. It is pretty unfeasible.

Avoiding the small arms fire for a fighter pilot is easy to do, and with how fast the repaircycles go, it's back in no time to drop darts on the infantry. And it's not like the fighter is discouraged from the incoming small arms fire he will finish the attack before doing barrel rolls to avoid the fire on the return-run. This is the average experience for the average player that shoot airplanes.It can incredibly frustrating for infantry.

Small arms damage have no real impact, same with AT rifle and K bullets on tanks, its repaired from all too quickly. Why even bother to shoot them if no real effect is imposed? I dont often see people shooting airplanes that are close, why should they? There are more threats to worry about and once they do shoot the airplanes, there is no lasting effect from the player action if player manages to hit X amount of bullets. No wonder so few players are willing to perform pewpew against airplanes.
RIP Sraw

Posts: 226

Date of registration
: Sep 20th 2016

Platform: PC

Battlelog:

Reputation modifier: 3

Sunday, March 5th 2017, 2:11pm

### Quoted from "JSLICE20"

If DICE decides to commit resources to further educate the playerbase, fine.

Sounds good in theory but past experience (eg hiring famous youtubers to make instructional videos and force everyone to watch them before playing) has shown us that the playerbase does not learn. The ones who do want to learn, educate themselves with sites like this and youtube.

### Quoted from "Iwo_Jima"

Never seen it happen on publics. It is pretty unfeasible.

Uncommon does not mean unfeasible.

Sona tank jungle

Posts: 7,897

Date of registration
: May 30th 2012

Platform: PS4

Location: SURROUNDED BY FUCKING MOUNTAINS

Battlelog:

Reputation modifier: 19

Sunday, March 5th 2017, 2:32pm

### Quoted

" Currently, I play most rounds with zero communication, verbal or otherwise
We have the tools to communicate through VOIP and text chat but this requires that other people respond to these VOIP and text chats which isn't a guarantee by any means.
Eliminating a heavy vehicle or shooting down a plane necessitates teamwork in a game that is notoriously bad at teamwork"

I had friends that regularly played BF3, then sort of gave up on BF4, and completely left the franchise after Hardline (which wasn't really a Battlefield game, but whatever). I now have to start from scratch with BF1 and have made some acquaintances here on Symthic, but not ones to regularly squad up with. And I'll be damned if I try to befriend some players in random games. I've been down that road before and it hasn't turned out well.

What I gather from this is that you just gave up on trying to squad up with players. Much like shooting at planes, because it didn't work right off the bat you entirely gave up.
There's plenty of gaming communities you could look to get into, the playerbase on PS4 BF1 is pretty damn large. Go to BFTracker and on the clan list filter by region, start opening clan pages and look at the ones for PS4. Or use google, the official BF forums or reddit. Plenty of options that don't have to be going in-game and adding people one by one.

### Quoted

make friends. Coordinate with them. This is not an impossible feat.

^or simply this

### Quoted

skill floor is too low

Certain planes and tanks are just super easy to do good in

Which I'm surprised you say this because despite you claiming that some vehicles are incredibly easy to do in, then surely learning to use a vehicle to counter another vehicle shouldn't be that hard to do, and it allows you to fight planes or tanks all on your own. Besides nitpicking arguments here, I have to disagree. Vehicle platforms aren't purely high skill floor, lv100 shitbucket only stuff, but saying they have a low skill floor is just ignorant. There's been posts before this one that give know insight on how reduced the capabilities of armour are in BF1 compared to previous titles, but you seem to have ignored these posts.

### Quoted

Fighters and attack planes easily have more survivability than bombers, because bombers need a rear gunner in order to survive against opposing planes and a good pilot because they are so fricking slow, cumbersome, and big making them easy targets for practically anything that can damage them

And on the flipside Bombers can take around three times the amount of punishment other planes can before going down. I don't know the exact multiplier, but (sweet spot) sniper rifles have often scored me "vehicle hit 3" on bombers, which indicates to around a x0.33 multiplier.

### Quoted

pilot's only offensive armaments are bomb payloads

These bomb payloads can about kill anything on the ground that isn't a Behemoth. Heavy Armour dies instantly, Light Armour barely stands a chance (and by this I mean AA Truck). A pretty damn good trade off IMO.

### Quoted

Fighters, attack planes, and heavy tanks are basically easy mode options because they are just as effective with no communication or teamwork necessary as the vehicles that require teamwork or communication in order to be effective at all, against infantry that is.

