Rank 5 and Below Aircraft Airspawn Removal

Suggestions Gameplay
1

I would like to propose the air spawn be removed for aircraft not under the designation Light Bomber, Hydroplane, Frontline Bomber, and Long Range Bomber. This would be removing the air spawn for all aircraft except for dedicated level bombers. The reasoning behind this is simple: the air spawn of aircraft like the Ju87, Do 335, SB2C, A36, and others like them allow these planes to act as faux interceptors. Strike aircraft of these type would be fine to have spawn at the airfield (or forward airfield) since they have virtually no reason to climb to bomber height to accomplish their intended roles. It would also be beneficial, since they are usually slower than their fighter counterparts, that they would arrive to bases/ground targets while the fighters are already occupied with each other instead of fighters trying to intercept the air spawned strikers since they are the closest target.

Edit: With interceptors and Air Defense Fighters almost all having climb rates above around 2500 ft/min. I would like to amend this suggestion to include interceptors and air defense fighters to also lose their air spawn. They have the climb rate necessary to accomplish their task by design. The only Interceptor/ADF I saw with below around 2500 ft/min are the J1N1, Ki-108 Kai, Ki-61-I, Potez, Do-217, and the Ju-88 C-6. They are almost all rank 2 aircraft or below, so their weak performance is somewhat expected. This will have similar effects to strike aircraft losing their airspawn, but with minimal effects as the rank 3+ interceptors/adf have comparable climb rates to the fighters they share a battle rating.

I will use the Do 335 B-2 and B24D-25-CO as a comparison to why these strike aircraft do not need an air spawn when compared to level-bomber aircraft.
The B-24 is a 5.7 Long Range Bomber that has a climb rate of 907 ft/min unloaded (spaded). I would like to note that the B-24 cannot be taken out without some sort of payload, so it will never reach the 907 ft/min climb rate. Unloaded, it would take 15+ minutes to reach 14,600 feet, which is where it currently spawns. It can carry a maximum payload of 4372 kg, which reduces that climb rate by 572 ft/min to new climb rate of 335 ft/min. A climb rate of 335 ft/min would mean that climbing to the spawn altitude would take around 45 minutes of flight.
The Do 335 B-2 is a 5.7 strike aircraft that has a climb rate of 1998 ft/min unloaded (spaded). It can be taken out without payload, so it can reach this climb rate under normal conditions. Unloaded, it would take less than 2 minutes to reach 3200 ft, where it currently spawns. It can carry a max payload of 1000kg, which reduces that climb rate by 708 to a new climb rate of 1290 ft/min. A climb rate of 1290 ft/min means climbing to the spawn altitude would take less than 3 minutes.

As you can see, the Do 335 would be minimally impacted by the change to an airfield spawn. But the aircraft that would be impacted the most by this spawn change would be the Bombers that play these aircraft. The Do 335 is always played as a faux interceptor because it spawns at speed and has a great climb rate for a strike aircraft. This is the case for almost all of the strike aircraft. Jet strikers at rank 5 have even better climb rates than propeller driven aircraft, so this problem is made worse at rank 5. Comparing the B-29 with the Me 262 A-1a/U1 at 7.3 is an even more unbalanced comparison and just shows that the strike aircraft have no need for an air spawn. If this change was made, all bomber aircraft at all ranks would benefit. They would have to worry about dedicated Air Defense Fighters/Interceptors and Fighters climbing to intercept instead of a ground strike aircraft that spawns in the air. This change will make aircraft like the B-17s, Lancasters, B-29, Tu-4, Me-264, He-177, and more actually viable to play and accomplish their primary purpose in Air RB.

[Would you like to see this in-game?]
  • Yes
  • No
0 voters
1 Like
2

You know what… yes.
We’ll see strike aircraft universally lower in BR like Q-5A.

