Maybe it could open up a path to 8v8 games where each team has 4 attackers and 4 fighters.
They could do that and also add larger maps for larger team modes
Fighter jockey nonsense. The game is a sandbox and should be allowed to be played as such. These “solutions” do nothing but water down gameplay further into 4 minute TDM matches instead of focusing on the real issues causing your gameplay to be worsened because of this.
3 Likes
Well…
Those suggestions will fix the ‘4min TDM’ in a makeshift way. Though. :|
According to the ‘Greatest Happiness Principle’.
PVE players(AKA, ‘manned bot’ or ‘bomber’) need to be sorted out and removed from ARB.
/s
Ah, Christ.
The whole discussion is nothing more than makeshift ideas unless Gaijin fix ARB with complete rework on them.
(Sadly, This will not gonna happen)
By reducing player choice and freedom and indirectly nerfing rewards, great!
3 Likes
After seeing a ‘bad example’ of Napalm bombing fighter main who tries to defend himself in the forum
I just… having a bit of a heavy headache
and wants to give up about defending the napalm capability of the fighters a bit…
But on the bright side,
He might be a good example of why ‘removing napalm’ can’t solve the problem!
1 Like
When u r talking about “classification”, u need to define “fighter”.
However, in fact, there’re lots of multirole aircraft that have been classified as fighters, like F-4 family.
As air force tech trees growing, the barrier between fighters and strikers will be blurred.
3 Likes
Typically with multirole aircraft they are able to destroy a base without relying on napalm. However, Gaijin classifications aren’t always accurate, such as the Mig-27s being classified as fighters when they should be attackers.
2 Likes
MiG-23BN (Attacker)-> MiG-27M (Fighter)-> MiG-27K (Fighter)
Ground-Attacking sub-variant of MiG-23 is also an example I guess.
Giving a blanket nerf to all planes of a class isn’t a great way to go about things imo. My idea is to remove napalm from all Rank 5+ premiums, and the F-84F.
Anyway, I really don’t think removing napalm from any plane classified as a fighter
will help the ‘napalm-fighters’ problems in ARB.
It really sounds like another makeshift idea just like ‘buff F-86 because it suffers from F-104 and MiG-19’ when we need decompression.
I am dead-tired to strap ‘Anti-Air’ only loadout into my attackers
(6x AIM-9L only at F-111C, or 2x AIM-9L on Tornado GR.1 can be example)
and fight against superior enemies solely armed with A2A loadout
(Either F-4S or MiG-23ML does way, way better at A2A compared to F-111C or Tornado GR.1)
While those mindless prem-bombers strap only two napalm and rush to the base.
- Attacker main dislikes them because they steal the base.
- Fighter mains dislike them because they free ride the team
(well, some of them which called as ‘fighter jocks’ also hate the attacker either though) - Tomcat maniacs dislike them because they made F-14 overrated, which ended up with a nerf that shouldn’t have been done.
(not my Idea, saw some of them claimed before.)
When everyone suffers from those guys. removing napalm sounds convincing.
We already removed ‘small size rocket exploiting’ before. right?
Some devil’s whisper like
“it will be okay because we had done this thing before, and no one but some Chinese exploiter with J35XS cried. right guys?” passes our ear, and tempting us.
But Things are a bit different than the Rocket case.
Rocket case was caused by an unintended bug which Rocket dealt too much of damage to the base and multiplied rewards too.
[Gaijin also has faults which kept that bug for months.which makes it looks like intended change.]
Even though rockets are used for striking some targets, the amount of rockets which was needed to destroy the base was significantly lower than it should. That was one of the reasons why Rocketting became dead. It was a bit ahistorical than it should have been compared to irl.
But napalms are different.
Unlike ‘ridiculously low amount of rocket’ does, napalm can be used for a strike specific location and burn them down to ashes.
And, current modeling of bases is perfectly suited for burning them down.
Also, they are historical loadouts, and many multiroles which designated as fighter can carry those bombs.
So, removing napalm from fighters. or drastically nerfing damage of napalm to base is not convincing enough to apply the change in historical side.
Also, as I claimed earlier in this topic, even if we remove napalm bombs from every fighter, those guys will not gonna stop.
They will find a way somehow.
Use conventional bombs and kill the competitor at the airfield.
or buying attacker prem jets, which can use napalm (Su-22M4 WTD61 as example)
They will switch their plane very quickly to another.