Fighters are effective because they're designed as a one man platform and their potential is limited to that, while the other air options can function just as well with a single pilot, but also have the option to have better damage output/performance by having additional hands in the guns. A bomber pilot doesn't need gunners to do a suicide run on a tank and bail, an attack plane is only weak to fighters because it gets outsped and eventually outurned.

The same applies to ground vehicles. A7V's main gun is given to the driver, which in most cases is expected to be the most competent player in the vehicle. Much like tankmayvin mentioned about the A7V, disabling the side gun platforms is key to allowing infantry to just shoot at it without any fear of retaliation. The driver has a pretty powerful gun, the gun is placed pretty high so you get a good angle to shoot at people and the vehicle's movement is hard to impair. On the flipside, you can't cover much more than, what, 120 degrees in front of you, and if your side guns get disabled, that means you can't defend yourself against incoming fire from that side. Again key part here is when you disable the dual MGs on the rear seat. You flank the vehicle and it can't fire back, or sometimes it doesn't even have back guns in the case of the Flame7V.

### Quoted

However, I'm curious as to what can be done to combat a force multiplier when insufficient bodies are present

It's already been mentioned that a single player has about enough firepower to destroy a vehicle if they manage to expend all their AT equipment, or in the case of planes, ammo (support class says hello).
Have you also tried to coordinate your efforts with your allies instead of them having to coordinate with you? It doesn't take too much effort to see a friendly assault shooting at a tank and helping him in his task (by bringing more firepower, ammo or health), instead of being hell bent on taking out the tank and going after it alone or similar. You can even apply this to modes like TDM or Domination. Look for a friendly medic and follow the guy around, revive them and in return they'll probably revive you.

### Quoted

For ideal balance there has to be a cap on which classes can be used in whichever amount

For ideal balance you tweak the classes so that the players aren't as inclined to use them to the same extent as the others do. This is already being looked at in the CTE with the changes to how grenades are resupplied and I read comments on how they plan to change stuff to make support a more appealing choice. I'm sure you've read those comments too since I recall they were on Symthic.

### Quoted

I think it is kinda funny that people complain that no one shoots at planes and then also don't shoot at planes because "no-one else does".

Big part of the problem right here, or at least you people make it look like that. With the whole "it isn't worth it so why bother" kinda stance.

### Quoted

Never seen it happen on publics. It is pretty unfeasible.

This rings a bell from what I just mentioned above. It's ok if you haven't seen it done, but have you actually tried to do it and maybe inspire people to do so?

### Quoted

Small arms damage have no real impact, same with AT rifle and K bullets on tanks, its repaired from all too quickly

You can't repair while taking additional fire, so I'm unsure as to how "it's repaired all too quickly" when you need to either dodge rounds fired at you or eliminate all immediate threats before repairing. You fire at a tank, it has less health. If you keep firing at it, the health keeps going down. Without external repairs, the vehicle's health will just keep going down until it retreats, kills everyone firing at it or dies.

### Quoted

There are more threats to worry about

I'm fairly confident in saying that even if you had hacks to know the position of all the enemy players on the map you'd be hard pressed to find a situation where you're too preoccupied with other threats that you can't spare 2-4 seconds to empty your magazine at a plane. If you're fighting something else the plane becomes a secondary concern, when you're running from flag to flag or standing there capturing a non-contested flag you can bother to shoot at planes. It's not that hard to understand, really.

@JSLICE20

@Iwo_Jima
Bro of Legion, the lurker ninja mod | Tesla FTW | RNG is evil.

### Quoted from "MsMuchLove"

I find majority of the complaints I hear about this game somehow never appear in my games.

Salt Miner

Posts: 3,639

Date of registration
: Mar 19th 2014

Platform: Xbox One

Battlelog:

Reputation modifier: 16

Sunday, March 5th 2017, 4:21pm

It's still a game design problem, just not a numbers problem. If people want to insist on valuing the stat/hard-number portion of game design far higher than all the other aspects that make up the game, like various encouragement and reward systems, then those same people are going to continue wondering why randoms never do X, and will continue to think they're terrible.

Just because it's not a hard-balance issue doesn't mean players are bad, it means another aspect of the game is lacking.
Who Enjoys, Wins

Posts: 2,015

Date of registration
: Jan 12th 2014

Platform: PC

Battlelog:

Reputation modifier: 14

Sunday, March 5th 2017, 8:14pm

Player bases are invariably statistical distributions, and thus most of the player base is only middling, or worse. This is just unavoidable.

