Responding To Your Feedback On Separate Battle Ratings

I agree, dynamic BRs should have been implemented before or around the time 4th gens started being released. Instead we’ve just seen missiles on legacy platforms upgraded so they can hold a candle to fundamentally better aircraft, so now those legacy platforms are at a higher BR and fight stronger opponents.

I’d love to be able to bring out the Phantom FG1 in its original loadout of Aim 9Ds and Aim 7Es at 10.7 or 11.0, where it doesn’t have to deal with constant uptiers into gen 4 hell. Likewise for the higher rank Soviet jets that all now have R-60Ms, being able to equip base R-60s or even earlier missiles for a drop in BR would breathe new life into them.

2 Likes

If you are killing AIs in a gamemode where the objective is “destroy all enemy aircraft” then this is largely useless to the game and is detrimental to your teams chances of winning. If you want to kill bots and bomb bases, air RB is not for you!

Because they are pointless. Why am i playing an air combat mode to kill bots and bases on the ground?

I’ve had them throw games away just because they wanted to continue bombing at the end of the game. In a team setting, this is not helpful at all and ends up reducing RP rewards. WINNING a game gives you far more RP than losing, almost twice as much. This makes playing the game as intended and killing enemy aircrafts more consistent and effective for grinding.

Please screenshot me the objectives again? And what are Bombers supposed to do, go and attack fighters? I never implied those who are going for objective targets should be left alone to do PvE. They are still valid targets.

Pointless to you, sure. As a bomber and attacker, your threats are other players, yet your contributions beneficial to your role are not beneficial to the match. This is unfair to those types of aircraft.

A failure of them game not allowing these types of aircraft to meaningly contribute. Plus, if I really wanted to split hairs, ending the game by killing all players gives you less RP than letting the match end on time. Because… your rewards are based on time.

2 Likes

Step 1: Takeoff and fly to center of map.
Step 2: Look forward. See those markers? Enemy planes.

Pointless as players in the game. All theyre doing that actually benefits players is being a free RP pinata. If the threats are other aircraft then what is the point of bombing bases?

Being able to satisfy every single aircraft for every role simply isnt possible. You will end up always fucking one over for anothers benefit.

Explain all the perfectly competitive F-4 Phantoms rocketing bases. I shouldnt have to go any further when there are F-16s, F-15s, MiG-29 and similar trucking bases. All good, great fighters. These people had a choice and picked the worse option.

I share (as usual) your general view on things, but in this case i would argue that that the changes of their algorithm was a fully intended nerf as they knew 2 things:

  1. Upcoming 3rd and 4th generation fighters were mainly designed as multi-role aircraft - with insane bomb payloads. So nerfing the income in time whilst knowing that the F-4E will come a year later will actually support sales of premium aircraft with high bomb loads in the future.

  2. They were fully aware that they are simply not smart enough to adapt the base and af health points to the constant flood of new aircraft with higher load outs.

    The introduction of the 264 at BR 3.7 (!!!) was just the beginning. With the F-4E in March 2020 and the introduction of respawning bases in May 2020 they killed Air RB as game mode - it was reduced to a simple low skill grinding tool for masses of “fresh/rookie” players…

1 Like

Doesn’t sound familiar. A screenshot would clear that up though.

There used to be a point to bombing bases as a bomber or attacker. You were actually a game ending threat that needed to be killed. Now it matters none of they are left alone. This is an issue that needs to be corrected.

Every aircraft needs to have a purpose. In general, Fighters fight all planes, attackers hit ground targets, bombers hit based. A system, though flawed, did exist for all aircraft to have some impact. That no longer matters in the current state of the game. This severly limits the type of aircraft that would be introduced

Because, as the reward system stands, this is the easiest way to grind RP, and I actually share frustrations that this is a problem. Which is why base bombing rewards should be significantly reduced for fighter aircraft only. Force fighters to be fighters. There is no reason why a fighter is taking over an attacker’s and bomber’s primary role.

2 Likes

I am extremely against killing defenseless bots being able to decide the outcome of a game.

However, you raise this…

I love this and strongly support this. Either way youll probably end up finding the uninformed premium timmies still bombing but less than before!

I should have probably added this in an above post as now its probably irrelevant, but my biggest issue with the premium phantoms, etc bombing is that they learn nothing and they end up grinding for something they dont know how to fly. Kinda what is generating the bombing F-16 and similar.

