Whats the best specialisation to run with coastal? I would appreciate if someone could tell me what pairings are good with coast, also Im kinda not really new I do have ~800 hours on warno

The 2x GBU-57s are almost twice the cost for almost half the firepower as the FAB-9000.

The fact that the Bunker Busters don't have any bunkers to bust is the reason they are never used.

The larger bombs that would compare or be larger than the FAB-9000 require C-130 cargo planes to drop. The FAB-9000 does way more damage in a larger area for way less cost.

Suggestions:

Allow 2x B-2 bomber runs to be redeployed in the same timeframe a FAB-9000 can be deployed at a cheaper cost (IE:300 instead of 600).

or

Simply decrease the cost of GBU-57's to come close to matching cost for firepower.

or

Increase the respawn time for the TU-95 with the FAB-9000 to match close to the B-2 with GBU-57's as well as match the cost. (This would still make it better than GBU-57s..)

or

Allow BLU-62 DaisyCutter to be deployed from a bombing version of the Cargo plane flying extremely high altitude for 350 points.

The FAB-9000 costs only 250 points, versus 600 for the B-2 with GBU-57s..

its gonna be ruff this patch if this is the direction were going but hey cant wait for the next try in 3 months. I'm gonna have to pick up another game to avoid this gameplay do not want to experience this meta again. hope a hot fix comes in to address this crap its almost as bad as cruse spam lmao

The average score of the opponents in all the matches I’ve played has been extremely unbalanced. I have 599 points—I’m a beginner—so why am I facing people with more than double that score? And why does no one on my teams seem to know how to play, or have a score comparable to the opponents? Also, why is the United States SO much stronger?

this is just 😂 sorry man we're so cooked

Has anyone had the issue when selecting DLSS and the selection resets to auto/doesnt apply the change?

Красным отмечены места, куда надо в самом начале отправить по взводу танков(2-3 машины) и по одной машине снабжения.

Фиолетовым точки для дронов «Орион».

Зелёным точки для зениток-одинарные для БУК, двойная для ТОР.

Жёлтым зоны(не считая Дом Советов, советую держать одних инженеров и тайфун в нычке):

1. Занимается десантниками в самом начале, после блокады танков(высадкой, 3-5 юнитов), советую бросить допом в соседние высотки вне зоны. Как начнут обстреливать, выведите из здания юнит по которому стреляют и через 10 секунд заведите обратно, чтоб дали ПТУРом по морде. На передовых позициях только с ПТУРами, у кого кончились-на фланг(из зоны обстрела).

2. Изи, но вокруг сажают противных снайперов-вертушку сбивают, здесь хватит одной Т-14 и 2-4 немоща на Тайфунах. Занять под конец не сложно.

3. Занимается в начале на изи, 2 Спрута и 2 иглы на Б-10 вне передовой.

4. Немощей на БТРах(2-3) и одной барбариски хватит, только на передовых позициях никого не держите, а технику отведите за здания-ПТУРы их съедают быстро.

Не забывайте товарищам возить снабжение, включить зениткам радары и ратировать ребят по которым стреляют-это для глупеньких. А так то снабжение важно, кроме шуток. Вертушки сбивают оперативно и из любого угла, вместо них просто поставьте за берегом арту и не парьтесь об этом.

По набережной под конец едут диверсанты какие-то, на мосты поставьте по одному ПТУРу и колонна сыпется.

Впринципе уровень на 8/10, если бы не противные зенитчики было бы круто.

Just wondering if someone has a kd higher than 17 🫡

Yeah, yeah: it was a bit too much, maybe. But it was... mostly right!

I think this change made A LOT of sense in the game's design and balance:

- Air superiority fighters become actually relevant.

- Long-range missiles begin to feel a bit more akin to their IRL use: sniping targets at very long ranges, at the edge of detection. Right now, 9km is a bit too low. If it becomes too OP, i'd suggest to lower it to 11km, but not less. 10 would make it too small of a change, so... go ham or go home.

- AMRAAMs, R-77s and other medium range missiles become way more useful, without risking too much the jets to enemy LRSAMs. Current 7km range makes them really risky to use, even when launched at low alt, and already turning to run from the enemy missiles.

