The player’s original request was to solve the problem of difficulty in using subsonic attack aircraft (CAS) to fight in the ARB (Air Realistic Battle), as the flight was too slow, and the map was too large. We requested to reduce their ARB BRs.
Now reducing the BRs of air superiority aircraft and increasing the BRs of attack aircraft in GRB (Ground Realistic Battle) not only fails to solve the problems previously proposed by players, but also adds new problems.
Strongly request to reconsider player feedback and postpone the implementation of this change!!!
4 Likes
? What your post described isn’t a thing.
Unless you mean BRs.
Strike aircraft were always primarily BR’d based on their air RB performance, not the performance of them in ground battles.
OP’s problem actually exists. Many players thought some strike aircraft will seeing a lower BR in air rather than a higher in ground where they are effective.
RIP ma bois jaguar GR1A and bucanneer S2B
2 Likes
Their BRs in both gamemodes were problematic, unless you’re seriously suggesting that the A-4E, AMX and the like were totally fine at their previous BRs.
What’s more puzzling is that it sounds like you want the ~10.0 subsonic attackers to go down in BR in Air RB, which is the absolute last thing that should happen so long as they retain their all aspect missiles. As long as they have those, they should be 10.7 as a bare minimum.
They’ll be hard to use in their intended roles at that tier, but A) That’s infinitely preferable to them rendering every high tier flareless plane borderline unplayable, and B) That’s an issue with the gamemode, not the BR. Add Air RB EC, problem solved.
3 Likes
People thought that by BR split ground attackers flinging all aspect missiles at flareless planes would be adjusted for Air battles.
But in usual Gajin fashion they pulled out good old monkey paw and nothing in Air changed but most stuff was moved in Ground RB.
Gaijin never stated anything was going to change in ARB. The community hyped itself up into thinking big changes were coming.
4 Likes
Gaijin said that their br was set using their arb stats. That is why they didnt get moved on the arb side. They also said that a couple were high due to their grb stats. Those moved down.
I also believe that the main demand from players was from the ground side wanting cas moved up. I hardly saw much in terms of people talking about cas planes in arb.
What I mean are BRs.
What players’ request is lower CAS BRs in Air Realistic Battle, no rase CAS BRs in Ground Realistic Battle.
Because we think current BRs for CAS in Air Realistic Battle are not Satisfactory.
This is what I am talking about.
1 Like
And they never talk about change BRs in GRB. Player always requests change BRs in ARB, not this thing.
Every BRs change since last year gaijin will ask players’ suggestions first. what about this time?
GAIJIN choose to say nothing about the detail, and no suggestion time.
This is another attempt to test players’ deadlines and patience.
1 Like
@Kingskofi
Weird of you to insult people then prove that BRs were based on air RB.
If BRs were not based on air RB, then the BRs wouldn’t be changing for ground battles.
I also was one of the players that caused the BRs to rise for a number of strike aircraft… using air RB.
Q-5A, Harrier GR7, A-7s, Su-17s, A-10A Late, Su-25… all were under-BR’d in air RB, I and others played them, at least I taught people how to use them as fighters, and they correctly moved up because of their air RB performance.
No, making those changes in GROUND for balance CAS are necessary. For ARB changes you can wait next balance patch.
2 Likes
I think the main benefit from this change will be seen later down the road, since stats will be looked at independently across GRB and ARB in future BR updates. My only fear is that everything’ll start being treated like a fighter, even if they’re strike aircraft or bombers.
Yeah, I’m not sure how people are surprised by the results. Aircraft BRs have been primarily based on Air modes, thus a split of BRs by mode is inherently going to mean adjustments in Ground (and Naval? plz?) but relatively little change in Air.
The more important thing is just having the split though, as it will allow more adjustments in the future.
I am rather disappointed they started with only the slice of the game that is top-tier (specifically) Ground (specifically) RB (specifically), but as I said myself the important thing is the split itself, for the future.
I knew since they announced it they were primarily going to focus on top tier. I wouldn’t be surprised if they use this as an excuse to add more powerful CAS ordnance. Besides that, they stated lower tier vehicles would be done case by case. So I wouldn’t expect much for them.
1 Like
Or unifying Nados at 11.0. That was expected, and wasn’t done either.