2 Likes
3

Im sorry but no, whilst yes aircraft like the Wyvern, Do-335 and other aircraft can be OP with the airspawn, you are essentially shooting every other strike aircraft in the foot, A lot of strike aircraft will struggle to compete at all if they are forced to the same playing field as fighters, leading to the exact same problem there is now between certain strike aircraft and Bombers except with ALL Fighters against Most Strike aircraft.

Not to mention the fact bombers would still be at severe risk due to Air defence fighters like the XP-50 or fast climbing fighters like the BF-109s, A better option would be to increase the spawning altitude for Bombers to realistic heights ( the B-24 would cruise at just over 6km compared to its spawn altitude of 4.5km in game) or to change it so bombers would spawn across a large area similar to this suggestion that would allow bombers to hide from enemy interceptors.

2 Likes
4

List of still “OP” strike aircraft.
Wyvern, F3D-1, F-84F, AD-4, Me 262 Jabo, Me 262 A-1a/U1, Fw 190 F-8, Su-6, Firecrest, Strikemaster, F-84G, Saab-105G…

And this change would lower the BR of other strike aircraft.

5

Compete with what? They are strike aircraft, they aren’t meant to be primarily air to air fighters. There is no reason at all that the strike aircraft need to be spawned in the air, at speed, and far ahead of the rest of the aircraft. Even the adf/interceptors spawn at the airfield and can be met by fighters quite quickly. Honestly, the airspawn could just be removed for all aircraft other than frontline/long range bombers. They even grounded the Vautour jet bombers, the Canberras, IL-28s, and Tu-4s should follow suit out of fairness. Especially since no jet at rank 6 or higher gets an airspawn.

That is the role of air defense fighters and interceptors. If a fighter can make an intercept from the airfield, then it can. This isn’t all about protecting bombers, it is about leveling the playing field between strike aircraft of low tier and strike aircraft of high tier. A secondary part is that bombers won’t be harrassed as much by strike aircraft.

Explain this to me then. Why does any of the strike aircraft spawn kms infront of the airfield? They get put out alone, with no fighters to defend them. It would be better for them to go to ground striking after the fighters have moved out from the airfield with them. That way they have high cover and if a fighter goes for them at low altitude, allied fighters can jump on them with an energy advantage. Why does the SB2C, BTD-1, Ju-87, or any other dive bomber spawn at the same altitude as the heavy bombers? Noone dive bombs anything in those planes. You don’t even need to be that high because there is no flak or AA gunning at you. Almost all the aircraft would benefit from strike aircraft spawning at the airfield, but the biggest downside is that they couldn’t be as easily used as faux interceptors.

6

There are a ton of aircraft that cannot or struggle to climb up to the same altitude and without an air spawn will struggle heavily.

Another thing Float planes do not have wheels implying that their air spawn should removed implying that they would be stuck on an airfield the entire time. Oh and “just allow them on only water-based maps” Yeah about that->Will become stale.

2 Likes
7

The main issue is that many strike aircraft will be intercepted by fighters if they dont get air spawn, apart from the few Turboprops and some others all of the strikr aircraft will nost likely lag behind and get caught out by the enemy fighters with higher altitude and speed before they can actually engage the enemies, hell even the faster ones like the strikemaster have pretty horrid acceleration meaning by the time they have actually gotten to the enemy ground targets especially on wider maps the match can already be over.

That would then add the problem that a lot of strike aircraft would then become increadibly OP for ground battles, although I will admit split BRs for air and ground that are coming may help fix that

I would like to add that this isnt a bad idea, far from it actually, just i feel there are better options such as the spawn areas i linked above.

3 Likes
8

I feel like you misread what I said. The list at the beginning is a list of what would not lose their airspawn. Floatplanes are on that list because of the gear issue and because alot of them are bombers.

9

Yes-and no.
I think bomber air spawn should also be lower in altitude

10

Smack the damn things on the forward airfield where possible and give them a score multiplier for doing their intended role. People who actually use them for ground attack already just use the altitude from the airspawn to gain speed the forward airfield would compensate for that

11

You didn’t make it clear and understandable. You wrote a rather confusing paragraph that’s all over the place. So yes I am confused.