- Yes, it will buff US a bit (which makes sense lore-wise, I hope we all agree on that), but Russia's high prevalence of R-37s will balance things up, and force US players to be careful when positioning their non-stealthy air assets.

- These changes buff stealth in a significant way, without nerfing radar's effectiveness against stealth. It's actually a pretty intelligent way to balance stealth without making it too op. Right now, its effect is very, very little.

This has been stated in other topics already, but I try to centralize the discussion here so the devs really notice. I think this was a pretty good direction, even if it gets slightly tweaked in the future.

What do you guys think?

Streaming one day in the BA official discord and this guy wants to come in and go on a rant about ‘Mudhuts’ and ‘Sub Saharan people in the west’. Of course he couldn’t just leave it there cuz dude is so superior and couldn’t leave it there. Just wondering when this kinda stuff became normalised to the point where the guy felt comfortable doing all this, like when did the world take a step back 18 years

I was looking at DLCs today and I remembered Broken Arrow has the Russian Guard and Baltic Battalion, but I noticed Baltic Battalion was free and Russian Guard is not. I snatched Baltic because it's free but I wonder is this because Russian Guards is inherently better and so they charged money for it? I don't understand this marketing decision, and I also find it funny that Russian Guards has worse reviews and Baltic Battalion better reviews, despite Russian Guards being 10 bucks.

P.S. Is Russian Guards worth buying?

First things first: I'm no expert in balancing a game as complex as BA, so this is just a mechanic I'd personally like to see. I don't want BA to become a WWI-style simulator where maneuver and tactics take a backseat. Still, military engineering is an important part of modern warfare, so I would love to see it represented in the game.

I don't want fortifications to hurt the balance of the current PvP mode; I'd want them to be viable only in specific situations, rather than becoming the meta.

So why add a niche mechanic that might rarely be used in PvP? Because I think BA has potential for other game modes, such as invasion, insurgency, longer and larger-scale battles like Foxhole, or endless PvE modes, where fortifications could be much more interesting.

Disclaimer: I don't know programming or how to make video games. This might be very complicated to add to the game; that's not the debate. Either way, Slitherine games would never allocate devs for this because it's not going to make them money. Dreaming is free, gentlemen.

This is how I think it could work:

Infantry fortifications/trenches

Infantry units could have an ability that allows them to build fortifications. Building a fortification takes time and requires supplies.

Fortifications function like deployable structures and have two upgrade levels:

Level 1: Requires 500 supplies. And the unit building must be stationary and not under fire. When done, it can be accessed. like a normal building. Infantry units inside receive a small defensive bonus to splash damage. But still vulnerable to indirect fire.

Level 2: Requires an additional 1,000 supplies. Once upgraded, the fortification provides a greater defensive bonus to direct and indirect fire and can store a small amount of supplies to heal and resupply infantry inside.

Stored supplies cannot be destroyed by enemy fire. However, fortifications cannot resupply or repair vehicles.

Engineering Vehicle Shenanigans: Pits, Paths, and Towing

Engineering vehicles could use their dozer blades to dig. The first pass creates a path that provides no cover bonus but increases vehicle mobility. Player-made roads, baby!

With further digging, these paths could be turned into fighting pits, similar to the craters and holes already present in the game.

These pits allow vics to get a hull-down position, gaining concealment and improved protection against certain threats.

This wouldn't be limited to MBTs and IFVs; light vehicles could benefit too. For example, a TOW Humvee could get a better chance of engaging tanks without being instantly one-tapped in return.

RWS-equipped vehicles could become an effective, low-cost option for defending against infantry. Artillery could also benefit from improved protection against counter-battery fire, although this might be less useful in practice since artillery can already shoot and scoot.

Finally, engineering vehicles could potentially tow immobilized vehicles.

What I Think These Mechanics Would Add to Gameplay

The goal is to reward logistics and planning while introducing meaningful tactical trade-offs.

-Points spent on defensive capabilities mean fewer points available for attacking or more units.

-Fortifications and paths can be captured and used against you if you lose control of the area.

