You’re omitting the on release comparisons, where the CL-13 was significantly stronger than the F-86F in terms of flight performance. Spitfire mk24 also back then rarely fought jets, and the F8F already had their engine turned into a RBMK with 80% of the control rods removed. Ki-84 was the only barely comparable fighter and it was still an easy kill.
Fighters (or bombers, way back when) dominating their BR bracket isn’t special or new, and the fault lies at the feet of the devs for not bothering to fix them faster.
No, the point is that this has happened before and it’s not a special occasion; the problem is the devs refusing to work quickly to fix a problem they created. It is not the fault of anyone or any aircraft that the devs released them too early/made them too strong/whatever.
you also forgot that current maps (in RB at least) ranges the same as AIM-120C max travel distance,…
no place for spreading a possible 16 rafale team in shorter amounts locally,…
no place to use AIM-120C, turn around, use the Speed advantage EFT/F-15 have over Rafale, to get outside range and start again,…
Gaijin choice, due to a community BF/COD like (arcade+ games enjoyers), is the reason why today Rafale is coming on top,…
As i repeated many times now:
MICA-EM is hard capped at 50km - unlike every other missiles which can easily reach 40km and still have enough energy to get a medium good enough Pk rates in game (things i’ve done with AAM-4, for exemple)
Most players needs to understand that game doesn’t allow them to use their aircraft/missile with strategy (or at least not in their mind), forcing them to rush mid-map like if they were in 1939 fighting 16v16 in head-on formations.
The performance difference between the Cl-13 Mk.5 and F-86 F-2 was not significantly more different than it is today.
Here are figures from DEFYNs video upon the release of the CL-13 Mk.6…which is a significant step up over the Cl-13 Mk.5, as well as the figures from the F-86 F-40.
The time-to-speed difference between the F-86 F-40 and the Cl.13 Mk.5 was 21 seconds maximum difference in acceleration from a standstill to 1100kph top speed.
Currently the Cl-13 Mk.5 will accelerate from 200kph to 1100kph in around 90 seconds according to statshark.
The F-86 F-40 will reach the same speed in 107 seconds.
The current difference between the two is 17 seconds and that is calculated acceleration from 200kph and not a standstill like in DEFYN test.
If we add the F-86 F-25 in for reference, we will see it accelerates slightly quicker than the F-86 F-40.
The relative performance difference between the Cl-13 Mk.5 and the F-86F was about the same when it was introduced to what it is to today. The only thing that is different is that there were less planes in the game and BR’s were relatively more compressed.
These are the overall statistics for theOrangeDoom (old content creator) in the Cl-13 Mk.5 vs F-86 F-2.
Overall he actually performed better on average in the F-86 F-2 than in the Cl-13 Mk.5.
Let’s do the same for DEFYN. Cl-13 Mk.5 first and F-86 F-2 next.
He performed basically identically in both planes in regards to kills per battle and actually slightly better in the F-2 in terms of kills per death.
So this idea that the Cl-13 Mk.5 dominated the matchmaker in the same way that the Rafale does really doesn’t hold any water. People at the time did perceive it as that way because the game had not yet jumped the shark in terms of power-creep and people really did think that fighting an identical plane that was 5-10% better was actually oppressive.
Also the idea that the Mk.24 rarely fought jets seems pretty laughable considering that if you watch old Messer Smitt videos from when the game was basically brand new, Fw-190 D-9 could end up in the same lobby as Me-262 and F-80.
The fact of the matter, a top tier aircraft dominating to the extent that the Rafale has for the past year is something that is out of the ordinary. The fact that you have to go back a decade to try and find an example of a similar situation (which wasn’t actually similar) should prove it.
Correct. I don’t have as many issues with the Rafale because I try not to RP as a lawnmower in the EFT, and I always try to stay fast and higher. The Rafale wouldn’t be anywhere near as good if gaijin didn’t make a mode where short ranges matter the most.
I’d argue that the EFT would be better if the 120Cs were put back to dev server levels with a much better seeker, and if 9Ms had a higher lock range
There’s also the top BR naval outlier that had two years of dominanace. Arguably more oppressive considering it’d just sail over to the spawn and kill everything automatically. You could shoot back but there was no point, it’d just ignore everything you threw at it.
The only really big difference between the Rafale and historical dominant aircraft is that for whatever reason the devs are taking their time in fixing the outlier.
(Also the spitfire mk24 beat the ever-loving crap out of jets easily back then since it had a decent thermo model, it was strong even against Me262 and P-80A; my experience with playing alongside a squadmate is that jet games were also super rare due to inflated repair costs of those early jets)
Scarhnhorst was a problem because it was an 8.0+ ship at 7.0 that absolutely dominated. Over the course of 2 years a number of changes occured that both nerfed the Scharnhorst and buffed everyone else. One of the most important being the introduction of comprable ships. Though the fire propergation in the turret lift was the biggest change of them all as it enabled existing vehicles to actually fight back effectively
We are back to square one though with Soyuz, with a 9.7 at 8.7
But what happened with Scharnhorst is the same thing that is happening right now with the Rafale.
Its a 15.0 aircraft vs 14.0 aircraft and the solution is the same.
Buff other aircraft / add comprable airframes
Add or change existing mechanics to nerf / reign in the outlier or level the playing field
I just hope it doesnt take 2 years to fix both “outliers”
Their IRCCM is already the best IMO, but I wouldn’t complain about a buff like that. My main issue is the lower lock ranges (which really hurts longer range shots) and their lack of HOBS capability, but that can mostly be played around.
Removing HMS and reducing the Rafales Mica count to 6 would be the easiest way of nerfing it to make it more fair, and it would lead to less powercreep.
Naval wasn’t too bad for the most part, it’s a decent mode despite the flaws and bad decisions by gaijin. Almost everyone has their time in the sun until top BR. Which is more that can be said of some other modes.
Yes. And the devs should’ve been smart enough to predict this and develop a plan to prevent/fix it if it happened. They’ve got the experience from previous times and the only thing missing is the action to correct their mistake quickly.
Naval is the game mode that is furthest removed from any of the other game modes. It is about as dumb as arguing that Air RB should be unbalanced because Helicopter PvP was unbalanced when it was a game-mode.
The difference is how dominant it is and for how long it has been dominant. Even F-14A vs MiG-23MLD was not nearly as oppressive and didn’t last as long. Neither did F-4 variants vs MiG-23 MLD.
You lost the majority of your games in the Mk.24 Spitfire in spite of having a 7.5 : 1 K/D in it and only averaged 1.2 K/B in it. A 41% win rate in any plane indicates that you have absolutely abysmal match presence; especially in props, and especially when the game was not 16v16 where your team is more likely to be steamrolled.
If the Mk.24 was so dominant then why does your win rate not even remotely reflect it? I predominantly played Mk.24 when it was set at 7.0 and even then I managed to win the majority of my games.
Ive been finding more and more the IRCCM just… doesnt work. The 9M swaps to a flare. Im gunna start working on a report becaue I think something is fundementally broken
Removal of HMD would do it. If HOBS is denied for everyone else then it should be denied for all. Would have to include the Soviet top tier stuff as well. Though they lack the raw FM.
