Air RB Needs the Following Reworks [plus POLLS]

Air RB Needs the Following Reworks

Top tier Air RB, in its current state, has various issues that need to be addressed. In light of Seek’s recent video regarding top tier Air RB, I figured someone ought to compile the arguments addressed and possibly add onto it. Here are the main issues that I personally see as major problems and how they can be solved:

1.) BR Compression at Top Tier

2.) The Stock Grind

3.) Match Sizes (16v16)

4.) Tree Heights

1.) BR Compression at Top Tier - Decompress to 13.3 (or higher)

This honestly does not need much of an explanation. The current top tier environment is far too compressed and needs to be decompressed quickly. Starting out with 13.3 for planes like the F-15C, F-16C, Su-27SM, etc. would help, but the ultimate goal should be to get the max BR up to at least 14.0 or higher.

Certain aircraft also benefited from the multipathing changes far more than others. The biggest example of this is the F-14A Early and F-14B. To address these two directly, they need to go up in BR. Whether that entails adding new IR missiles (eg. the AIM-9L to the F-14A and the AIM-9M to the F-14B), that should be addressed and their BR increased accordingly.

What are your opinions on BR compression?
  • 13.0 is fine as it is
  • 13.3 is needed
  • 13.3 and higher is needed (eg. 13.7, 14.0, etc.)
0 voters

2.) The Stock Grind - Add stock FOX-1s and FOX-3s

As it stands, the current stock grind is attrocious for anything not carrying FOX-3s or Chaff. We already have stock flares, which were added in light of the addition of IRCCM FOX-2 missiles. Now that we have extremely dominant FOX-3 missiles, we should absolutely get stock Chaff as well.

Furthermore, stock FOX-1 and FOX-3 missiles should be provided. This does not mean having all missiles available upon purchasing the vehicle. Rather, it means that we should have the ability to use missiles that give us some chance against other aircraft. Depending on the vehicle’s rank, BR, and era, two stock FOX-1 or FOX-1 missiles should be made accessible alongside the stock FOX-2s.

For example, the F-16C should get 2x AIM-120As alongside its 2x AIM-9Ms while the F-16A ADF should get 2x AIM-7Ms and 2x AIM-9Ls.

An example from the Russian side would be the MiG-29SMT getting 2x R-77s and 2x R-73s, while the MiG-29 (9-13) gets 2x R-27s and 2x R-60Ms stock.

NOTE: I am explicitly stating 2x radar AND 2x IR missiles, making it a total of FOUR stock missiles. Two IR missiles on/under the outermost pylons, two radar missiles under the innermost pylons. What I am NOT saying is “two missiles total, selecting either radar or IR”.

What do you think about stock FOX-1s and FOX-3s?
  • Both FOX-1s and FOX-3s are needed
  • Only FOX-1s are needed
  • Only FOX-3s are needed
  • None of these are needed
0 voters

3.) Match Sizes (16v16) - Make 8v8 standard

Gaijin recently added an opt-in function for smaller matches. The result of this is the vast majority of matches being 16v16 with a few 12v12 matches being thrown in. This is not at all what the community asked for and needs to be addressed.

There are many ways to fix this issue. One of the ways this can be fixed is by inverting the match-size priority. This includes making 8v8 and 10v10 games the priority in the matchmaker, meaning as soon as those smaller matches fill up they launch. Another way to help with this is to eliminate 16v16 from the matchmaking entirely and replace it with 12v12. Then 10v10 and 8v8 matches can be the “1 in 10” matches that appear rather than 12v12.

Overall, the current implementation of “the option to get into smaller matches” does not accomplish what the community wants. We want smaller matches to be the norm so that we can have a larger impact on the match as a whole - not be subject to the whims of our teams dying out and being overrun by the other half of the enemy team.

Do you have the smaller matches option enabled?
  • Yes, I have it enabled
  • No, I have it disabled
0 voters
Which match sizes would you prefer
  • I prefer 16v16
  • I prefer 12v12
  • I prefer 10v10
  • I prefer 8v8
  • I prefer 6v6
0 voters

4.) Tree Heights - Reduce the average tree size to ~10-20m

Since multipathing got reduced to 60m, the tree height in WT has become an interesting topic of discussion. Currently, the average tree height sits around 50-60m off the ground, making it very difficult to use multipathing. This is especially an issue for people stock grinding, where having zero chaff and no radar missiles makes it extremely difficult to grind out modifications. These modifications, mind you, are required to give your plane a semblance of being competitive.