The realities of pubbing might make it so that while the landships are statistically better, I, and almost every other shitbucket tanker uses the A7V or the rare specialist tank. But the realities of pubbing cannot inform balance. Any more buffs to the landship it it would be objectively OP. Things are only lacking here from the perspective of the player base. You just cannot cure stupid. You can barely even manage stupid. Doesn't matter if it's video games or health care.

I'm totally fine with soft incentives like more points, better point distribution, etc, etc. DICE should always be striving so that rewards match gameplay impact. Both damaging vehicles as well as supporting friendly vehicles is under-represented. I wish there was better point sharing for all sorts of activities.

Getting a chunk of the vehicle destroy as a flat assist or a fraction of total points given based on damage done would be great. Or a headhunter bonus that is a soft incentive to take out people with large kill streaks. The HVT commander marking was lame of course, but points are less obnoxious. Revenge is a pretty powerful motivator though, moreso than points maybe.

Sona tank jungle

Posts: 7,897

Date of registration
: May 30th 2012

Platform: PS4

Location: SURROUNDED BY FUCKING MOUNTAINS

Battlelog:

Reputation modifier: 19

Sunday, March 5th 2017, 8:21pm

It doesn't make any sense to say you need to encourage it via scoring when downing planes with SAA yields about the same points as shooting it down with SAF. Maybe SAA will give you an additional 20-80 points for wing damage and some of the splash damaging the pilot, but that's about it.

Also regarding some comments earlier on making it more of a factor to shoot at plane parts. It's a pretty big deal as a pilot, because your mobility goes to shit and if your engine is dead it you need at least 2 repair cycles to bring it back to normal, not to mention the crippled speed.

Shooting at plane parts is hard because what's easiest to shoot is at the fuselage or wings. Engines are more easy to disable on Bombers since they have dual engines and aren't placed in the front of the plane but at the sides. The reward is good but it isn't easy to land a shot because the engine is hard to hit.

If you want to argue how much points should part disables give:

20 for wing damage (can be achieved multiple times on the same wing)
50 for engine disable
150 for disable (highlighted in score feed)
250 for destroy (highlighted in score feed)
Bro of Legion, the lurker ninja mod | Tesla FTW | RNG is evil.

### Quoted from "MsMuchLove"

I find majority of the complaints I hear about this game somehow never appear in my games.

Posts: 3,292

Date of registration
: Apr 26th 2013

Platform: PS4

Location: Arizona, USA

Reputation modifier: 15

Sunday, March 5th 2017, 11:07pm

### Quoted from "Oscar"

surely learning to use a vehicle to counter another vehicle shouldn't be that hard to do, and it allows you to fight planes or tanks all on your own.

We've already covered across several threads that using tanks against tanks or planes against planes is a garbage vehicle counter system. Not to mention that grabbing tanks or planes from the spawn screen isn't always guaranteed. Sometimes you gotta wait for your team to capture an objective that offers a vehicle asset (which I still hold is a balance-breaking feature) or wait for one of your spawn vehicles to die to steal it from three to five other players camping the vehicle slots.

### Quoted from "Oscar"

There's been posts before this one that give know insight on how reduced the capabilities of armour are in BF1 compared to previous titles, but you seem to have ignored these posts.

Read again, jack. I already recognized that heavy tanks are statistically inferior to previous title tanks.

### Quoted from "JSLICE20"

Soloing tanks is virtually impossible now, specifically referring to the heavily armored ones and AT teamplay is still just as bad as it has ever been; nothing has progressed or improved. This is why heavies feel more dominant when they are statistically inferior to BF3/4 overall. BF1 actually necessitates coordinated attacks to suppress or destroy heavy tanks. So while AT teamplay multiplied the effectiveness in BF3/4, it was still possible to fend off the tanks on your own.

Lrn to read before making accusations.

### Quoted from "Oscar"

Fighters are effective because they're designed as a one man platform and their potential is limited to that

Okay then, an example. "I'm a solo casual player but I'm fairly proficient at flying and all I really care about is getting kills, not winning or contributing but getting kills. Why on earth would I opt for the bomber that needs 2 other players to use at maximum efficiency when the fighter's trench darts will net me an equivalent amount or more kills than the bomber? I can outgun and outmaneuver any enemy pilot I want on my own, but I'd need to rely on having a rear gunner who can aim to protect me from enemy pilots if using a bomber. Yeah, thanks but no thanks. I'll just absolutely destroy clumps of infantry on my own because they refuse to shoot back at me (lol) when there's clearly enough of them to seriously damage or cripple me in a strafing run."

