I would’ve stuck at AAB if there was
Anyway,
Maybe it might be true that AAB fits better than ARB for bombing.
But in meantime, AAB solutions might need to get modified before being added to ARB.
Still, sounds better than ‘just remove napalm’ though.
and should have been done ages ago. Fighters need to be taxed on base bombing so that they actually do their job
why are you so eager to screw over F-4’s? or maybe they could get fighter-bomber designation and be exempt from nerfs.
If the plane carried napalm IRL, then it should carry it ingame.
an F4 is a strike fighter, not a fully fledged fighter.
so fighter-bomber designation ingame then?
Absolutely, it genuinely confuses me why some of the best fighters (especially mig-21 and F104 taf) for their respective BRs are able to carry enough napalm to bomb a base, not only does it incentivise zombing in br ranges where you actually need fighters to win matches (11.0-12.7) and also completely reduces bombers and attackers role in the match.
Premium fighters just shouldn’t be able to base bomb, whether this is enforced through the removal of bombs or a heavy penalty on rewards for bombing, either way I believe it should be a thing of the past because there are already a lot of premiums at the higher brs, it doesn’t help in the slightest that half of them are racing towards (and typically TKing eachother or dying before even raching) a base
Wouldn’t matter as people will always go for the easier low stakes options that still give decent rewards, either cut RP by like 75% or remove napalm, I’m sick of fighters (MiG-21 and MiG-23) beating strikers to their respective objectives and not playing their role.
This is made worse by the fact that Gaijin sells premium strike aircraft that can’t fulfill their role in their own game mode.
How about we buff the reward for getting A2A kills so it’s way more efficient than base bombing? As a player you should not be asking for more punishment/nerfing.
No - you do not have the right to force players to play the way you want them to play.
why is this the new ‘one size fits all’ argument to all player related issues with the game now?
In fact, we have something similar to act like
‘Nerf the base bombing reward of fighters compared to attacker/bomber’
‘in an inadequate way’ which can’t solve the problem.
You can check ‘Reward multiplier for base’ and ‘Estimated damage to base’ in your loadout when you click bombs on it.
Radius of multipliers is set in X.X-10.0 in bomber/attackers
while X.X-8.0 on fighters.
If I strap same amount of ZB-500 napalm on both Su-17(Attacker) and MiGs(fighter)
Reward multipliers with four ZB-500 (which is enough to take 2 bases down) is
5.0x in Su-17M2 and
4.0x in MiG-27M (Attack aircraft which was misdesignated as fighter, because it was designed based on MiG-23)
but it is meaningless because
Base bombers mount bombs for a single base only because of
Especially when
Reward multiplier with two ZB-500 (which is enough to take 1 base down) is
7.6x in Su-17M2 and
7.3x in MiG-23ML
:/
Maybe because Gaijin wants to set 8.0x-ish for single base bombing.
Well, their claims are also a bit fair because
If we tries to force them to play A2A only by entirely removing napalm.
Then some fighter mains with bad behaviour also can apply the same reasoning for ‘remove every bomber and attacker from ARB and let them be forced to play in GRB only just like helicopter does’
At the same time,
It is extremely annoyed that bomber/strike aircraft enthusiasts need to be sacrificed for ‘let them play the way they want’
:/
Yeah because of all planes, the F-84F needs a nerf… get a grip man
What does the F-84F have, compared to the F-86A-5 in ARB.
And
++++ Fancy Vietnam-war style camo, which reminds me F-105D.
(Again, Only for biased rank 5 version on US TT. XD)
Doesn’t mean it’s not annoying af tho. It’s normally only premium players that ignore me marking bases, but F-84Fs do it too. Besides, If Gajin increased its thrust and decreased its energy loss, along with moving it to 7.7, it’d be a actually decent plane.
So you want to nerf the F-84F because they didn’t yield the base for you?
Come on man, it is dead plane now outside the US after “Sons of Attila” update.
Get a grip.
And I am partially likes the second idea.
Oh also, they should return the CCIP. Claiming its guns didn’t have CCIP irl because its sight is the same one used on the F-100D, and the F-100D doesn’t have CCIP is complete bs.
If you want it back, find the source and write a bug report about it.
Then, a Few centuries later, gaijin will reimplement it.
Also, further discussion about F-84F’s CCIP might be off topic. so we need to end here.
Fair?
It’s not annoying. You’re just complaining about one of the worst jets at the BR because you love to have terrible takes.
