For airfields I somewhat disagree, at least for the lower ranks (10km in something like an I-15 is ludicrous), but something I would be fine with is close-ish airspawns (30-60s out of firing range, slightly more for lower BRs), but airfields being placed further back. Said airspawns would be at the deck, however.
→ Something that could also work is mid-air rearming points with varying distances based on the plane, but its probably a bit too “arcadey” for RB.
I agree on air-to-ground armament scaling, though, but I would tweak it per individual plane. Something like the F.222.2 shouldnt need 10k+ SP to spawn in, despite having 52 50kgs.
I took the F86-A5 into a testflight with full-real controls, cockpit view and 16 HVARs.
Range at which I can land and splash with rockets with massively hindered controls and no practice doing CAS: ~2km at cost of 8 rockets. Now, I did leave markers on to get distance estimation.
With mouse controls, it’s far more consistent and made possible at higher speeds and steeper dive angles.
What chance does a 5.3 open-top vehicle have without some serious building cover?
2kms will take a long time for those rockets to cover… Think about that before trying to mock the opposing argument because it shows you have no care for the point.
Says the person with mostly negative kdr on the vehicles he played lol its only possible to get that kind of numbers if you charge blindly into enemies and gets blown up.
Cool stat check bro, but it does nothing to further the discussion…
I think it’s about time @Stona_WT made the rule about statshaming come back because it does nothing at all in forms of discussion, and it’s all about trying to shame someone into submission so they can carry on the complaint thread as per usual.
It’s not stat shaming to call someone out who has never used a 5.3 SPAA at 7.7 to NOT make claims about “skill issues” and “unable to face opposition.”
You are claiming the Bosvark is a viable SPAA to use as Britain with the 7.7 lineup.
I never stated I was good at it or that I’d even used it, I merely said about the tactic…
And that’s what you don’t want to hear, the tactic, the thoughts, the contribution tothe thread other than the backpat and support to get your air threat ‘solved’ through what YOU want, not what anyone else does…