### Quoted from "Oscar"

disabling the side gun platforms is key to allowing infantry to just shoot at it without any fear of retaliation. The driver has a pretty powerful gun, the gun is placed pretty high so you get a good angle to shoot at people and the vehicle's movement is hard to impair.

If a heavy tank lets enemy infantry with AT flank him so easily then he's out of position or is a garbage tanker. 'Nuff said.

### Quoted from "Oscar"

It's already been mentioned that a single player has about enough firepower to destroy a vehicle if they manage to expend all their AT equipment

You're joking, right? Let's just look at the Assault's Rocket Gun and AT grenade:

In-game min damage: 20
Deploy time - 0.45s
Hold and release delay - 0.7s
Initial speed - 18 m/s

Rocket Gun:
In-game min damage: 15
Deploy time - 1.2s
Initial speed - 140m/s

Our heavy tank is at its full 1000 HP and we'll use a common distance of 20m as the distance between our Assault soldier and the tank.

Deploying the AT grenade takes 0.45s and then another 0.7s to throw. At 18m/s it will take over 1.11s to hit the tank when including the angle of which the grenade is thrown, but we'll stick with 1.11 for now. The grenade will reload in the time it takes for the first to hit, but we're looking at another 0.7s to throw again with the 1.11s to the next impact.

Altogether, 0.45 + 0.7 + 1.11 + 0.7 + 1.11 = 4.07s to deal 40 damage to the tank.

Deploying the Rocket Gun takes a whopping 1.2s. At 140m/s it will only take 0.143s to hit the tank, but takes 3.15s to reload. Damn. We have 4 rockets available to do the remaining 60 damage to destroy the tank. Altogether, 1.2 + 0.143(4) + 3.15(3) = 11.222s to deal a min 60 damage to the tank.

Combined we're looking at a minimum of 15.292s to destroy a heavy tank with no delays in between if you can remain stationary. ~15 Goddamn seconds at the very least give or take. So sure, the capacity to solo one is there but essentially impossible in a real game scenario.
To Aim Assist or not to Aim Assist, that is the question.

### Source code

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38

AccelerationInputThreshold 0.98
AccelerationMultiplier 5.0
AccelerationDamping 4.0
AccelerationTimeThreshold 0.15
SquaredAcceleration 0.0
MaxAcceleration::Vec2
x 2.0
y 2.0
YawSpeedStrength 1.0
PitchSpeedStrength 1.0
AttractDistanceFallOffs::Vec2
x 1.0
y 1.2
AttractSoftZone 0.75
AttractUserInputMultiplier 0.45
AttractUserInputMultiplier_NoZoom 0.5
AttractOwnSpeedInfluence 0.0
AttractTargetSpeedInfluence 0.85
AttractOwnRequiredMovementForMaximumAttract 0.0
AttractStartInputThreshold 0.1
AttractMoveInputCap 0.0
AttractYawStrength 1.0
AttractPitchStrength 0.34
MaxToTargetAngle 45.0
MaxToTargetXZAngle 45.0
ViewObstructedKeepTime 0.0
SnapZoomLateralSpeedLimit 1000.0
SnapZoomTime 0.2
SnapZoomPostTimeNoInput 0.2
SnapZoomPostTime 0.2
SnapZoomReticlePointPriority 999
SnapZoomAutoEngageTime 0.0
SnapZoomBreakTimeAtMaxInput 0.2
SnapZoomBreakMaxInput 0.2
SnapZoomBreakMinAngle 90.0
SnapZoomSpamGuardTime 1.2
SoldierBackupSkeletonCollisionData *nullGuid*
CheckBoneCenterOnlyDistance 40.0

### Source code

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39

AccelerationInputThreshold 0.98
AccelerationMultiplier 5.0
AccelerationDamping 4.0
AccelerationTimeThreshold 0.15
SquaredAcceleration 0.0
MaxAcceleration::Vec2
x 2.0
y 2.0
YawSpeedStrength 1.0
PitchSpeedStrength 1.0
AttractDistanceFallOffs::Vec2
x 1.0
y 1.2
AttractSoftZone 0.0
AttractUserInputMultiplier 1.0
AttractUserInputMultiplier_NoZoom -1.0
AttractOwnSpeedInfluence 0.0
AttractTargetSpeedInfluence 0.0
AttractOwnRequiredMovementForMaximumAttract 0.0
AttractStartInputThreshold 0.0
AttractMoveInputCap 0.0
AttractYawStrength 0.0
AttractPitchStrength 0.0
MaxToTargetAngle 45.0
MaxToTargetXZAngle 45.0
ViewObstructedKeepTime 0.0
SnapZoomLateralSpeedLimit 1000.0
SnapZoomTime 0.2
SnapZoomPostTimeNoInput 0.0
SnapZoomPostTime 0.0
SnapZoomReticlePointPriority 999
SnapZoomAutoEngageTime 0.0
SnapZoomBreakTimeAtMaxInput -1.0
SnapZoomBreakMaxInput 0.2
SnapZoomBreakMinAngle 90.0
SnapZoomSpamGuardTime 0.5
SoldierBackupSkeletonCollisionData *nullGuid*
CheckBoneCenterOnlyDistance 40.0
DisableForcedTargetRecalcDistance 7.0