(Personally, I don’t use multipathing very much since I always climb, but the argument is still valid, especially for stock grinding).

What do you think about tree heights in WT?
  • They are fine as they are (50-60m is okay)
  • They should be decreased in size (40-30m)
  • They should be decreased in size (20-10m)
0 voters

Conclusion - TL;DR

Overall, each of these issues overlap a lot.

The current BR spread at 13.0-11.7 makes little sense. The fact that Vietnam era Phantoms and newly nerfed MiG-23s have to face AMRAAMs or Phoenixes the way they do is simply terrible. These planes very often lack RWRs capable of giving them a lock tone, much less a missile warning.

Personally, I like how top tier plays at the moment so long as you have FOX-3s and are not stock grinding. The max BR simply needs to shift up to give lower BRs some breathing room. The issues with multipathing would also not be nearly as bad if the number of people in the matches was not so large and the tree heights were not absurdly large.

The stock grind certainly has to change, the current state of stock grinding is ridiculously bad. Giving stock Chaff and SARH/ARH missiles would help the stock grind tremendously, and progression would actually be viable.

Edit #1: Here are some examples of new stock loadouts that I am proposing. There was some confusion about the stock loadouts in some of the discussions. I hope this clears it up a little bit.

Stock FOX-3 Examples:

  • 2x AIM-9M
  • 2x AIM-120A

F-15C MSIP-II Stock Loadout 3D

  • 2x AIM-9M
  • 2x AIM-120A

F-16C Stock Loadout 3D

Stock FOX-1 Examples:

  • 2x AIM-9L
  • 2x AIM-7M

MiG-29 (9-12A)
  • 2x R-60MK
  • 2x R-27R1

MiG-29 (9-12A) Stock Loadout 3D.jpeg

I hope this clears up what was meant by this a little bit more.


I feel like trees just need to be overhauled in general - Not only are they too large but they also look rather ugly and have weird LOD’s, you can sometimes just see their LOD’s gradually render in not just on the horizon but as close as 50-100m to your plane and it’s rather noticeable/distracting in my opinion. Tree models being changed could also help with hitboxes.

I feel that current top tier would be perfectly fine with an improved matchmaker, proper BR decompression, better maps and smoother stock grind. Planes should be able to put up a fight even stock or near stock and not just have to base bomb.


For example, a top tier jet like the F-15C MSIP II could get 2x AIM-7M, 2x AIM-120A and 2x AIM-9M stock. This is still a far cry from the spaded loadout this plane has but it at least means that a stock F-15C can put up a fight with spaded planes and get a few kills. This’d mean people can actually fight with non-missile mod spaded planes instead of having to rely on base bombing and passive play to grind their modifications.


Would be nice to have multipath increased a little to like 70-80 meters if trees do not go unchanged, along with the way that missiles detonate/proxy, it does sometimes feel a bit shit when you get low enough to multipath a missile and you still get splashed even though its like 10 meters away from you.

Now while my personal opinion is to have it back up to 80 (with the team and tree sizes changed) in Air RB or even 100 (if team sizes and trees stay unchanged), I’m sure people wouldn’t agree with me. This is just for Air RB however, as I do not play sim, I am not qualified to argue for or against the multipath changes in a Game mode I do not play. Sim players/people who also don’t play Air RB/play it enough, should also take a similar approach to me on the matter.


Missiles also go through trees, it doesn’t block their vision and only the trunk has physics.


Missiles and radars seem to see through terrain right now if DEFYN’s new video is anything to go by.


I’d decompress all the way up to 15.0 since everything above 7.3 is incredibly compressed.

IMO, the option should’ve been an opt-out feature, and not an opt-in feature. 12v12 should be the default for all BRs, while 16v16 should be an option.


If I’m honest with how the game’s going rn, I think there should be a separation between aircraft that have Fox-3s and ones that don’t, Air RB and Air SB are now just plain unplayable unless you pay the $50 + like $25 to get the Fox-3…

And on top of that, why do certain nations get Fox-3s on their current TT aircraft and others need to research a whole new Aircraft. Either no aircraft should be added and the current top tier aircraft have it, or every nation gets a new aircraft with Fox-3s.


