so for this have diferent br for ground and air… no? to make balanc… in gound have highter br bacasuse have ir bombs but with 2 aim9m in air battle …
as i said, i am against introducing even more IRCCM missiles into 11.0-12.0 bracket. I obviously do not want to make any jet in the game suffer (or any vehicle), but already existing IRCCM stuff puts a lot of pressure there. Some 11.0 aircrafts have only 12 flares for crying out loud, what are they suppose to do against AIM-9M or Magic2 or R-73?
Why should aircraft in air RB not be balanced off of their capability in A2A combat?
3 Likes
Aircraft of the same role should. Otherwise you are getting stuff like subsonic attackers with all-aspect missilis at the br where enemies might not even have flares
And if the gamemode allowed aircraft of differing roles to perform their correct roles, then I wouldnt have any issue with that.
But as it currently stands ARB is almost entirely PvP. The match outcomes are almost always decided by which team kills the other team first and the rewards are likewise structured around that. In fact, ground attackers are actively punished for performing their primary role due to diminishing returns and many fighters can outperform ground attackers in the ground attacker role.
(Tornado is hard-pressed to beat an F-4 in a ground attack role)
But if we are judging aircraft by their primary role, in this case the Tornado GR4 by its ability to bomb bases and take out AI targets, then it is not stronger than the Tornado RET8 at 11.7 and therefore by your logic can be moved down to 11.7.
1 Like
I’m kind of peeved with this always being the approach. I want all my AAMs on my su 39, because downing people with it would be funny. But they won’t add that because they’re “lacking”. We need modification dependent ratings now.
Not stronger than the 10.7 F111 either.
Yeah, Dynamic BRs would be another good solution
That is also true.
It’s not really a good solution so much as a necessary one. Dedicated attacker platforms, even modern ones, are lacking compared to the armaments they face, yet are neglected their weapons because the rating they are left at to be competitive is low. We cannot have accurate depictions without it.
Yeah. the other option would be to just remove the requirement for ground attackers to have to compete in A2A combat
Yeah but then I still can’t down people with my silly frogfoot and we’re back where we started :(
If it goes to 12.0 surely the ret.8 can get aim9l/i-1s and join it :( Because playing 3 tornados with identical performance in arb is just not fun. It’s an upgrade from the early 2010s so I would be shocked if they hadn’t been integrated
Yeah, that would be the logical thing to do. Not sure why they opted for the RET8 to have 9Ls not 9Li.
Only thing I can think of, is that they wanted a datum point for a Tornado IDS with better defensive abilities at 11.7.
In the tornado mlu thread smin said it was because it would increase the br, and at that time there was 2 tornados at 11.7 so idk
Where the Tornado IDS BRs are concnered, I think they just pick a number out of a hat. It never makes sense
At least guided bombs are no longer a br increase in arb :D
Yeah, that is something. But still is in ASB for some reason.
I definitely agree too, it isn’t particularly fair that aircraft with few flares should have to face IRCCM missiles, it’s similar to the issues that arose when the Yak-38 was first introduced, and aircraft with no flares had to fight against R60s. This really just leads into the age old issue of compression, where we have IRCCM missiles in the same br range as aircraft with no countermeasures.
But the issue I would like to bring attention to as well (which I probably should have mentioned at the beginning) also pertains to the Mirage F1C family. Your argument, quite rightly states, that aircrafy with low flare counts should not be facing IRCCM missiles on semi capable platforms (so excluding the A-10s and Su-25s). I agree that this is a perfectly valid claim, however it doesn’t line up across the board. - The Mirage F1 family get not only the 2x IRCCM missiles, like the tornado, but also have arguably better flight performance and access to additional radar missiles, all at a lower br.
The F1 series having a lower br than the Tornado could only be drawn to the air to ground loadout on the two aircraft, where the Tornado far exceeds the F1s. However the F1s have a split ground/air br to compensate for this. Yet the Tornado, with an objectively inferior A2A loadout and worse flight performance, has a higher BR in air battles, because it’s ARB/GRB brs are not split.
Overall though, I agree with you - and ideally there would be decompression to allow for aircraft with fewer flares to not encounter capable airframes with IRCCM. All I am arguing in response is that the Tornado, with only 2x short range IR missiles, should not be encountering aircraft that have far superior performance in addition to 4x short range IR missiles and 6x Fox-3s
3 Likes