Dunno why this post was voted inappropriate (please tell me how it is, I’m curious)
But this image has to stay cuz it’s funny
2 Likes
I just flew my BV238 yesterday and saw nothing different other than fires lasting long enough to eventually burn out tail controls, which they already did before. Not once was my wing blown off except by a direct rocket hit.
Probably some salty fighter player screaming “abuse” seeing a BV238 exist in a jet game without instantly eating ten missiles and sending pieces in all directions.
2 Likes
Yeah it has to be the salty fighter mains being exposed for flying bombers as fighters
are these “salty fighter mains” you keep mentioning in the room with us now?
The reply was sarcastic. Read the chain of replies.
alright pipe down edgelord
Neither did bombers when they could end matches before either team saw each other. But that was all fine according to you?
Of course you play BV238. I’m sure there’s no conflict of interest here at all.
-joins pvp game
-surprised when players are doing pvp
3 Likes
Wonderful! No more BV238s being invulnerable and parking above airfields!
1 Like
This is an online PVP game at it’s heart and always should be.
It’s really weird that you want to change Air RB to being PVE focused when you could just go play IL-2 Sturmovik (the game this game is base off) by yourself.
1 Like
no skill? hell, you spacebar mains are the ones with absolutely zero braincell gameplay, literally a simulated fruit fly’s brain can also fly straight and click some spacebars to try and get free rp
before you cry about bombers being so wEAk!! (which clearly isnt), why dont you learn how to aim with your gunners instead of calling others skill issue and be part of the most pathetic player base out there
Quite the contrary - while winning rounds via airfield destruction was funny due to how rare it was, I do plainly recognize that is just as problematic as Fighter Deathmatch auto-ending things.
I barely played the thing prior to the damage model buff. Bought it ages ago, forgot about it, saw people especially screaming how “broken” it was, and so I went to go see for myself.
What I mean here is that those players had other fighters they could have gone after, they could have gone after ground targets, and my slow boat would be powerless to catch them if they simply didn’t engage. They flew to me, and I shot them down. Nothing broken there.
The mode should not and cannot remain “a pvp mode” if nonfighters are ever to have actual healthy purpose.
Not in my experience. I flew it a bunch last night and I just got lit on fire a bit more often, naught else. Only a concentrated barrage from a Yak-9K swooping down above me took my tail off, and mind you that was before the October 8th change.
If the game was forever destined to be “just PvP,” then there would be zero point to add attackers, bombers, and dedicated bomber interceptors as playable machines.
If the goal of all non-fighters is simply to lure fighters so they smash themselves together, then AI-controlled nonfighters would work just as well as set-pieces for that purpose.
Because I plainly see the utterly wasted potential the game has by saying “but its a PvP game!”
The game has already added the majority of relevant fighters save for the final cluster of modern jets. In comparison, scores of attackers and bombers are conspicuously absent, and in the modern jets which hype the servers most of them have substantial multirole loadouts that have zero purpose in any game mode.
How is it “wrong” to plainly see that having fighters alone be able to win matches means they don’t need nonfighters to anything at all, and therefore recognize that to give nonfighters actual guaranteed purpose, fighters need to be made intentionally unable to win rounds purely on PvP grounds?
PvP can certainly be ONE objective, but currently for the vast majority of the game’s existence it has functionally been the only objective worth considering. How is it “wrong” to cut fighters’ swollen egos down to size in order to ensure nonfighters always matter, like in actual operations? Hell, regarding modern jets, Nuclear Option literally does this sort of inversion already - what is so “wrong” with wanting props to have a similar treatment?
Also the old IL-2 games totally lack the easy controllability of War Thunder, so I’m not terribly interested in that.
Obliterating bombers in a half-second click is indeed skill-less. And its insult to injury given fighters already have no need for their own team’s nonfighters to win most games.
It sounds like you’re salty your favorite food can actually fight back sometimes.
The problem before never was aiming gunners - it was not getting annihilated in half a second before you had even a chance to practically aim. I flew my own PBJ-1H, BV238, and some others after the supposed “nerf” and saw hardly no difference other than fires from .50cal hits starting more easily.
