I’m talking that napalm is only good for one thing, while bombs are good for a lot more things. It’s not my fault that Britain decided against using napalm, that Germany stopped using fire bombs, China never used them, Italy never used them. Literally the only two nations that did are America and USSR. Cry about Russian and American bias, since they’re the main ones who use them.
Right… and this entire thread is about the 1 thing its good at, destroying bases, is too good, and they need a rework.
They allow fighters, such as the Mig-23ML, to outperform dedicated ground attackers like the Tornado because they allow a relatively tiny weapons payload to do more damage than a moderately sized payload. All whilst being on a faster airframe.
If the Tornados BR is largely dictated by its “effeciency” which the sole reason they are at 11.7 not 11.3 or 11.0, then this needs to be factored in
If balance was the only issue, then they should add CBUs which could be tuned similarly, that all other nations would use.
Gaijin actually giving a British plane something good? Nice joke, mate. You should be a comedian.
1 Like
Good luck playing with the F104 as an interceptor, the plane was so nerdy that it can’t perform its own function, it now only serves to be a bomb.
1 Like
Fighters carrying napalm bombs isn’t the problem. Honestly those fighters need to git-gud for foolishly carrying bombs instead of air to air missiles in the current game modes.
What really needs to change is that the maps need to change. For one, there really should be more bases and more targets. One attacker player has enough firepower to wipe out half of the bases. There just aren’t enough targets to go around. But furthermore the ground targets shouldn’t just be defenseless bases. There should be serious objectives on the map.
MatAWG had an interesting video the other day displaying an intriguing custom battle where there were multiple bases along the frontline, and the skies over the bases were controlled by a mix of close range AAA like Strelas and longer ranged AAA like the S-75. That’s something more akin to what the battles should be. Air RB should NOT be a 16v16 team deathmatch. Right now ground attack is useless towards winning battles and exists just as selfish and brainless way to score points for people who either aren’t skilled enough to compete in PvP or who are unfortunate enough to be playing a nation that lacks viable fighters at that BR.
It would be a good thing if theater level AAA could disrupt the team-deathmatch meta and give a purpose to multirole loadouts and dedicated ground attackers that can seriously threaten such AAA.
3 Likes
This to be honest, sounds like what ASB / RB EC should be. I dont necessarily have issue with ARB being a deathmatch gamemode, the issue is there is little alternative unless you are willing to learn how to play ASB and deal with its shortcomings
2 Likes
If we have ARB persist as being a “deathmatch” game mode, then they need to solve the problem of attackers and bombers being permitted to even queue for the game mode since they are largely deadweight. Granted there are some exceptions to attackers being useless like the F-15E that are basically fighters wearing a funny hat, or things like the A-10 and Su-25 trolling early generation jet aircraft that lack countermeasures.
For the most part though people spawning into attackers, or things like F-4s with base bombing loadouts, are deadweight for their team. They probably aren’t helping their team win at all. Arguably their presence is detrimental to their team when they alternatively could have had another fighter for the deathmatch. They’re only there to try to scrounge up some RP for lack of better options.
Attackers and bombers don’t really have any place within a deathmatch. If air RB is supposed to be a deathmatch, then attackers and bombers shouldn’t be in air RB. If attackers and bombers shouldn’t be in air RB, then they need some alternative mode where they can do something more productive than racing headfirst at a base while screaming “MINE MINE MINE MINE!” like the seagulls from “Finding Nemo” and praying that the RWR beeping is indicative of a missile seeking their adjacent teammate instead of themselves.
2 Likes
Yeah, in Gaijin and some bad fighter mains who want bomber/attacker to be ‘manned bot, which can do nothing in a match but gives a superior reward than those unmanned A-4B or CL-13’
With Gaijin’s way of solving(Laugh) the problem.
I can’t wait to see the complete removal of my fully spaded bomber branch, and say goodbye to my Tornado IDS forevermore in this game. :|
Then I will finally can quit this game which is in rubbish bollock status.
I really want to see that Strike Aircraft and Bombers can do a real thing in ARB but
My mind is just broken, and I don’t have any faith about that anymore…
The problem with playing strike aircraft in ARB is to do it efficiently for a win you basically have to “troll” to get anywhere by playing the most ungodly fast ones and dragging the game out and bleeding tickets for a win. Definitely with some airfield camping, feigning landings and order spam necessary since people will go apeshit after you(which is often how you win :) ). Often times most of your team mates are also useless for it because they are all dead before the bases can even respawn.