### Source code

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39

 AccelerationInputThreshold 0.98
AccelerationMultiplier 5.0
AccelerationDamping 4.0
AccelerationTimeThreshold 0.15
SquaredAcceleration 0.0
MaxAcceleration::Vec2
x 2.0
y 2.0
YawSpeedStrength 1.0
PitchSpeedStrength 1.0
AttractDistanceFallOffs::Vec2
x 1.0
y 1.2
AttractSoftZone 0.75
AttractUserInputMultiplier 0.45
AttractUserInputMultiplier_NoZoom 0.5
AttractOwnSpeedInfluence 0.0
AttractTargetSpeedInfluence 0.85
AttractOwnRequiredMovementForMaximumAttract 0.0
AttractStartInputThreshold 0.1
AttractMoveInputCap 0.0
AttractYawStrength 1.0
AttractPitchStrength 0.34
MaxToTargetAngle 45.0
MaxToTargetXZAngle 45.0
ViewObstructedKeepTime 0.0
SnapZoomLateralSpeedLimit 1000.0
SnapZoomTime 0.2
SnapZoomPostTimeNoInput 0.0
SnapZoomPostTime 0.0
SnapZoomReticlePointPriority 999
SnapZoomAutoEngageTime 0.0
SnapZoomBreakTimeAtMaxInput -1.0
SnapZoomBreakMaxInput 0.2
SnapZoomBreakMinAngle 90.0
SnapZoomSpamGuardTime 0.5
SoldierBackupSkeletonCollisionData *nullGuid*
CheckBoneCenterOnlyDistance 40.0
DisableForcedTargetRecalcDistance 7.0

### Quoted from "Zer0Cod3x"

the Sebstalder is quiet good since it can 3hit kill at any distanc ,but In my opinion i actually thikn the sweeper is better, its got a really really fast firerate that can beat alll those Noobmaticos, Helregall adn shitguns in close quarters , and its also really accurate out to like l;ong range,. overall great allround gun, jsut my 2\$ tho

### My "Contributions"

This post has been edited 1 times, last edit by "JSLICE20" (Mar 5th 2017, 11:29pm)

Salt Miner

Posts: 3,639

Date of registration
: Mar 19th 2014

Platform: Xbox One

Battlelog:

Reputation modifier: 16

Sunday, March 5th 2017, 11:22pm

@JSLICE20

15 seconds? That's hilarious. Any Tanker that gets soloed in an A7V is basically AFK.

As opposed to BF4's two hits to the rear and dead, with the first immobilizing the vehicle for good measure. Took as long as it takes to reload the RPG/SMAW once. There was also lol-instant-kill-C4, which I always hated, but that doesn't change that it was a thing. And no one better respond with "that only happens to bad Tankers", when the BF1 comparison takes 15 full seconds and requires prone/stationary for the Rocket Gun.

That's the other half of what discourages engaging Tanks and Planes in BF1: The TTK against them is so incredibly long compared to BF4.
Who Enjoys, Wins

Posts: 292

Date of registration
: Dec 2nd 2013

Platform: PC

Location: California

Battlelog:

Reputation modifier: 10

Sunday, March 5th 2017, 11:26pm

There's going to be more than point incentives needed to encouraged. On top of what BleedingUranium said about the TTK for vehicle destructions, BF34 had mobility disables and feedback for actually landing hits, and there is a distinct lack of that against the A7V and planes. Also, awarding Kill Assist as Kills for doing as little as 20% damage to a vehicle and allowing destroyed gunner parts to kill occupants would strongly encourage everyone to contribute.

You want to recreate that same competition of EVERYONE racing to the stationary AAs and HMGs when they hear the Airship Behemoth being announced, when it comes to shooting at planes and dealing with tanks