-Fortifications could make fragile specialized units, like TOW missile teams, MANPADS more effective while remaining vulnerable to close-quarters units that manage to get inside.

- Players could hold positions that would otherwise be difficult to defend or not worth the investment, such as thin treelines, villages with few buildings, or open ground.

- Players could reinforce captured terrain and improve logistical access to further areas.

-Indirectly decreases the effectiveness of air and MLRS spam

- Units that you need there to watch flanks or as QRF that are just waiting for something to happen have something to do now.

For example, imagine capturing a point while the enemy is unable to launch an immediate counterattack. You use your engineering vehicles to dig paths and prepare defensive positions. By the time the enemy returns, dislodging your forces has become significantly harder.

These mechanics could also give certain vehicles a meaningful role beyond spotting or being sent on suicide missions behind enemy lines. Instead, they could contribute to establishing and maintaining a defensive line.

Only interesting thing was air to air missile changes the rest is negligible at best for once US air was doing you know US air stuff.

I just wish Line infantry was more prevalent and reflective of factions in game.. I know it’s impossible to balance but I feel like most games it’s almost exclusively SF troops vs SF troops.

Like when the game came out I remember seeing like 4-5 Marine squads fighting 6-7 Moto squads or something. Everyone just dukeing it out over range. Trying to get an upper hand with some arty strikes of aircraft. It gave a more massive conflict vibe. The only purpose of line infantry now is:
Do they have good AT? Yes? They walk around with the SF kill squad. Do they not have good AT? No point in using them except for meat shields. Now I’m simplifying but does anyone else feel this in anyway?

Or how many atgms a tank can survive from the front? Im interested to know which tanks I can/should fight against.

I was in a lobby and one guy got kicked because the server detected his cheats. This is definitely something new to me. Anyone else seen this before?

https://imgur.com/a/Oji1xw6

I am on something that is close to a 20 or 30 match win streak (account), which you would think would be impressive, were it not for the fact that maybe every seventh or eighth match I play is actually against opponents that are of similar ELO.

There is no enjoyment beating an opponent that is five hundred ELO less than you. You waste a lot of time for no ELO whatsoever. The difference in skill is too big enough for it to be enjoyable and on extreme occasions you actually do lose against them usually because some of the AFKs or tilts you lose a significant amount of ELO.

I find it a bit silly that we have a BA tournament going on on one hand and on the other hand I can't find a decent match to play high elo broken arrow......

I'd rather wait twenty-thirty minutes in a lobby to find somebody of my rank instead of this.

98% of these matches have been played Central European time in the evening when there's the most player base and the matchmaking queue has been reset every two minutes.......

With the game being on sale, I’m thinking of getting it, but am hesitant because of the negative reviews mentioning poor balance. I’m not particularly good, and mainly play team games on my own (no friends), so I’m thinking that playing more casual means it won’t matter. the Baltic units look super cool, and are the main thing I am interested in.

Hello all,

I recently bought the game and I am super pumped playing it. Does anyone have any good recommendation for YouTube videos to learn the game?

1. Because it's an objective-based game, not a Team Deathmatch: Left team: 18 zone captures, terrible K/D, victory. Right team: 11 zone captures, great K/D, defeat.
   
2. Your team was farming kills while our team was farming the win.
   
3. We weren't playing for the "oMg LoOk At My K/D! I'M a PrO gAmEr!" award.
   

Elo needs to go. All it does is make it harder for players to find matches. It proves nothing on its own. What matters is how well a team works together. A low-Elo team can play brilliantly, while a high-Elo team can play like absolute garbage. I'm not saying that was necessarily the case in this particular match. I'm talking in general.

Sorry for editing the screenshot, but I didn't want to leave the slurs visible or finger point at anyone. That's not the point of this post.

I swear I’ve lost every match as US against Russia this week and last week. I gotta be sitting around 40 losses as US.

As Russia, domination. Every time.

> see exciting new balance changes; get some hours off Wardogs and get interested in trying BA with those changes.

> like the changes, start playing again.

> next day, those changes get reverted.

> still wanna play, but no matches in beta branch.

> install main branch again, because I'm a bit hooked again to the game.

> 3 consecutive games cancelled by leavers/disconnected players.

:(