There would be a time for the MP bandaid to come off, but not while we’re still suffering from compression.
That would just be balance-breaking.
Focus on moving things up and down first, and then we can start thinking about it.
As for the 60M reductions, it did make the game hell for a while until the balance was readjusted.
There is an argument to be made that they wont ever fix it whilst the bandaid exists.
they look so heavily at player stats, that the player stats may not show an issue with the F-14A being at 12.7 and there being no need to decompress because people are defending so easily using MP
Remove/lower it and then fix the damage afterwards. May suck for a month or so, but is better than it never happening out of fear of it being bad short term.
1 Like
It’s the symptom of a larger issue, but MP alliviates it right now-- which is why we have it.
There is a lot to fix before MP can truly go, and just ignoring those factors and immediately removing is simply not going to work.
They may not be, but your team is completely suppressed and the enemy team is very well-positioned and ready to completely steamroll you.
And THAT is an issue.
Barely.
barely
They’re horrible missiles.
You can’t use it because it’s the hottest plane in the game. Instant IR missile death.
They already do that ingame because that’s what they’re designed to do. Removing multipath allows others to do the same.
That’s not a fact. That’s a biased opinion. The magic 2 at that low BR in general makes it way better than the F-14A.
As I said jsut above… There is an argument to be made that there is nothing to fix currently because there is MP.
What incentive is there to add stock chaff, to make better maps, to change core gamemode design, to adjust BRs, etc etc. Without also changing MP.
Maybe it should all happen at once, maybe MP needs incremental reductions that allow for things to be fixed one at a time. But one thing is certain. The status quo really isnt tennable for all that much longer
1 Like
I dislike that alternative.
I just fundamentally disagree that a shock treatment is the way to go in this scenario.
We can try and pressure gaijin into solving those underlying issues, and THEN remove the bandaids.
But turning an entire bracket(s, depending on how far you wanna go) into a wasteland for an undetermined amount of time is an awful idea.
It really wouldn’t fix balance issues. Hell it would probably create even more.
You’ll likely see more planes getting questionable BR moves like the F-16A.
2 Likes
If MP was set to realistic heights for missiles. Then Tornado F3 vs F-16A would probably be reasonably fair. The issue at the moment is that the F-16 can easily get within range to destroy an F3 thanks to MP.
2 Likes
That would be incorrect simply because MP exists as is BECAUSE there are problems to be fixed first.
And removing it right now would not fix them, period. Just make it more painful for the player.
The incentive would be to eventually solve a critical balance issue that you yourself pointed a couple messages ago; somebody is fundamentally screwed by its presence, be it the shitty avionics people or the SARH buses.
what is a realistic height for multipathing?
Depends on the missile. AMRAAM i’ve heard 40m. But Skyflash didnt have a min alt dictated by MP, but instead issues with its prox fuse and that height was 33m.
You would likely also have to move planes like the Netz and Belgian F-16A down.
Then you would have another problem because technically they shouldn’t be the same BR as the US one, but with no MP they also shouldn’t be above 12.3.
my issue with removing multipathing altogether is that the SARH 13.0s are gonna be completely screwed
That’s for their proxy fuse.
Basically nothing, and either setting it on a per missile basis for their proximity fuse systems, or just actually modeling a minimum height for PF on a per missile basis and disabling multipathing.
It already works far more reliably and over more terrain than it should.
and the same can be said with the FGR2 already being the same BR as the F-4S despite the F-4S having Agile eagle.
BRs are a mess with or without MP. The question is, is it worth fixing with MP only to then fix them again after MP?
1 Like
How so? It’s a missile that every fighter jet can dodge just by pulling G.
Irony.
The answer is NOTHING. (besides that F-104 which we all know should be much lower in BR to the point it’s a complete outlier)
An this is exactly the problem I was talking about before. Planes that have the BVR advantage they’re supposed to have don’t have it due to multipathing. It fundamentally breaks plane balance and makes the need for unnecessary additions instead of fixing this 1 problem.
3 Likes
There is never going to be an easy solution. But at the moment, there is an argument to be made that the Sea Harrier FA2 should be a lower BR than the Gripen A because of MP.
Its altogether a messy problem with no clear solution, but I think MP isnt the answer
1 Like
I mean the sea harrier FA 2 is pretty much the worst 13.0, its abysmal to the point 12.7 seems fair despite AMRAAM
But would it be if AMRAAM were actually a meaningful threat?
(among other fixes it depserately needs)
1 Like