Thoughts about limiting armarment in battles?

Game Discussion General Discussion
,
1

To kinda explain, Lets use the A10 and it’s 9L’s rough history. Mainly due to the missiles is has, it either ends up in a place where it effectively creates a no fly zone around it or is an after thought due to its air frame.

If we were to limit it to only its gun, it would be far easier to balance and be more of an even match against its similar opponents.
Keep in mind, this wouldn’t get rid of it’s 9L’s, Only restrict them in battle.

This would also open the door for aircraft to get their irl armarment without the risk of an increase in BR for the normal match maker.

(Context: I mainly want a way for the f1 to get it’s 9L’s without being in a place where it gets decimated due to no flares.)(You could say Modification based BR would work, in which case its a pick your poison situation for certain aircraft. Perhaps combining both would work?)

2

Im not sure if its exactly what youre saying but I’ve always thought that have different available weapons between air and ground battles for planes would make a lot of sense, that way antiradiation missiles couldve been added and only be usable in air battles against AI targets or only let the A10 use aim9Ls in ground battles and limit it to aim9Js or worse for air battles to put it at a lower BR

1 Like
3

A10 gameplay is just fly straight for 5-10 minutes into a battle that’s already over cuz ur team won the furball and u did’t do anything or get swarmed and die cuz ur team lost the furball.

imo it should either get air spawn (gaijin said a10 will get air spawn but still we’re still waiting) or keep the amount of aim9L for now cuz a10 is hella slow

1 Like
4

I dont recall anyone saying this, the A10 and su25 were the reason airspawn was removed at high ranks if I remember

1 Like
5

i read somewhere that gaijin said a10 will get it’s airspawn back but im too lazy to go look for the source. Or im completely wrong lol

1 Like
6

Counter argument: Make Modifications affect the BR of a vehicle.
It would be the obviouse solution for alot of problems in this game.

But Gaijin doesn´t do that, Cause they delibaretly made the modifications system to make people grind or pay.

Though, even if they would try, they are way to incompetent and/or lazy to do it functionaly.

4 Likes
7

Did touch apon that at the bottom of my post. lol

8

Oh yea, sorry, the idea just hit me and i immidiatly went to writing. XD

1 Like
9

but consider this: without 9L, and AAMs in general, the A-10 can be at a BR where it’s airframe is useful, so like 6.7

10

honestly I would rather have it at 6.7 ARB without missiles, flying straight for 10 minutes isnt fun

11

I’ve told many times that’s how it should have been.
Here we have UK Phantoms start with 2 x AIM-9D and an external gun (affects FM) at 12.0.
That’s easily a 10,3 … and i’m positive that even with only 9Ds or Gs an 21SMT with flares and R-60s would destroy it 70% of the times.
We have a crapload of set ups per plane , yet it’s only a grind blockade …
For example , you have to grind AIM-7E then you unlock E2 the F …ehhm… Just give me 2 7Fs from start and let me grind the other 2 so at least i can play in the BR that X vehcile has… i have to grind E then E2 , which i won’t use ever again when i get to F. As i said just a blockade.
You can insert any plane/combo to the same result.
But if you had Armament based BR depending to what you use , you would use them…

I even made a suggestion some months before, yet to be seen or do something with it… yes/no/ consider whatever. No one cares… they haven’t even seen it i’m sure.

1 Like
12

Yea, it would make teh progression so much more interresting and smoother. You could switch more around, unlock and spade vehicles with much more freedom and fair gameplay.

Sadly, as i said, gaijin did this because they want it and even if not, couldn´t do it any other way.
They will keep this system static out of greed and incompetence.

Another example of “War Thunder: The Wasted Potential”.

1 Like
13

Modifications based BR cannot work cause it restricts changing loadouts in-match.

Gaijin doesn’t have a way to DCS-like restrict weapons from random battles either, however F-1 with 9Ls would be 11.0.
And A-10 without 9Ls would be ~8.7.

@Circleati
No, Su-17M2 and A-7D are the reasons why air spawn was removed from strike aircraft. 90 second matches were a thing for an update when A-7D had air spawn.

And I see the TOS-breaking username on a game that has minors playing is completely lying about why modifications don’t impact BR.
Modifications don’t impact BR because it’d be a hassle to code and incentivize toxic behavior.

1 Like
14

Yea, thats what i said, it would be alot to code.
Also, mister TOS snitch. What so hard about allowing me to decide what Loudouts i take with me into the match or not.
If i get the option to uncheck ammo types, i get to join a lower BR match where these ammo types are not available for me.
Its not that complicated.

15

the air spawn where removed long before the A-10s/SU-25s, I think it was because of planes like the A-4s and Harriers etc. but I don’t recall exactly when they changed it.

they didn’t specifically say it would get an air spawn, but a “forward spawn” which could be air or on the forward air base:

16

I certianly dont miss the days of orbital a5’s and av8’s before you even got halfway to the map

1 Like
17

I was a necessary change IMO (imagine an F-15E with an air spawn), however it needed to be implemented on a case by case basis, not the blanket removal of all air spawns for rank 6+. as it is currently there are attackers like the A-10 that need the air spawn to even make it to battle that are basically useless in ARB, while a number sub rank 6 attackers and bombers can still abuse it like the FW-190 F-8 and SAAB-105s.
If Gaijin doesn’t want to make the effort to review each attacker individually then at least allowing them to spawn on the forward air base would be a decent compromise as it would give them a head start, but not the massive alt and speed advantage that an air spawn dose.