Reworking it by massively increasing the time it takes to fully burn and deal damage would probably the simplest/best way of doing that, without nerfing it drastically.
Right now, they destroy the base way too quickly, often before other planes can even reach it.
The point is that a Mig-23ML can run 2? napalm bombs and beat an equivalent premium (let alone TT version) such as the Tornado WTD61 to a base and get the kill. Despite the fact the Mig-23ML is one of the best fighters at 11.7. Meanwhile, even at 11.3 the Tornado IDS is a tad underpowered.
The only carriers that truly benefit from Napalm and the fighters that could and should be doing A2A.
Just nerf the impact damage by dividing it by 50. it’s supposed to be a short term area denial weapon, giving it a high impact damage makes no goddamn sense.
Yep,
That should rebalance them rather nicely whilst still leaving them an option for base bombing
Yeaah lets get them tornado indirectly buffed to shit and contribute even less to the team after popping 5000 flares in a straight line and lawndart 30m away from the base.
Most people when given the choice of good missiles OR bombs, they would pick the missiles. Examples: mig 21 bison and j7d.
theree a reason why so many mig 23ml users, myself included, just dump the r60ms and go for bombs.
Also what about stock grind? You would need to give the fighter planes all best missiles then, otherwise people will still bomb.
Well…
Buc S2 has a 3+ year old bug report to get Napalm as its specifically listed in the manual. (Sea Vixen too)
Harrier Gr3 could probably get them on the grounds the Harrier Gr1 has them
Other nations get weapons because the airframe could use it, therefore all nations get it (look at the Gripens) So the Phantoms at least could get them
Also Britain reserved the right to use napalm and pilots were likely trained how to use them in the Jaguar and Phantom, but just never actually used them
But ultimately Britain heavily used CBUs, on pretty much everything, which could be added and tuned to be a Napalm rough equivalent.
Good. you are now playing overtiered planes.
I think I need to disagree with you AGAIN about Super Mystere.
It might be a bad plane, but I think carrying SECAN 63 over AIM-9B feels insane.
Just like the way you use J-7D with 1500kg of bombs.
You even don’t have sight of which plane is good or bad because you bombs with ‘EVERY’ plane you get.
False.
Test drive your MiG-23ML with 2x ZB500 or 16x FAB 100.
For example, F-105D can use both dumb bomb and napalm for base bombing.
2x BLU-27/B has 800kg-ish weight
while 5x Mk.83 has 2230kg.
Triple of weight compared to napalm.
Even though F-105D’s empty weight is 12600kg, the extra 1400kg of weight damages acceleration quite much.
Please learn basic math from the beginning.
If a plane gets heavier, the thrust ratio goes lower
So accelerate slower
Then the Engine will get extra thrust later because it will reach optimal speed slower, which will make you even slower.
Mig 23 and other fighters are low thrust low weight airframes. I think the mig 23 has 13000 AB which is unusually powerful for a single engine fighter, but this still is beaten by two engine planes which has like 6000-8000 kg/f x2 which is roughly 12000-16000.
It’s like a car lifting a trailer VS truck doing the same. The car benefits from lower weight, but given higher weight the truck will beat it
F-105D, F-111A?
Hu?
They have less flares than the Mig-23MLs and are slower.
Tornado is a ground attack aircraft, its pretty much meant to do one thing and one thing only. Though, i’ve gotten a fair few kills in the GR4 recently.
Mig-23ML, F-4S and other fighters that run Napalm could actually benefit quite a bit to the team if they ran an A2A fit, but quite often chose not too, because running Napalm and base bombing is more proftiable for them.
Just because UK didnt use napalm as prolifically as others doesn’t mean the whole weapon should be nerfed, just that CBU should be added as a counterpart
Both of which could get a base kill without Napalm right?
Whilst something like the F-5 or Mig-23 wouldnt be able to without Napalm, if they ran standard bombs instead.
More what I meant
Mig-23ML, F-4S and other fighters that run Napalm could actually benefit quite a bit to the team if they ran an A2A fit, but quite often chose not too, because running Napalm and base bombing is more proftiable for them.
I’m sorry this is wrong. Most zombers run missiles on the plane too. It’s about maximizing the chance of you getting at least something.
Something could be a base bombed, player killed, or even AI plane destroyed.
They really do benefit from napalm though, I can speak from experience on the F-105D
Napalm vs regular bombs difference in performance is rather extreme. They are something like 13x more effective iirc.
Perhaps they can still be stronger, but they dont need to be 13x more effective
and that’s why napalms shouldnt be nerfed. You have to think about stock grind.
I didnt realise premiums like the Mig-23ML had a stock grind
But i’ve never had an issue with stock grinding with conventional bombs
Yeah, but that would require gaijin specifically nerfing specific vehicles which gaijin tend not to do. (E.g. removing or adding air spawn for certain vehicles).
Especially not prems where sales would go down
13x? Isn’t this the number that napalm was underperforming by before they fixed it? I think you might be confusing them