Never the less as I stated. There are a lot of aircraft in all categories that cannot perform without an air spawn. This includes crafts that should be in the strike aircraft tag but are not in the game.

12

Yea, this is the list that would not be touched and would retain their airspawn. Mostly bombers, and I’m honestly been thinking more about interceptors and air defense fighters after speaking with some of the people here.

13

I’m starting to space it out. Also, this still doesn’t change the fact that there are aircraft that have different titles but aren’t actually what the title states.

14

I can see where you’re coming from, but if they lag behind the fighters then they will have adequate cover. The fighters will be at higher altitude except for those fighters that want to intercept ground attackers, but they run the risk of being easy targets for the higher altitude fighters. Basically, if they are behind their own fighters, they have a screen between them and the enemy that doesn’t happen now. And with the props, the games can last a very long time if it comes down to 2 or so planes.

15

Yes, but if players know that there will be slow, heavy strike aircraft with no altitude then players arent going to engage the agile fighters are they? I know i would rather take the strike aircraft over a fighter any day, but again as I said this is not a bad suggestion, i just do not think it would be a good blanket option to completely remove all airspawns for strike aircraft when that would cause some issues for other aircraft. Personally I just feel it would be better to fix the whole gamemode rather than just putting on a bandaid and causing new problems that could be just as bad and unbalanced as before.

16

@lxtav
No it wouldn’t.
First off separate BRs for select CAS is coming this year.
Second, better CAS exists than CAS itself at the same BR.
Examples: AD-4 is inferior to on par for CAS as the following 5.0 through 6.0 aircraft: AU-1, F4U-7, F-8F [technically 5.0 and 6.3], on-par with Spitfire LF Mk9 for Israel, P-47, F4U-4B, Me 410 B-6/R3, IL-10.

So no, there’s zero reason to oppose this suggestion.
Any CAS that would become OP for ground would just retain their ground RB BR, and those that won’t will be corrected for both modes under a system that doesn’t let attackers kill bombers instantly.

17

There’s also 0 reason to want it to change. If anything, it should be selective, and not a blanket “no.”
And what about the fact it will severely harm planes that need that airspawn to be decent? I doubt Gaijin would change the BRs to accommodate for them.

2 Likes
18

There are many over-BR’d planes cause they have air spawns.

19

They will try to kill the slow strike aircraft until they get boom and zoomed by every fighter with any altitude. It doesn’t matter if the ones going after strikers want to engage fighters, they will be engaged by fighters with every single advantage over them. And people already go after strikers anyway, the BF110s, ME410s, Su6s IL10s, AD2/4s, AM1s, and any other strikers get jumped on anyway. If they are behind the fighters, then they will have fighter cover, something that doesn’t exist now. Playing the strike aircraft around 8.7 is the best example I can give for this. You can take a A-4 at 8.7 and hit bases while other aircraft are in the dogfight. Sort of weird tbh, it’s almost like I got the idea from somewhere.

What other aircraft would have issues?

You say it isn’t a bad suggestion, but the say that it would cause all of these issues. The part of the current problem planes like the Do335 being able to intercept bombers before fighters. The Wyvern being able to do the same thing. Why does a heavy ass strike aircraft with less than 2kft/min climb rate reach bomber height before a Spitfire with 4000ft/min climb rate? Air spawn. Why does a strike aircraft need to reach 16000 ft? It doesn’t. So how does strike aircraft, hell even the air defense fighters and interceptors, losing the air spawn cause problems for other aircraft? What other aircraft would have these problems, and what would they be?

