I believe it still is four bombers not including attackers
Higher tier doesn’t have bombers so they should include attackers as well.
Having 12/16 teammates to be premium IDS’ loaded with bombs is kind of stupid.
Yes. Limits are still on.
Each team can have only Four IL-28.
Of course there isn’t limit for attackers like F-84F/G.
1 Like
That’s why they need to be careful what they put on sale as a premium because it cases the vehicle to be overplayed also limit the lvl of who can buy them
It is always fun to play Tornado IDS WTD61 while
- Allied MiG-23ML with napalm but no AAM steals my base with superior advantage on both fuselage and payload
- At the same time, Allied Tornado IDS WTD61 attempts to TK me bc I will steal his base.
- And enemy F-14A wiped 50% of the team with AIM-54 spam (before nerf)
:/
Yeah that’s a nice dream right there.
Limiting teams to 4 players with ground ordnance is much easier, faster and better for Gaijin.
Gaijin’s makeshift solution might be
- if you queued with Su-22/24 or Tornado IDS
- But some random MiG-23ML got loaded faster than you in the match
- They are armed and spawned with napalm, and Su-22/24 or Tornado are now forced to take off with A2A-only loadout.
- announce it proudly as devblog.
- ignores any feedback
Right?
Maybe easier but it’s almost a pipe dream either way The amount of multi rolls in the game I would severely hinder the matchmaking unless they took away a lot of ordinance from multiroles which in and of itself would cause another SH storm within the community
Yeah they would totally do that instead of the sensible way of making people choose loadout before they queue and then checking if they have any A2G.
Gaijin gonna Gaijin.
2 Likes
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.