I LOVE BRINGING THE BV 238 AS AN ANTI CAS WEAPON.
I love going to the enemy airfield where the CAS player are rearming to drop the 20 bombs on them. Even if that doesnt work, just being a punch bag in the air is valuable since you become the main focus of CAS player, buying time for your fellow teammates trying to play the game.
1 Like
I see an easy way to do both of these options. We separate NE and ARB into separate modes. Rename NE to Air PvE(in addition to dropping minimum BR to 1.0 and making nukes start at 6.7) and ARB to Air PvP. We remove all nonfighters from Air PvP then fighter players can enjoy their “skillful” gameplay while ground attack and bombers can munch on ground targets in their own mode. Fighters who then go into Air PvE can suffer through the nonfighters having a purpose and adapt or get farmed
(obviously we need to fix the giant problems with NE first. If there’s BTR-152s and M19A1s beaming your 2000lb bomb as soon as you drop it then bombers won’t be fun)
i know a dude with nearly 20k kills with lincoln bomber, and its mostly air kills
and guess what, it was achieved even before the update
if we are to discuss skill, we should not allow bombers to tank dedicated anti bomber weapons, and instead encourage bomber players to defend themselves rather than simply flying straight
Why would a fighter, built to shoot down other aircraft, attack ground targets instead of doing its job?
If you want to play PvE there’s Air Assault right there.
2 Likes
Say, what’s your opinion about the PvE objective: defend your ground targets to not lose?
Because 1) sometimes that’s what needs to be done to not lose and 2) well over half of fighters carry substantial CAS loadouts, including over 3/4 of high tier jets.
Ah yes, the exceptionally godawful mode that nobody in their right mind plays more than once a day for the booster, if that.
Cool.
I can see increasing damage dealt from truly large-caliber weapons sure, but standard fighter guns should intentionally struggle as compensation for the extremely elevated shooting accuracy mouse aim grants. Bombers have considerably more parallax error to fight against when aiming their own guns, on much larger and less agile platforms. I vehemently reject “realistic durability” when pilot shooting accuracy is anything but realistic.
That should be mandatory in every round, ideally speaking. As strong as fighters may be, they gotta land for fuel, ammo, and maintenance sometime, so if they fail to achieve anything of substance on the ground, their victory should be at best pyrrhic.
The way I’d accomplish this is relatively simple.
No auto-win or auto-end ticket bleeds for completion of any objective. Each of the three overarching objectives bleeds 50% of the ticket bar in incremental chunks. A2A (counting all players AND all AI attackers) is 50%. All ground units are another 50%. Bombing would be a Deep Strike style single objective with a bunch of buildings instead of aimless HP bar bases, and worth 50% in total. Best 2 of 3 wins the round, which would in most circumstances be “obliterate the enemy team and finish one other objective or some of both other two.”
Then fighters get to have their fun without automatically stepping on everyone else’s toes, likewise for nonfighters, and the diehard “fighter mafia” types are forcibly rendered irrelevant because suddenly something OTHER than PvP actually is REQUIRED to win EVERY match.
i see pilots shoot more accurately in real life so we should make bombers invincible to such weapons
well why dont you make other fighters tanky as well because bombers can shoot down fighters more accurately than in real life?
Because they’ve owned the mode for years and need to be kicked off their un-earned throne to make sufficient room to allow nonfighters to matter. Also because they have already the unquestioned advantages in speed, acceleration, agility, climb rate, and focused firepower. Fighters have the inherent ability to choose if, when, where, and for how long the fight happens between them and Bombers/Attackers, and outside very specific niche cases the latter cannot even run away when being attacked from an unfavorable position. We saw what “realistic durability” did for a decade - they were target practice everyone said was useless.
Literally the only lever available to bombers is durability, and save for a surprisingly small handful of them, the buff only helped so much. Nothing really changed much for twin-engine bombers like Ki-67s, P1Y1s, Yer-2s, etc. - they get lit on fire instantly and will guaranteed crash from fire whether they kill their assailant or not. Bigger planes are a bit more durable, but only so much.