There are also russian jets with no flares going against all aspect missiles. There are for most nations in the game.
@Smin1080p Are there any plans to decompress further down, by moving aircraft like the F-104 and MiG-19 up as well? Or is that something that will be considered later, during a regular BR adjustment or something?
2 Likes
Sorry meant laser guided, sort of get the 2 confused from time to time
Which zoom? From camera on the glass?
Still not moved the tornado Gr1 down to 11.0 in ARB/ASB
Can it get a forward instead then?
Along with other slow subsonics like the Buc S2B. This is just buffing the US/USSR and no one else
3 Likes
Hi,
Can we have a break down on how Skill of a player affects the calculations for efficiency, would be good to see how it works so we can give feed back.
all IDS’ should be 10.7/11.0 in Air, shame 9Ls stop it moving down further,
1 Like
what if, and hear me out here, we DECOMPRESS the brs? i know its a crazy thing to even think about, but another br or 2 would give some breathing room to a LOT of planes tanks and ships without being an extreme step in queue time.
that doesnt mean move the vehicles around in the current br system, thats just compressing some parts of the game even more, it means adding more brs to the game and spreading things out. ground and air to 14 or 15 br would be a huge improvement, naval is desperate for some room as destroyers can fight the best cruisers, cruisers can fight the best battleships, and battleships of wildly different capabilities all see each other.
4 Likes
This is what is actual RIP bozo situation for premium A-10 buyers.
Learn to play without spamming AIM-9Ls against defenseless flareless subsonic jets.
Should have stayed at 11.7. How will the most modern (30-35 years newer than any other non-Russian contemporary A2G missile) and advanced A2G missile in the game with three times the range of non-Russian SPAA and Mach 2 speed be able to compete now that it can no longer face 10.3-11.3 SPAA with 5 times less range!
In all honesty, 13.0 deserves to exist just for the SU-25SM3. Even the pantsir isn’t an effective counter. There’s also no reason for the Kh-38 to exist since it’s completely overkill and the Kh-29s were already the best A2G missiles in the game.
3 Likes
Now that’s an intelligent way of going about it! Thanks for listening and giving it some more thoughts!
Edit: Seems you forgot to add the new BRs for the attack aircrafts in the spreadsheet
Yoo very nice. There is yet another double edged sword that comes with this, which is that the close proximity to the ground targets means that the attack aircraft will be able to heavily influence the state of the tickets before the battle between the fighters really kicks off, leading to slightly shorter and hence less enjoyable matches. A nice addition to go alongside this would be to increase both the number of ground targets available to the attackers, aswell as increasing the ticket count. This way attackers get to do a lot of ground striking and earning, without making matches super short via ticket bleed.
Once again, this is a very nice change, its good to see you guys implementing changes strictly based on fairness of interactions aswell as player feedback, rather than simply your own metrics.
While useful at 10.3 i will rather bring the freccia and at 11.3 the vrcc
Honestly at this point i Will rather start grinding the helicopter tech tree than use the AMX in ground battles
With the addition of this system, would it be worth also adjusting tech tree tornado IDS variants (currently 11.3) to 11.0 ARB, and keeping such planes at 11.3 for GRB due to the enhanced A-G performance?
I raise this because the premium / event variants are currently 11.0 ARB, and tech tree variants offer no difference in performance for air battles and are currently a higher ranking
2 Likes
I also want to point out one more thing.
Aircraft such as the A-10s and Su-25s, with their inferior flight performance and strong weaponry suffer against fighters because those fighters have vastly superior flight characteristics.
However, while this BR increase will bring about stronger fighters to hunt them, at around this 10.3-11.3 range, fighters increase in potentcy mainly due to their kit and not so much due to their flight performance. For example, the J-7D at 11.0 doesnt have superior flight performance to the MiG-21MF at 10.3, but it has a vastly superior kit. Of course, aircraft such as MiG-23MLs etc. do bring new levels of flight performance to the table, but generally speaking the majority of the upgrades to fighters at this specific BR region come to the weapons kit. The point is, is that these attack aircraft are not going to be dealing with a whole new type of threat. These aircraft have ample quantities of large calibre countermeasures, and so it doesnt really phase them all that much that they are now facing higher calibre missiles.
Furthermore, even if the flight performance of the fighters they were facing was to drastically increase with the BR bump, the A-10/Su-25 could on no grounds compete with fighters at its current BR anyway. Hell, im not sure it could compete with a lot of fighters at 7.3 if we purely consider flight performance. It doesnt make much difference if the A-10 is competing with a fighter with a 0.8 TWR or a 1:1 TWR, since it can do nothing to it anyway (in terms of flight performance ofc).
So, all in all, I dont think the A-10/Su-25s will have a much rougher time than they already do when it comes to defending against enemy fighters at its BR and above, this change just simply prevents them from facing as many enemies w/o countermeasures at BRs below it.
All in all, fabulous change, and I wouldnt worry too much about the A-10/Su-25s being less competititve.
3 Likes
The table on the link as of 30 May shows no BR changes at all for the Su25, A10, etc in Air Realistic Battles.
So, yes, the game will continue being unfair for planes without flares in ARB.
Why don’t you separate this discussion into ground and air battles then?
My take on this matter is that balancing the BRs appropriately is more important than balancing the earnings appropriately. Hence, moving the tornados down a step should come before you consider the fact that these planes might be earning a smidge too much.
And I will say, I fully appreciate the reasoning, im not accusing you guys of being greedy or scummy or whatever, I just thing that you need to fix the BRs and then sort out any issues with earnings you might have, that way the community knows your priorities are aligned with theirs.
Of course, a little decompression would help all these problems ;)
I digress, move the tornadoes down.
Sim players suffering again. We don’t benefit from closer spawns because we don’t have airspawn.
1 Like
They clearly said they would implement it after the next major update.
Considering they only literally today even considered the idea, I dont think its fair to rush them when the update is around the corner.
Be grateful
One thing that I think hasn’t been mentioned is how by moving down a lot of the purely air to air aircraft in ground be like the mig 23’s, it would incentivise people to play more anti cas, cause now you have really powerful anti air weapons at a much lower br.