There is a reason to want it to change. It’s absoluetly crazy that strike aircraft get a free pass into being an interceptor and intercepting bombers even before fighters can. It bothers the hell out of me when I’m in a bomber, and bothers the hell out of me when I’m in a fighter. Strike aircraft don’t need an airspawn to be decent. Strike aircraft need an airspawn to get air to air kills easily, which isn’t what they are for. You ever see people using anything other than a Wyvern, Do335, Strikemaster, Me 262 A-1a/U1(not even the A-1a/Jabo gets used), A2D-1, or a Skyraider? No, because the strikers aren’t really for air rb anyway, because noone really ground strikes unless they can’t get air kills for rp. I see more prop fighters ground strike than I ever see actual ground strikers. All those mentioned above either bomb bases or go for bombers.

I just spawned with by BTD-1 at 4.0 and played a game. I spawned at 11.5k feet at around 220ish mph. The Xp-50s spawned at around 5900 ft at 8000 yards behind me. By the time they reached my altitude, they were 9000 yards behind me. They were 7000 yards behind me when I intercepted the enemy Pe-8. The BTD carries two cannons with 400 rounds compared to the Xp-50 at 120 rounds. More than 3 times the ammunition that excels at killing large planes. You don’t even have to bring bombs in it, you can fly without them, making you lighter and faster. All I had to do to make the intercept was turn slightly to the right. This is a problem.

I just spawned with my Do-335 B-2 at 5.7 and played a game (map was malta, so very small map). I spawned at 3300 ft at 300ish mph. I rose to 10kft within 2 minutes of the game start. I intercepted a Lancaster at 10kft and then dropped to 1kft to kill an A26B. I then rose to 10kft again to kill a P-51 in a head on. I got 3 kills which was half the game and obviously the most on my team. I got one more kill than the entire enemy team combined. I did this game with the full 1kg bombload on the Do-335 the entire time. I want to reiterate this to drive my point home, I did the entire game with the MAXIMUM BOMB LOAD and INTERCEPTED a long range bomber, a light bomber/strike, and a fighter, while going from 3300 ft to 10000 feet, back down to 1000 feet, and then back up to 10000 feet. This is a problem.

Justify that to me, tell me why that doesn’t have an reasoning for change. I can do the same thing with any Do-335 (not just the 5.7 one), the Skyradiers, the Bf110s, the Me410s, the Beaufighters, and the Fireflys. I know this because I’ve done it dozens if not 100s of times. I’ve seen people use the PBJs and A26s to bomber hunt from the striker spawn. This, my friend, is a problem.

I know I came across as harsh with this reply. This is the reason why, these 9 words. You have to be absolutely crazy if you don’t think that STRIKE aircraft INTERCEPTING HIGH ALTITUDE aircraft before DEDICATED INTERCEPTORS and HIGH CLIMB RATE FIGHTERS is a problem. I’ve come up with more than a few ideas for Air RB to be better, and this one has to be the hardest for opposition to argue. The data speaks for itself. The only planes that need airspawns are high altitude level bombers. I’m even going to edit out the interceptor and air defense fighter out of the list I initially made because if a fighter can climb that high, then planes designed to do that can start at the airfield too. Level bombers NEED an airspawn because it is impossible for them to climb to appropriate heights. Use the B-29 in Sim and make it to even 5k feet. I tried once and only got to 2500 feet before I was shot down at the enemy airfield. That was a long ordeal and took the entire length of an Enduring Confrontation map. That airspawn is a NEED. Strike aircraft NEED to be brought down a peg, to the airfield with the rest of the aircraft.

20

One of the issues would easily be the fact that if strike aircraft are so slow (which a lot will be qhen taking off from an airfield) they will be limited to the meager rewards of ground targets that van take way to much damage for the rewards they give sometimes, asd in the risk that there is a dogfight going on above you constantly then it just doesnt become a fun experiance imo.

This is my opinion, i am free to disagree with the suggestion, and others are free to agree as the vote is up to the wider community to decide, I would personally prefer something different as rb has several more underlying issues than just strike aircraft and would rather see them all fixed rather than just the odd one or two

1 Like