Sure but if you did read through others and my own comments you did not need to comment what you did. I get that you probably are one of those who enjoys bombing with napalm and using fighters.
But that doesnt even show that you dont use napalm. Also still doesnt reason with your first post complaining before reading through the comments.
I’m sure me being in the top 3% of the air RB playerbase by overall statistics is because I napalm bomb sweetie.
1 Like
Great couldn’t care less so why you complaining about my post with my opinions.
because I am free to comment where I wish when I wish as long as I am not breaking forum rules?
2 Likes
Great so how about a truce. I have my opinion and so do you.
How about I will reply if I wish. Does that work for you? Rhetorical question.
Sure but no need to be so hostile from the get go.
I reply very aggressively towards players who try to dumb down the game for their own interests.
Do you actually think gaijin reads this shit. The answer is no.
Freedom of speech man your opinion is yours and mine is mine. I made a post about my opinion on this topic. You can comment if you like and I just wont agree with your statements.
Anyways Gaijin mods you can close this topic if you want I have no more intersting in a post that wont get anywhere.
I might not bother about napalming fighters if killing grounds have any kind of impact on gameplay-wise, and Strike aircraft can get any kind of air cover from allied fighters.
Yes. Killing ground targets might give better rewards than base bombing, but it needs to take higher risks than taking bases because not all of the strike aircraft have good survivability with speeds.
Also, if you have that level of survivability, Bomb the base quickly and moving to assist allied fighters gives a higher chance to win. (We all know that winning gives you a bonus. right?)
As I told you before, I disagree about that Fighter jets which can mount napalm need to get their napalm removed.
But, ‘it is fine to let the fighter get base because the ground target gives more rewards’ sounds similar to
Qu’ils mangent de la brioche !(Also known as ‘Let them eat cakes’) :/
We both know that it is more of a gameplay design problem, I agree with some of your points
But still, I disagree with other points and still think napalm bombs are significantly overperforming than they should (but not in ‘small calibre rocket with bug’ level.), and need to be dealt with about that unfairness IF Gaijin has a plan to never fix the gameplay and keeps ARB as TDM fighter heaven.
As long as OP wants to get this topic shut down, We might need to agree to disagree this time.
Decreasing earnings doesn’t deter players from playing in a specific way, all it does is increase the grind and player frustration. It works for Gaijin because that’s ultimately their objective, but it doesn’t improve gameplay.
1 Like
Other things got a balance in the name sake of game balance. It will not hurt balancing these as well.
Cause if that is your argument -
ENTIRE SANDF Sub tree needs it’s actual ammo
TOW and some AGM needs to get its tandem charge
Multiple tanks on US and UK needs to get its actual ammo
Basically - the game will be less fun for those who run ERA - less fun the EXACT same way that multirole capable fighters, interceptors and fighter interceptors ruin the fun for strike, attack-craft and bombers.
Napalm is the new rocket meta, change my mind.
@Its_Filthy
Napalm rewards are already the lowest in the game.
Any change is just purely anti-player corporate greed.
Also all American and British tanks have their actual ammo; saying otherwise would be lying.
You might wanna go do some reading. Can start with the SEP 2.
With that - you can also start reading the bug report site and see what has been left intended by the devs.
2 Napalm = base GG Easy.
Exactly and that is kind of my problem with it. Its just too easy to destroy a base with napalm.