I don’t want to imagine where GJN would put these planes without all the nerfs over the years…
1 Like
That’s what happens when A7M2 compresses 10 times worse than A6M5.
A6M5 being the king of 650 IAS maneuvrability is hilarious BTW.
3 Likes
A7M2 never was a high speed fighter. Back in the days it’s strength was low speed fighting, but GJN gave it automatic flaps and crippled it to death.
It was my beloved reverse monster, but without good flaps and the nerfed ammo it’s useless.
Since they removed wing breakage due to G-forces, ARBs are directly like playing in an arcade, since you can’t use the strengths of certain planes, nor exploit the weaknesses of others.
The goal of Arcade Thunder is getting closer and closer.
3 Likes
How’s ammo nerfed on A7M2?
The cannons reliably 1-shot.
And I never claimed it was good at high speed. I’m just saying it compresses way more than A6M5, which is true.
1 Like
After all the ammo nerfs and buffs it’s still worse than before. Long distance kills are more luck than reliable. Sure, this concerns to all cannons, but it’s even worse for planes relied on long distance kills like the A7M2.
You mean cannon range nerf? Yeah, but actually Type 99 Mk 2 has excellent ballistics still and carries its velocity really, really well.
I would happily trade all 3.of Ta-152Hs guns for 1 Type 99 Mk2 with 200 rounds.
3 Likes
Since they reach altitude faster, there is no way to reliably reach a point where you have a sufficient energy advantage to reset engagement without issue. Since you can easily be run down if climbing optimally (constant speed), and maintaining a high speed means they are going to be above you and you will lack options.
With the removal of Interception targets, there is no reason to climb at all, since objectives that are worth tickets are all on the surface.
The thing to do would be to give everyone airspawns wholesale with dynamically assigned altitude(per airframe), based off time to altitude figures with the target altitude set based on the aircraft’s role.
And to avoid prior knowledge of static spawns being used to rush people climbing with said inherent energy advantage; players should be distributed across a wide area (e.g. across two adjacent map edges), to frustrate time based deductions of pathing.
Aside from that balancing based of either the median or 40th / 60th percentiles’ performance may make things fairer for the majority, though this would likely also require a wholesale adjustment to the meta economy to keep KPI’s in band.
1 Like
what reaches altitude faster? energy fighters? I’m confused as to what you are trying to say here.
This makes no sense, since when have ARB games ever been resolved by ground pounding? The incentive to climb is to kill all the enemy players because thats what wins 95% of ARB games.
The reason to climb is so that your BF109 doesn’t end up with a Zero or a Spitfire above you.
This wouldn’t solve the current gameplay “meta” (if you can even call it that) where people don’t bother climbing in the first place, or the fact that large numbers of people just hard dive on the first zomber they see.
When this is your gameplay loop, and everyone sits or just ends up at low altitude, the planes that do the best at low altitude are the ones that are going to end up winning most consistently even if they are technically outclassed.
Do you really think that ability is worthy of 5.7 though?
Tickets don’t matter in ARB anymore though, unless you literally run out the clock 25 minutes. Games pretty much have never ended by ticket loss directly anymore.
What planes are we referring to?
I mean the damage they do at long range. Most of the time you get hits or crits >1km, if you are lucky a severe damage. Back in the days planes explode instantly, even at 1.5km like they still do at shorter ranges.
I understand it for minengeschosse, because they need a specific amount of penetration, but HE with impact detonator…
They do insane damage at every range. I’ve been 1-shotting people from 1000+m away in some instances. What the HELL are you talking about?
Use MG151/20 for a week, then tell me Type.99 Mk2 is somehow “nerfed”.
M-geschoss has normal, sensitive, fuse with slight delay and it could penetrate aircraft skin just fine even at long range despite having shit ballistics.
Also the “but muh 1500m shots don’t work” is like the biggest non-issue ever. Seriously.
