Fix the dumb missile meta in top tier.

[J]

Nerf missiles in top tier its getting insanely dumb this missile meta just climbing to space and spamming missiles all day.

[76561198315424152]

Best mode, go to custom and look for aerobatics 👌


Cause after 2+ years of supersonic stuff, i see No indication that they give a 🦆 about balance there.

(Nothing against missile thunder, just let there be a better br separation from newer and older weapon tech))

Mig 21s down a br step yet agan, br update after br update cause of their system.. and players now know enough of their lack of actual insight/overview to 🦆 up the brs over the board.


Automated system for repairs & brs is fine, if they cap it. So that plane x can't go above or below a certain cost or br range .. but like it is it's not good.

Also gonna copy paste this about the missiles...

Can you please look into the forums, whoever sets brs on the new stuff...


Wt needs better br separation with old & new jet technology.. what the h is supersonics with aam doing against subsonic without counters

New added jet premiums like draken on too low br, again... why keep doing this, we wanna play our lower jets too sometimes...

I'll get the draken (fix packet loss first so one can play in peace) but I also wanna be able to play 1950s jets without getting outclassed by better technology. see p2w is bad for everyone even the ones buying stuff...




💎Let air to air missiles start earliest at 8.7-9.0-9.3 somewhere, the very earliest... (WTH is mig21 doing at 9.3, it's 10.7 fully modded to get away from 9.3 sabres for example, maybe 10.0 without missiles equiped)

💎aam researched & equipped should give a br bump. The difference in performance justifies a difference in br. This would be good br dynamics.

For example, a pre-supersonic patch 8.0 plane without aam equipped should still be 8.0 until a aam modification is researched & equipped...

if equipped in hangar - immediate br bump to at least 8.7. (Allowing the option to not bring it in, to fit in a 8.0 lineup or matchmaker. 8.0 is just an example.)

💎Give the old jets & jets without flares & aam some slack.

💎Create more br separation/decompress by moving up the top br to 13.x.

The br should be balanced with consideration to what was in before the supersonic update.

💎Fix top tier balance to give a good reason for players to even buy premium account, or they might as well stay at rank 1-4... Don't fall short on the finnish line, setting proper brs should be the easiest part of the development, it's confusing to us...

💎That goes for repair costs & or at least repair times & research requirements too. No need to go far beyond 100k per vehicle on top tiers. Fixing this is just win/win."

And add enough presets! id use like 35 & i don't even play tonks, give us a hundred..

[9imperator8]

Well that is about how those planes were designed to be used. Those more modern planes are only platforms for missiles. If you want dogfights don't expect it from any nearly modern plane.

[whatdoesthisbuttondo?]

Originally posted by alarik98:

Well that is about how those planes were designed to be used. Those more modern planes are only platforms for missiles. If you want dogfights don't expect it from any nearly modern plane.

Not necessarily, many modern jets were designed with dogfighting performance in mind.

The MiG-29 is a prime example.

[9imperator8]

Originally posted by whatdoesthisbuttondo?:

Originally posted by alarik98:

Well that is about how those planes were designed to be used. Those more modern planes are only platforms for missiles. If you want dogfights don't expect it from any nearly modern plane.

Not necessarily, many modern jets were designed with dogfighting performance in mind.

The MiG-29 is a prime example.

Yes, many (mainly russian ones) have been designed like that. However modern combat is very much tied to the missiles.

[whatdoesthisbuttondo?]

Originally posted by alarik98:

Yes, many (mainly russian ones) have been designed like that. However modern combat is very much tied to the missiles.

Ideally yes, which lead us to even design jet fighters without guns at some point.

In practice however, RoE often dictate the target to be positively identified by visual before engaging, hence short-range AAMs are carried and we found that guns do have a place in modern jetfighters as well.

Anyway, modern american jetfighter design produced some formidable dogfighters as well, as the lessons above were mainly learned in Vietnam.

[J]

I agree with the comments but im sorry irl jets do not fire missiles when pulling dumb turns and insane amounts of G's firing missiles and definitely not vertically thats called screwing yourself. Only very few modern are designed to fire missiles like this...

[Kay]

Originally posted by whatdoesthisbuttondo?:

Originally posted by alarik98:

Yes, many (mainly russian ones) have been designed like that. However modern combat is very much tied to the missiles.

Ideally yes, which lead us to even design jet fighters without guns at some point.

In practice however, RoE often dictate the target to be positively identified by visual before engaging, hence short-range AAMs are carried and we found that guns do have a place in modern jetfighters as well.

Anyway, modern american jetfighter design produced some formidable dogfighters as well, as the lessons above were mainly learned in Vietnam.

The place for guns is more to do with the capability to strafe a target with very short response times, rather than leaving ground forces without at least some kind of CAS than it is for dogfighting, though there is still the argument that they're better to have in that situation than not.

On topic though, top tier is going to be missiles for the foreseeable future, and a lot of people do in fact enjoy missile gameplay, though it is different to gunfighting and relies more on awareness and using your kit appropriately, along with knowing the limitations of hostile kit (PD radar doesn't do well with targets moving at the same speed as the jet etc.)