3 Likes

For air battles, all aircraft need a way to contribute. Killing AIs to cause ticket bleed is way too simplified, the AIs should be tied to objectives, as objectives create some sort of purpose for dedicated roles.

Bad players will always exist. Sometimes, despite being experienced, “I” am the bad player. Even if you twist their arm to be a fighter they will still be effectively useless. At the very least, even if they can’t kill aircraft they can live to be 10 second decoys, or they teamkill you with a terribly timed missile.

1 Like

Unless kill an enemy plane can get like 3 times reward than bomb base, it wont change. Players bomb because they don’t like to fight, but they want some cas or just want the top jets. They like spent time on bombing while playing phone and keep brain offline, that’s why there are Mig-23s bombing the base

I agree with those in the premium Mig-23s and F4s.

I disagree its all players. There are many interesting and unique aircraft are design and built for one thing. Ground attack.

Aircraft like Tornados, Jaguars, Bucanners, Su-24s. A-10s, J-7s (I think thats the right chinese aircraft)

They should still be just as rewarding. I should not be forced to try and dogfight a Mig-23MLD in a Tornado Gr1 just because bombing bases rewards very little in comparison. Not unless the Tornado Gr1 was 10.3 where maybe it would stand a chance in A2A combat.

1 Like

I don’t like the idea of cutting rewards of bombing too, just explaining it won’t work as gaijin thought, even you cut it to floor, there will still be someone bombing with mig-23.
And this becomes a problem, you can’t make a2a reward so high too, the reason is the players want, not others. I can’t figure out a way except gaijin hires a Yuri and control players’ mind.

Fair point. Just see too many people in this thread that appear to want bombing removed entirely from ARB.

there needs a place for the bombers or attackers, a bombing pve maybe, but it’s also hard to balance this mode, both gameplay and reward.

If its anything like Heli PvE. Please for the love of god no.

The best solution is an RB EC gamemode. Air Sim, but with RB controls, Third person and I’d suggest GRB style markers. (there for friendlies, not there for enemies)

99% of the time. Im in Sim. That includes ground attackers. But I’ve recently been doing some stock farming of the Jaguar IS in ARB and it really sucks. Finally gone over to ASB with it now i’ve got enough mods unlocked for it to be worth while in ASB.

But I get not everyone wants to be confined to cockpit and things like Joysticks make a big difference.

What about CAS aircraft that arent good at cas and are mid as fighters forced into the fighting role because its the only way to grind the vehicle effectively?

Flight performance matters tremendously when evading SPAA systems. The fact that the controls for the A-6E become unresponsive at 950kph makes it difficult to dodge even Iglas.

This combined with its lack of kinetic range from its weaponry, wouldn’t justify it being a higher battle rating than the Super Entendard.

As for the thermals, they greatly enhance target aquisition but considering it is inferior in other significant metrics, it doesn’t justify it being a higher battle rating than the Super Entendard.

The lack of thermals isn’t a significant enough difference to justify a different placement, especially since the pod has excellent zoom. Keep in mind other vehicles at this battlerating and higher manage with just TV cameras equipped on Kh-29s, KAB-500kr, and AGM-65Bs.

Not quite, only 5 GBU-12s. The center pylon can only carry one bomb of any type. The center pylon cannot equip missiles or BOL pods.

Though… That is still a hell of a lot more than a lot of other aircraft at rhe same BR, like the Buc S2B.

Buccaneer S.2B will remain at 10.3 with the amended changes thankfully.

As for most of the 10.7 roster, I would say the capability of the A-6E is is on par, especially when compared with the A-7E and Super Entendard. They have different attributes and compromised but none punches above the other by a meaningful margin.

Part of that is that the A-7E specifically of the three A-7s is missing ordnance (e.g. AGM-88, AIM-9L / -9M, Walleye II ( & ERDL kit), AGM-84E, Secure datalink pod, etc.) that it may yet still receive in the future.

I wouldn’t be surprised if at some point it got access to them, there has to be a reason for avoiding a Tech Tree A-6, AV-8B, A-10C or F/A-18A, That isn’t them wanting to extend the sales period for the TRAM, right?

1 Like

Ima be honest, I don’t think Gaijin cares enough about the A-6E TRAM to protect its place for the sake of sales. Very few people purchased it, compared to all of the other US premiums at rank 7 & 8.

The addition of those missing weaponry to the A-7E will result in it being at a higher battle rating. Maybe they will divide it into an Early and Late variant, or add some other modification with more advanced weaponry. It wouldn’t be the first time aircraft were restricted in their weapons capability for balance related reasons.