1 Like
The turn fighter tends to have the better low altitude rate of climb, due to concessions made to permit performance at highest altitudes providing a significant weight penalty and so acceleration suffers especially at low speeds.
A long, long time ago, when bombers & attackers used to have a purpose.
Woosh.
The point isn’t to win harder (the matchmaker has a clear hand in that), its to reliably progress down the tech tree, with as little effort as possible. and leaving it to a chance that doesn’t favor the average player doesn’t help. Especially since Proximity mission score generation was removed so if you don’t get hits you don’t get anything at all, for the time invested.
For US teams it’s pointless since basically everyone bar the Russians will beat you to 3~5km of altitude, and your advantages only show up above ~6km or so.
It would go a fair way to raising the average altitude at which engagements occur, and treat all airframes fairly.
Well, what else where they going to do when carrying ordnance; not?
And so how are you going to account for player skill? Gaijin can’t put the breaks on your meta progression if they can’t dock your earnings for repairs, it was the basis for astronomic bombers costs since in the right hands they could go multiple matches without dying and so had the costs raised to account for that. Woe be to any who where intercepted more than average.
Depends, are you going up against a better than average pilot, that knows what to not do, or not?
I see, you won’t understand my point. You are right. Period.
Which turn fighter? This is very dependent on aircraft and is definitely not a blanket statement, and still definitely isn’t true of Zeros.
Soo 2013? 2015 maybe?
What are you trying to say with that matchmaker comment? That its rigged or something? God I hope not.
If thats all you consider the point of the game to be then your experience playing it must be incredibly boring. My main reason for playing is to have fun and to win when fighting other players, not to mindlessly grind. The game is old, I’ve been playing since Planes OBT and so I’ve got all the jets I want. Half the props I play were spaded around that aforementioned 2013-2015. The point is playing a PVP game like a PVP game. The tech tree progress comes naturally with that.
Thats far from accurate across all American aircraft, and even on the ones where its not inaccurate, so your backup plan is to let Spitfires and stuff gain even more of an altitude advantage over you?
Ok so firstly, I never gave a damn about repair costs back when those were massive.
Why should they be balanced on player skill at all? Especially as heavily the weight seems to be. A Skilled player is going to be skilled regardless of what plane he is flying. It doesn’t make the plane more OP. If they up BR the heck out of planes so the only way they do well is in the hands of top players - who are going to consistently do well regardless, Its not going to prove the plane is balanced or not.
The pilot skill is irrelevant to the question. Is the aircraft close enough to equal in actual performance to be comparable to other aircraft at the same BR?
Is the A6M5 Ko seriously, legitimately, hand on heart close enough in performance to any of these example aircraft to be deserving of the same BR?
The Zeros aren’t the only aircraft suffering from this either. I unlocked and spaded the G.55 Serie 1 after seeing the BR announcements just because I’ve barely toched italy and wanted to see why it was going up, as everyone was also saying that was a dumb change. And it was. The thing is roughly equivalent to a 4.7 Bf109 G-6. It doesn’t feel any reason to be 5.0 worthy, let alone 5.3.
2 Likes
Before you drive yourself crazy in this argument, check his stats, he is mostly an AAB player, which is fine apart from the bit where he is arguing about ARB balance based of a mode where aircraft preform completely differantly.
You two seem to be arguing about 2 completely different sets of performance.
I’m surprised the N1K went up but the Ki-84 didn’t, seeing as the former is rarely seen in ARB. Same as how the LF beasts went up but not AirRB satan that is the Yak-3U, imo the Yak-3 going up did act as compensation atleast.
checking it, he has played a decent amount of aircraft in RB, Though of course as usual when someone has a confusing opinion on things, its all American aircraft with next to no experience in any other nation.
Yeah, just the bulk of his recent stuff is AAB, so that’s likely the basis of his opinion, I’m not trying to make an issue of his preferred game modes or stat shame, just explain why you both seem to be talking past each other. Aircraft are a lot more forgiving in their playstyles in arcade than realistic.