I am a bit worried about ‘bomber reward thread’ if we consider those ‘remove bases for get rid of those bot and skillless zombers’ threads all over the forum :|
With exaggeration, we might go to a dogfight in Bucc or Lancasters if Gaijin really listens forum’s voice. :/
I know I shouldn’t be doomposting now, but we’ve seen long-term hatred to mudmovers…
Ah, of course, don’t forget about the overall reward nerfing attempt two years ago too…
that whole part of air is unplayable because of those creatures
So trying it out.
Its a little tricky to be certain without more testing as one was a win and the other was a loss, but yeah, probably better off just running 4x 1000lb which does mitigate the only reason for it to be a higher BR than the Canberras in ARB
J-7D is way worse to deal with.
AFAIK, when the era F-5C and F-8E were 10.3BR, J-7D were 11.0 along with J-7E
My memories are a bit iffy, so unsure about that though.
There are pros and cons.
Now for me personally, I just playing these aircraft for fun, I have nothing to grind with them at the moment. So overall the reward is secondary to the gameplay. So a lower BR would naturally make a lot of these aircraft more fun to play (and this is in part why I want to see things like ASM, ARMs and CBUs added, its not necessarily about buffing the performance, but rather buffing the “fun”)
A lower BR would also mean that you could more consistantly make it to a target to get a base kill and maybe also use your aircraft that isnt really designed for A2A combat to grab a bit of extra score with an A2A kill or 2. Which would offset any losses in rewards.
The downside is that for aircraft like the Buc S1, which cannot do that, they may end up getting far less each match, though again, it may still be a net gain over multiple matches.
For example. At the moment if you make 5k RP per match for 1 base but only made it to the base 50% of the time due to being a higher BR. Then you would get 25k RP over 10 matches. If the reward was reduced to 3-4K, but due to a lower BR you were now making it 80% of the time. Over those same 10 matches you would get 24-32K. So it would be really critical how much they reduce the reward by. But even on the lower end of 3k per match, where you would technically get 1k less RP over those 10 matches, you wouldnt feel like you were wasting your time quite as much and probably would have had a lot more fun.
Though my biggest fear is that they would reduce the rewards too much and not lower the aircraft enough. So you had weak aircraft, at bad BRs but now earning even less than they did before.
well tbf he was talking about now where J-7D and F-8E are same BR
just note the score you get when you kill a base with the different bomb loadouts, RP/SL is basically just a function of score X time spent alive.
All loadouts and planes have slightly differently modifiers to score/rewards based on what they bring, but generally it is just never worth it to bring more bombs than is enough for 1 base. As you rewards get cut, and you have to get more than 1 base to equalize score. On top of being heavier and hampering your ability to beat blue enemies to bases.
Was playing the tornado yesterday 12 bombs 1 base gave me like 300 something vs 600 something for just bringing 5.
Its been this way for like 5 years and 99% of the playerbase hasn’t caught on yet for some reason.
If you want to know the real reason rocket damage to bases was nerfed it wasn’t whatever BS gaijin said it was, it was because rockets mostly bypassed this nerf, you could bring just enough bombs for 1 base then the rest rockets and bypass their system of kneecapping base rewards. Imagine the horror… people were getting nearly 2 full bases worth of RP/SL. And then in the same update they made napalm work like it does now so fighters are actually the best bombers in the game.
Yeah, its a really bad system. More actions should equal more reward, which is why most of the community probably doesnt realise this issue and its why the devs need to have a proper thread for discussing bombers and rewards.
Lower the rewards slightly, lower the BRs slightly and remove the diminishing returns for increased weapon loads and you’d probably see mud movers largely fixed
Not really worth it for you most of the time, but ticket bleed is nonexistent with base destruction, so if you want to contribute to the team, is only option.
Buccaneer is incredibly hard to justify. Even other jet bombers are better at low ratings in other trees. I’m pretty okay with using bombers and attackers that are a bit higher than they ought to be, but buccaneer not remotely worth the attempts. It would be workable if we had it consistently get much longer range maps that allow you to take a path away from threats, but it doesn’t and even then I’m not sure it could with the threats it runs into. At least with yak 28 (Not a lower br example, but a similarly lacking platform relative to BR) you can hit 10km vertical at which point most people won’t bother you.
The Buccaneer S1 is notably faster than the bomber 0.3 below it: Canberra.
Both having equally good payloads.
Air spawn for S1 would require a BR uptick for sure when the Vautours are still 9.0 as equally fast bombers.
I spaded it in ARB mostly in 2024 IIRC - stay low and fast, kill as many AI ground units as you can - got back to reload maybe 50% of the time, and even a 3rd time once or twice - points for landing and take-off re a significant % of what you get!!
It is worthless as long as Canberra does better at both ground pounding and base bombing, thanks to air spawn.
And don’t forget that USAF B-57B can mount 20mm M39 for more pounding.
Maybe you would be right if both Bucc and Vautours retain air spawn.
But as long as neither bucc nor vautour has air spawn, both of them are way worse than rank 5 bombers with air spawn.
B-57B or IL-28Sh can be an easy example of it.
IMO, only bomber which is worse than Bucc S.1 is ‘Non-US variant’ of F-84F.
Slower, meh payload, ground spawn.
Scimitar is 8.7 as well and really the better bullpup slinger.
^^This, by going into ground targets instead of base(s), you could quickly dump your payloads (and still get rewards) and RTB much earlier, thus you’re less exposed to incoming enemy.
Also for countermeasures, you could sacrifice one of the underwing bomb and replaced it with a rocket pod as an ersatz flares. When an enemy fired an IR missile, you could launch 1-2 rockets and turn slightly, with your good speed you could run to the airfield or nearby friendly.
I would agree with you but the vautour at 9.0 with no guns takes the cake. At least in a buccaneer you could do the scummy thing and camp above their af and use the agm’s to kill them (saw a scimitar doing it in a squad with an a4e… probably the most scummy thing ive seen in a while).
How many times does ticket bleed even win a match though? From personal expierence maybe 1 out 15 or so games, so the idea you are helping the team via ticket bleed is kinda dubious outside of sim.
Only reason bombers aren’t hated more in lower tiers is MM tries to put 4 on both teams so the deadweight is even across both, at higher tiers they try to just balance strike planes by placing them at a BR they are competitive at, but sometimes fail to do so and seem to rather put them at a BR they are terrible at than even close to one they would approach being problematic at with a few exceptions like A-10 early and su25.
Only way these planes don’t suck is introduction of RB EC where killing AI/bases actually makes a difference because every game comes down to tickets and not just like 5% or whatever do now. Would also remove the loadout nerfs we have now, since in EC everyone gets kneecapped/screwed equally via reward periods instead of just base bombers getting screwed over.
