Now they argue AAA is to strong due the lead indicator. Which left out that hitting an plane isn't as easy as pointing an gun at an slow tank that can only move in an limited matter. The opposing opinions have already been more than once voiced.įact is as said before there are arguments on both sides about skill.īefore it was that one only needs AAA to be taken out and CAS can be countered. This could be reversal to working bombs with large blast radii and nuke rockets or it could be a far more complex and historically accurate fixing of all bombs, rockets, and AT guns on planes. Then we can see ordinance get massively un-nerfed like it has needed to be for a while now. And if one team has won the ground they can demolish these to end hung games faster. These units would be worth, in total, 50% of a team’s tickets. add a defensive line of light pillboxes, howitzers, BMG nests, and AT guns in front of spawns, these would cut down on lone wolf spawn camping and give planes a way to help win the match by objective. have all planes spawn on the AF, and (preferably) remove Airbase AAA from RB GF, 99% of the it serves no purpose anyway, and on some maps it starts firing from a ludicrous distance like on Poland. raise spawn costs of ordinance-laden fighters (you shouldn’t be able to have your cake - being able to obliterate most of the enemy team on the ground - and eat it too - being able to shoot down any enemy attacker or bomber or fighter with ease so easily right after dumping your ordinance) keep lead indicators on radar SPAA and have all other SPAA display them at a shorter max range. Do you have one to propose that we can discuss? I'm interested in a package of reasonable changes. StronkVodka, for instance, denies that it's a combined arms game mode and warrior412 declares that 50% of the mode is planes, both statements that are clearly incorrect by any reasonable examination of the mode description or the fact that you can't spawn in a plane at the start of a match. It's not enough for some and too much for others. you get ordnance that's useless and arcade lead indicators that nobody wanted, apparently. How do you come up with an equitable compromise when neither side wants to budge? The answer is. I wasn't in either camp, but have found that merely makes me a lightning rod for both. I'll just forward that the small, vocal minority you complain of was on both sides of the issue, between those who demanded no changes and those that demanded the removal of all airplanes. Or if we could finally agree on something here, which means a lot less personal agenda and a lot more for the greater good, we could put forward a widely carried suggestion and hope for the best. Though I had no trouble evading an AMX-30 DCA in my stock He-162, so. No such AAA like that should be below 8.0. I will say that the AMX-30 DCA is undertiered now. That is at 6.3 and above, where the first French radar SPAA is now reliably and commonly seen. Any tank kills are bonus points, and if there are no SPAA, I mark tanks and score assists until my guns are dry. I fly now so that SPAA will reveal their location and to shoot down enemy aircraft. It'd become high risk, but with potential huge rewards. I'd be okay with radar lead even though I disagree with it IF ordnance still reliably killed. There would still be people who claim it didn't go far enough, that they wouldn't be satisfied until combined arms meant you mixed APCR in with your APHE. Active radar homing was commonly in use in the 1960s and even the late 1950s, and that's just from a few minutes casual online research.Įveryone also noted that it didn't matter what nerfs ordnance got and that it has gotten to the point that suiciding your plane into a tank is the only reliable way to get a kill. (See the ASM-N-2 Bat as just one example). That's a very 1944 solution to the problem. Then the perfect counter will be missiles that home in on radar emitters and destroy them.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |