Lower the reward multiplier for bases on fighter aircraft

Game Discussion Realistic Battle
,
1

its kinda annoying to have entire teams full of fighters bombing bases.
basicaly its known that if the team has a lot of fighters bombing its almost a guaranteed loss.
so in my opinion all fighters (doesnt matter if they have fire bombs or regular bombs or rockets) should only get a base reward multiplier of 1.0 to 2.0 (1.0 being for fire bombs and 2.0 being for regular bombs/rockets), and strike aircraft/bombers should get regular multipliers.

this would incentivize fighters to actually fight and not afk bomb.
strike aircraft/bombers would be unaffected

2

I’d prefer it if this was done for premium fighters alone since some tech fighters like the F-4J and F-4EJ have absolutely abysmal stock loadouts and bombing is the most viable way to unlock better A2A weaponry

3

imo, they should just give them better stock loadouts, like for the f4j maybe 2 sparrows and 2 sidewinders, same for the EJ, but yeah, if only premium fighters got lower amounts i wouldnt complain either

1 Like
4

I doubt that would stop them (I don’t think most of them even know there is a reward multiplier, look at how many take ordinance for 4 bases despite how unlikely it is that you will get even 2) and the last thing this game needs is more nerfs to the economy.
Then there are planes like the F-104S TAF that is basically useless for anything but base bombing.
The system dose need a rework, but more nerfs to the economy is not the way to do it IMO.
Maybe hide base markers from fighters for the 1st 5 mins so attackers/ bombers can hit them, but doesn’t punish fighters for hitting them later then the last guy on the enemy team is airfield camping, or separate targets for different types of planes.

5

I think a better solution would be to nerf napalm in some way, such as halving its overall damage, or decreasing the initial damage, and increasing the time it takes to fully burn.

And remove it from dedicate fighter jets, excluding the F-104s.

3 Likes
6

They could also add different types of bases like hardened bunkers etc that require actual bombs to destroy. With the massive empty areas around the outside of the high tier maps there is room to add some interesting things, like bases protected by heavy air defenses that require peeling away in order to hit the base, so rushing in to speed bomb just gets you shot down.

1 Like
7

to be fully honest, i really think the reason the f104S/G are at that br is the bombs, i mostly say bc when the XS lost the ability to bomb it went down from 11.0 to 10.3 in like what, 2 months?, i think the same would happen to the 104s if their bombs got removed

8

This would be my prefered solution for long term health of the game, but I do still think Napalm needs some rework

Various base types that require different methods of attack. Some would be better with Napalm/CBUs, otehrs regular bombs and maybe even a few that required GBUs and precision hits (though the GPS nerf does create some issue for that idea). They could also come in a range of sizes and a range of defences.

Of course only SB would truly benefit from having all types available. But in ARB. 1-2 “large” and “hardened” targets that need conventional bombs and perhaps a lot of them. Would probably be all that is needed shorter term (The forward airfield could be this target)

9

No. I dont think it was. The decompression had it move to 11.0 and whilst that was fine on paper. It constantly saw the strong SARH slingers in full uptiers and with no RWRs I imagine that was exceptionally rough.

It probably should be 10.7 though, so maybe the loss of effective base bombing was why it moved down to 10.3. But whilst it may have played a role. I think it was only part of it.

It might… It might not… Gaijin relationship with anything even resembling a mud mover is wierd.

10

i dont entirely remember where in the forum it was said that they balanced brs based on points per match (or was it SL gained per match, i dont remember very well)

11

There is this that you might be remembering

Which was the most insane thing ever written.

But, if that was the only thing that mattered. The mig-23s would all be 12.0 as well. So clearly there is more at play

2 Likes
12

tbf i have been playing a lot of mig23 br and successful mig23 bomb runs are always in the lower end, like, they either get TKd/crash , a f104/tornado beats them to the base or they get intercepted, i think the few successful bomb runs are what keep them at the br they are

13

F-104 might, but a Tornado probably wont. At least i’ve yet to do it in my Tornados

14

That’s a good idea. Also napalm needs to be removed from premium jet fighters. The whole argument of “muh realistic” is boneheaded in the extreme. From a gameplay perspective, it’s borderline useless unless you’re bombing bases or open tops in ground RB the latter of which at that BR are virtually nonexistent. It’s so obvious that it was meant to be a cheap and lazy way to grind up a tech tree and is a godsend for bot farmers looking to sell accounts since in almost every game, premium fighters like the MiG-21 Lazur and F-104S always beat strike aircraft to bases.

1 Like
15

It’s already lowered, and stop demanding lower rewards.

XS didn’t lose its ability to bomb, it never had that ability.
And it was moved to 10.3 due to better attention made.

F-104S would still be 11.3 whether it bombs or not.

16

-its not

-it did

it wouldnt

17

Then why has the F-104S and F-4E never increased in BR due to their bombing ability? Why aren’t they 12.0?
Mig-21Bis in Sweden can’t bomb at all yet is correctly 0.3 BR below the superior F-104S and F-4E and the same BR as Mig-21s that can bomb.