My only problem with this is the R-27ER, which needs a counter.

1 Like

I would also appreciate the multipath height to be increased to 70m or so as 10.7-13.0 is just horrendous early game


I feel like PvE should also be mentioned since the mode is pure pain while being insanly hard to do anything while the price to respawn is insane


Even earlier than that it’s an issue. Less so, but still an issue.

1 Like

I have no idea what to do against the ER, they get launched from like 1-2km.

I think multipathing is great as it is, there hasnt been a moment where a missile hit me while i have been notching, and dodging multiple missiles isnt bad either. Flying low simply just shouldnt be a strat.


theres nothing nato countries can really get apart from better fox 3s, i didnt find the ER to be a problem though and wasnt easiest missile to use either as you have to notching incoming missiles

1 Like

dont let the plane to get within 1-2km


BR decompression is like actually always needed in this game, not really a question lol. To decompress the whoel game youd probabyl need top tier to be like 20.0 at this point.

As far as more stock missiles goes, if they would actually just give you consistent ways of fighting people without radar guided missiles, it would be completely fine to only have Fox 2s stock as now.

There generally just needs to be a reliable way to get to merge with people without being at a massive disadvantage form the getgo, current gameplay is completely dogshit because the skill gap in BVR is absulutely minimal (this is the least skilled meta since we got R-60s and Magic 1s before flares were added to the game).

I’m not opposed to having a expanded set of armament (say 2 IR + 2 radar guided missiles) available stock, but it isn’t per-say needed when you have the realistic possibility to merge with someone and just slam them because you’re better than them.

The issue with stock ARHs is that basically stock people would just full yolo it for 1 kill, which is just ass for gameplay too.

Match sizes, I’m a bit split on honestly.

On the one hand, smaller matches give you more match impact as a single player, which is extremely good, but it also gives exponentially mroe match impact to people that premade squad, which is a major issue. Playing against a 4 stack in an 8v8, even if they’re not particularly good at the game is basically impossible as long as they’re not completely stupid. Also more single player match impact also means that that 1 guy thats bombing on your team also has more negative impact.

On top of that, fighting 8v8 is kind of boring, because there’s way less combat to be had, and the fact that people are just more spread out just lead sto eventually having to play hide and seek against the last guy hiding in some map corner, while now they basically just get fragged most of the time.

I think I’d prefer 10v10 or 12v12 and a smaller maximum premade squad size for top tier overall.

Tree size just needs to be reduced alone because of the reason that it’s currently completely rediculous. The highest tree I could find (without doing any extensive searching) was 340ft (103m) high, measured with the radar altimeter of the Harrier Gr.7 hovering next to the tree on Rocky Pillars.

This will however not fix the issue with the 60m multipathing. You’re still going to be extremely likely to getting splash damaged, you still get griefed by the terrain having some random dip in it that you just physically cannot get into (already happened with 100m plenty) and you cannot enter an actual fight with ANYONE whatsoever without passing 60m essentially; even with 100m this was relatively hard to do, and even with SARHs where you usually just wouldn’t have random ones flying at you at basically all times you’d have to be extremely careful of what maneuvers youre doing to not eat an ER while you loop over or something.
Having the mechanic just be an RNG dice roll is just bad in every way.


Oh right, I’ll tell it to just go away.


i think at the very least, mid tier IR missiles like 9Ls maybe and what not should just come stock as a full kit rather than just 2 (at top tiers eg. 11.7-13.0) and maybe SARH as well but ARH stock? i cant imagine a world where little timmy who did nothing but play f-4s base bombing the entire time finally graduated the naval academy for bombers and got his f-15 and he gets to just lob off 8 120s into space, what a sick joke.

also idk about anyone else but the 3 trees i have directly in my back yard that are within my wood fence are all 40-50 meters. 10 meters is lower than the apex of my roof. 30-40 meters is perfect imo.


It also means stock aircraft/worse players have a much larger effect on the game, too. If someone is in a non-meta, or stock plane, their team is at a much larger disadvantage in an 8v8. Personally, I think 12v12 or 10v10 is the sweet spot for match size.