No big changes will follow compared to what we will lose when we remove napalm from it.
Also I am worrying about removing napalm can give those ‘fighter jocks’ a reason to get rid of non-A2A players from ARB.
Especially, they can use the same reasons to Tornado/Aadvark enjoyers
Which we used to those napalm-bombers.
IMHO, complete reworks of ARB is the only perfect option for get rid of this problem.
(Which gaijin will never do.)
Maybe there will be some other makeshift ideas too, but removing napalm from a fighter will be one of the easiest and worst.
This is why I am refusing your idea of removing napalm from the fighter.
Even though that I hate MiG-23ML which is armed with two ZB-500 only.
Ah, Forgot to say, thanks for created this discussion with concern.
Well I agree your point about switching planes. I would definitely use conventional bombs or switch planes if they removed napalm from fighters, except.for select few planes (mirage f1c) that couldn’t bomb on time anyway
Uh… Erm… Okaay…
I think ‘you’ might need to try a2a combat more than now…
(I am a bomber main but I also enjoy fighting against enemies when I play fighters, they are also fun!)
but further arguing about this in here might be off-topic.
So… uh… thank you for reinforcing my theory via ‘providing yourself as one of examples’?
1 Like
I have never shyed away from A2A. Pure bot-like bombing would be inefficient and slower to grind with.
If you are the player who likes explosions, likes to wipe out bases and win by airfield destruction while the fighters in your team go pew pew, who likes to have excellent aced crews and planes, then you should seriously consider air arcade.
In arcade, no Mig21 will “steal” a base. If you want to win a match with bombs, you have a fair chance. Bombs matter in most maps. You don’t want to interact with fighters anyway. So play arcade while RB degenerates to a tank players CAS grinding ground.
The rewards for bombing in a fighter vs being pure A2A is completely unbalanced. A2A rewards must be increased significantly.
Here’s an example from in-game: I have played pure A2A my entire time in air RB. I have 231 battles in the J-7D and a decent K/D of 3.6. I also have a friend who bombs in the MiG-23ML. He has 276 games in it and a KD of 1.77 - Not great, not terrible. Yet he has earned 1,215,584 RP. A million RP! Meanwhile I’ve earned only 396,484 RP. that’s fucking ridiculous! No wonder why people bomb bases in MiG-23MLs all the time.
Or another example: I have 874 kills for 339 deaths, over 552 games in the F-5C, and yet I still haven’t even earned as much as my friend did in literally half the amount of games.
Why would I play A2A at that point?
2 Likes
I made some suggestions further up:
I just had an idea for a fourth option:
- When you spawn a plane with bombs, the game assigns you a personal base objective which only you (and the red team) can see. The objective could be made to fit your plane’s selected bomb load. (which is realistic really). You don’t have to bomb it, you can go for other red targets. (same assignment happens after reloading)
The map holds a certain amount of RP for bases (as is now), and at the end of the match allocates them to all base bombers by some distribution sceme. To make it more realistic: Each team sees all the many existing bases on both sides in grey. You see your personal current objective in red, and damaged bases in blue or red. When something is hit but not dead, it is avaible for grabs to all. Bombs only score when they hit red targets.
This would stop the undesirable internal team competition. You have your own private base target. But the spoils of base bombing would still have to be divided among all who participated successfully. Which means that the MIG-21 BLUs will have to share the profit with others. This may just make the base bombing less lucrative for planes with other options. During grind, you may not yet have the options, so you could BLU a few modules before other missions will be more profitable.
It will hopefully reduce bombing by those who have alternatives. They can bomb, but they can’t reserve it all for themselves by being there first. So it will be less profitable for them. It might also break up the usual flight patterns.
TL/DNR: Give bomb carriers individual base objectives but limit total team base reward to what it is now.
1 Like
I don’t disagree. I actually won’t mind if fighting gave better rewards than bombing.
1 Like
This also would somewhat fix strat bombers and bases being stolen by Wyverns and alike. They are still made out of wet cardboard, but hey, at least you dont have to race against faster planes
That’s what I’m thinking too. Instead of barring players from choosing to bomb in their fighter, Gaijin should incentivize A2A more. But of course, this is Gaijin and bvvd will probably just nerf the bombing rewards to be just as bad as A2A instead.
2 Likes