2 Likes
IMO, low-tier strike planes (I don’t have top-tier) are the WORST. They (1) have cannons and spawn at bomber ALT, making them bomber hunters (2) dive and rush for the bases (3) They are the TOP Teamkillers. TBH, if you want to ban napalm, it wouldn’t be hard for some F-4 to find OTHER options, like Rockets (I’ve heard most use rockets now since napalm has bad rewards), Snakeye bombs, maybe even ATGM/ASGM like the ones on the SU-34. What we SHOULD do is, however, is to make a statistics that gives bombers 100-200% MORE RP and SL when they DAMAGE/KILL a base. AND the MAIN reason why fighters choose napalm is because it’s lighter and more damaging. But why? Because after the base respawning changes, (I also know what it is) they figured only four (4) bases won’t be enough, rushing for the bases with the lightest load possible. We can (1) add up to eight bases (someting like SB) so that there is less competition in both low and top tier, (2) add AAA (low tier) and AAM (top-tier) around bases so that fighters might not want to take it. And we can have AAA and AAM target low-flying planes (mostly fighters) so that leaves bombers in peace. I know, because of the ballistic computers and retarded bombs, bombers also fly low. So, we can rig the AAA and AAM to target fighters like crazy while target bombers a little less (second priority). It’s realistic since IRL bases are not left undefended. (I know that they should target bombers first, but the point is to discourage fighters). What ya think?
I miss the bases respawning right after I landed. :(
No need to nerf fighters, especially since many of them are actually fighter-bombers irl. Why not to just increase amount of targets to bomb as well as health points/protection of each base?
1 Like
Agreed. Also, stock grind, and the fact that some planes are simply awfulz like Smb2, that the only decently consistent route is to grind is bomb
Almost every strike jets are more awful than MiG-23ML in the current meta.
But your way of sacrificing whole strike aircraft for your ‘bomber tagged as a fighter’ is wild as hell.
Napalms are overperforming
With superior flight characteristics of a fighter
They are shameless.
Stop cherrypicking Gaijin’s flaw to defend your own flaw.
Stock grind is a problem.
But there will be also other ways to improve it without exploiting napalm.
Actually, in the case of SMB2, many 9.0 strike planes (IAR-93B, A-32A) perform better than it, they dont compress at mach 0.85
It is Super Mystere’s fault. For Christ’s sake.
The fact that SMB2 acts worse doesn’t give licence to whole other fighters for shaming strike aircraft.
It can be fixed with buff or decompression.
There’s a third option there too, which is people who just want to grind their tree with a premium. The unfortunate part is, is that not everyone cares about your win loss ratio. They bomb to get RP, they could care less about their stats, they just want to get to the planes they want, spade those, and move on with their lives.
I’m not going to lie, I enjoy some PVP, but sometimes I will just go into Sim to bomb because I get a bunch of free RP. It’s less stress to go into Sim, say “friendly”, and then bomb. If some guy shoots me down, depending on how I’m feeling, I will either hunt him down, keep bombing, or I will quit and create a new match in a dead server. It’s less stressful than “Spawn, fire, die. Spawn, fire, survive.”
If anything, blame Gaijin for the bomber crisis. People are always going to find ways to get through the grind faster. Gaijin shouldn’t have made everything so bloody expensive while giving little exp. for destroying aircraft.
Its 2x as effective as reg bombs iir i havent taken angthing but 1000kg of napalm to any arb battle in years. If I remember correctly it takes 2000kg (4 500kg) bombs to destroy a base vs 2 500kg napalm. Sorry idk what imperial bombs are since ive only really been geinding russia last year or so.
And again the more bombs you bring the less rp/sl you get per base based on some wacky formula they use for loadouts. Some planes supposedly have loadouts that missed the nerf you can still abuse but idk what they are. The general rule of thumb is to only bring enough bombs for a single base, and since napalm is 2x as effective per kg you cut the weight you need to carry roughly in half.
If you remember the nerf to rockets a while back to bases, the real reason this was done is because rockets only slightly nerf rp/sl gains vs bombs, so people would bring just enough napalm for 1 base, then every other pylon would be rockets, allowong them to get multiple bases per loadout without nerfed gains. So it was nerfed into oblivion.
Yeah, I hated the rocket nerfs. But that was because I was playing Sweden, and if you know Sweden, they don’t get bombs on most of their planes, only rockets.
If I remember correctly, only the A29 and the Strike Aircrafts beyond the A29 get bombs. The Drakkens, Viggens, Saab trainer jet, MiG 21, Hunter, and the other fighters only get rockets.
A lot of these ppl don’t want to hear it, but they suggest nerfing fighter options simply due to spite.
2 Likes