The damage and burn overtime should be reduced drastically, removing it shouldn’t be an option because it still plays a role in the game regardless.
It’s just extremely demoralizing to try to race in your bomber and not even be able to do what your plane was designed to do.
Yeah, I am well aware that napalm itself shouldn’t removed from fighter.
Just whined because of personal hatred deep inside my heart. :/
Tonka GR.1 was my first paid talisman, but I never played it nowadays because MiG-23ML does better in both A2A and A2G base bombing races.
Really, the current efficiency of napalm bombs is extremely demoralizing.
Dedicated strike aircraft or bombers like Tonka can do nothing but be a dead weight on the match in ARB if we only consider capability and BR.
Didn’t most napalm bombs used to have far more drag than they currently do? Maybe I am miss remembering but I recall it used to be better to carry regular bombs, even though it took more to kill a base, as they would slow the aircraft far less than napalm canisters.
I dont know, but the main change and the reason it became so popular was a massive buff to the base damage it did. I cant find the changelog for it though
Edit found it
As I remember when it was added it took 4 250kg canisters to kill a base to kill a base and they slowed the plane by something like twice what a regular bomb would.
Looking in game I think it’s just the original MK77 canisters, 5 of them have +0.35000 kgf parasite drag and slow an A-4 by 190kph, while 5 1000lb’ers have +0.21000 kgf drag and only slow on A-4 by 84kph so it’s likely its just the newer more streamlined canisters that are doing it.
well, arent the USAF napalm bomb much more streamlined? makes sense no?
anyways, napalm shouldnt be nerfed since it is very real and effective weapon used by many strike aircraft
No idea, I was just trying to work out why napalm wasn’t slowing planes the way it used too.
As for whether or not it needs a nerf, I would say either it or strike aircraft need a bit of a rework to give strikers a better chance to actually do their jobs.
That would, in my opinion, be better done by letting strikers/ bombers spawn on the forward airfield (like Gaijin said they would do a year ago) so they can reach objectives before fighters destroy them, rather than nerfing weapons.
Introducing a mix of different base types that where more/ less resistant to different weapon types could be another approach.
It takes about 3 250kg Napalm, while it takes 2 500kg of Napalm to destroy a base.
Meanwhile it takes about 4,500kg bombs to destroy a base.
In Arcade, it takes 5 250kg, or 4 500kg of Napalm, whilst it takes about 9,000kg of bombs.
I see the issue but the solution is bad, artificial restrictions are too zero sum. Better idea would be to simply make the bases either respawn in 30 seconds and/or add more bases. I still think napalm and rockets should be nerfed against bases simply because it makes bombs borderline irrelevant in over 95% ARB matches that lack worthwhile AI targets for bombs, unless you have high power AGM/GBU bombs.
Napalm is useless outside of bombing bases anyhow. At least bombs can be used in GRB, GSB, and all three air battles. Rockets are just meh in general, used to be good, but then “waaaaah, nerf rockets, they’re too good!”
Napalm is the only bombs worth bringing.
99.999999% of players dont realize like 5 years ago gaijin nerfed bomb loadouts so the more you bring the less rp/sl you get per base. Bringing enough bombs for 3 bases cuts your reward per base by like 66% so you get barely more than bringing enough for just 1 and have to secure 3 bases which is unlikey.
So bringing anything but just enough napalm for 1 base is extremely dumb. Why napalm? Because its the lightest loadout, so you are faster than bringing enough conv bombs for 1 base.
Also if the rp nerf is when you load in, so you cant even bring extra ordinance to ground pound or you nerf your rp/sl.
And finally whatever plane can carry 2 500kg napalm and is fastest is the best base bomber for rewards on any br bracket, modt of these arent even strike planes or bombers.
Recently I’ve been playing A32A and Super Mysterie. Imagine napalms getting removed. These planes would be worthless overnight.
and this is precisely why Napalm needs to be reworked and quite heavily nerfed.
If nothing else, it massively screws over aircraft that dont have that option, like the Tornado IDS. In fact a few nations like Britain dont have a single F2P napalm carrier.
I personally feel napalms won’t change much for high weight high thrust airframes. They’re already heavy to begin with, so bomb weighs almost nothing to them.
I mean, it’s on Britain for not getting on the napalm program. Its funny how both US and Britain tested napalm on the same region (Peninsular SEA) and produce two extremely polarized conclusion where US goes on with BLU-77 and britain stick with the dumbass Mk. 82.
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.