They can base rush if they want. They just have reason to demand that everything that is better at it needs to be nerfed.
Its like that one dude who demanded multipath needed to be like 500m high because he wanted to fly straight the whole match and not get killed by aim54
“Oh, stop those F-4EJ’s rocket spam because my Kfir Canards can’t no more run faster than them to bomb the base😭😭😭” -------- Typical sucker statement who only bombing the base and do nothing in a fking F I G H T E R S
I agree they can complain about it, nerfing bombing or giving better rewards for air kills would solve most of the problems, but claiming that fighters shouldn’t have bombs because it makes their experience in strike aircraft less fun is not a valid excuse to ban bombs on fighter planes
Flying boat with 6 terrible IRs and in some cases with very limited CMs isn’t really useful.
As I said, they’ll be forced to do something they’re inferior at.
In ARB, if Gaijin doesn’t want to add more bases, there should be a clear distinction between the two.
My dude, the Kfir was built as a ground attacker, that is what it was designed for
Ok, by that same argument there should be no up tiers or down tiers because you have to combat planes or tanks better than yours
Air kills would get them so much more already. They do base rushing because it is easy to do.
They would have to heavily nerf base rewards again but that would screw over attackers and bombers.
Agreed, people bomb bases because it’s easy. I too bomb bases, it’s free RP. After that I go kill the premium phantoms who have no idea how to play.
Me watching an f4s fire off all 4 of his aim7s at the same time.
Not really.
Strike aircraft are there to ground pound. If fighters can do that better while being much better at A2A, then what’s the point of strikers ?
It’s like if you have AAs being able to kill tanks just as easily as TDs, while being much better at engaging planes as well.
At least TDs wouldn’t be limited to 4 enemies (bases), so current situation is even worse.
My initial point was that just because fighters carrying bombs interferes with the gameplay of strike aircraft isn’t a reason to ban bombs from fighters. Sure it’s inconvenient to them, but that’s just the game. It’s never perfect.
In the current state of the game yes it is a perfect reason.
That’s like you support lower tier bombers to larp as fighters “just because they want to”.
Some boundaries have to be set.
But more importantly it is label as “fighter” in the game just like the F-4, so he really can’t blame other for too go in bombing base
What boundaries? ban anything that annoys you? If players want to larp as fighters with bombers that’s up to them.
Do you see there where it says it is designed as a ground attack version?
@Schindibee, @RunaDacino
Thanks for the extra info and correction about Air SB.
Maybe I only saw some extreme comments about the bombing in air-SB and got frightened.
It made me unsure about trying Air SB at all. :|
Well… Some of those comments I saw before sounded like “bombing or PVE things in war thunder is a sin. Because this game is PVP. Leave. Air SB isn’t your place.”
:'(
I might also be angry if some PVE guys force me not to engage at all in the lobby when I play Fighters for Intercept.
Thank you very much.
A full downtier against largely flareless planes and you don’t even have a single missile…
Also underpowered engine/ airframe??? It’s one of the best for the BR. Climb to 5k and you will reach Mach 1.4 easily.
Developed from a airframe which doesn’t do well in CAS and you expect it will do well? And my point is I don’t care what role it designed for IRL but in the game it had labeled as a “fighter”