[xCrossFaith]

Modern jets rely mainly on missiles... I don't think that's the issue, but that flares should be a universal thing, there is really no reason for anything above rank V to not have them

And don't go with the "but muh realism" thing because the ammount of realistic stuff in this game is 0, starting for making dead pilots pay for the planes they died in

If you are going to tell me that Mirage IIIC having flares is not realistic while you are in a Phatom over a 1945 map yeah... I simply can't buy that excuse :P

[9imperator8]

Originally posted by xCrossFaith:

Modern jets rely mainly on missiles... I don't think that's the issue, but that flares should be a universal thing, there is really no reason for anything above rank V to not have them

And don't go with the "but muh realism" thing because the ammount of realistic stuff in this game is 0, starting for making dead pilots pay for the planes they died in

If you are going to tell me that Mirage IIIC having flares is not realistic while you are in a Phatom over a 1945 map yeah... I simply can't buy that excuse :P

Yea, realism really isn't a thing with the match ups as you can have 40's tanks against a coldwar italian mariocart (R3)...

[smartest indiana resident]

its just kinda annoying getting slapped by a SRAAM from 4 km away

[Luxaeterna]

Have you ever seen modern jets documentary like desert storm, falklands, arab-israeli wars, and iran-iraq war. Missle spam is how modern jets fight. The same thing with modern ships in the future of naval.

[J]

Originally posted by Luxaeterna:

Have you ever seen modern jets documentary like desert storm, falklands, arab-israeli wars, and iran-iraq war. Missle spam is how modern jets fight. The same thing with modern ships in the future of naval.

i agree with parts of your comment. Fighter Jet Pilots still have a ROE to follow While all jets from both the USA and the UK are equiped with Long Range anti air missiles they are told not to use them unless it is absolutely necessary for several reasons.
- Missiles are expensive more expensive than cannon ammo.
- 75% of the time anti air missiles collide and will set the cockpit a light which can burn the pilot alive which is a breach of several human rights laws.

And this game aims for "realistic" regardless allowing a jet to spam missiles is very unrealistic.

[9imperator8]

Originally posted by DeeZPlays:

Originally posted by Luxaeterna:

Have you ever seen modern jets documentary like desert storm, falklands, arab-israeli wars, and iran-iraq war. Missle spam is how modern jets fight. The same thing with modern ships in the future of naval.

i agree with parts of your comment. Fighter Jet Pilots still have a ROE to follow While all jets from both the USA and the UK are equiped with Long Range anti air missiles they are told not to use them unless it is absolutely necessary for several reasons.
- Missiles are expensive more expensive than cannon ammo.
- 75% of the time anti air missiles collide and will set the cockpit a light which can burn the pilot alive which is a breach of several human rights laws.

And this game aims for "realistic" regardless allowing a jet to spam missiles is very unrealistic.

Doesn't necessary aim for true realism. The game aims somewhere near realism but not a simulation. Vehicles work close to their irl counter parts but in no way or form does the game imitate real war or world.
There is no infantry to support tanks, vehicle from completly diffirent eras face each other, there is always same number of people on each team, you can see in 3rd person, there is no real supply or supplyline mechanics,there is no politics or laws, there is no morale etc.

Game's mechanics are directed to be somewhere close to realis, but this game is not a scenario simulator.

[Jaes]

Originally posted by DeeZPlays:

- Missiles are expensive more expensive than cannon ammo.

Uh?? What an absolute nonsensical series of statements.

Rules of Engagement (ROE) are established so pilots don't go trigger happy and kill something they're not supposed to. Or start a war with another nation because military jets were ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ around with each other. Look up the Gulf of Sidra Incident as a prime example for ROE.

There is no doctrine or ROE that will put a pilot's life in danger for the sake of saving money. The pilot is way more expensive and important than the cost of a missile or the machine they pilot. The fact that you're implying that pilots are supposed to close in with guns instead of using the dedicated and primary weapon system of shooting down other aircraft as safely and efficiently as possible is absurd.

Guns are fallback weapon systems for when your missiles fail or your target is too close for a missile launch. This was a lesson taught in Vietnam. Note the progression of gun-less F-4 Phantoms to the F-4E.

Originally posted by DeeZPlays:

- 75% of the time anti air missiles collide and will set the cockpit a light which can burn the pilot alive which is a breach of several human rights laws.

Yes, which law establishes that you can't kill the enemy in active combat? You must be extremely shocked by the existence of flamethrowers with a statement like this! Have you heard of Napalm? Thermobaric bombs? I would highly recommend reviewing Protocol III of the Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons before spouting nonsense (because I doubt you'd actually look it up, I included a very important part of the Protocol below) .

Protocol III states though that incendiary weapons do not include:

Munitions designed to combine penetration, blast or fragmentation effects with an additional incendiary effect, such as armor-piercing projectiles, fragmentation shells, explosive bombs and similar combined-effects munitions in which the incendiary effect is not specifically designed to cause burn injury to persons, but to be used against military objectives, such as armoured vehicles, aircraft and installations or facilities.

Originally posted by DeeZPlays:

And this game aims for "realistic" regardless allowing a jet to spam missiles is very unrealistic.

You clearly have no idea what you're talking about. If that wasn't already established. The F-8 Crusader, an aircraft known as the "Last Gunfighter," scored 2 Gun kills. The rest of its 17 kills (19 in total) were scored with missiles. By spamming them. You know, the thing you claim doesn't happen.

[J]

Originally posted by Jaes:

Originally posted by DeeZPlays:

- Missiles are expensive more expensive than cannon ammo.

Uh?? What an absolute nonsensical series of statements.

Rules of Engagement (ROE) are established so pilots don't go trigger happy and kill something they're not supposed to. Or start a war with another nation because military jets were ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ around with each other. Look up the Gulf of Sidra Incident as a prime example for ROE.

There is no doctrine or ROE that will put a pilot's life in danger for the sake of saving money. The pilot is way more expensive and important than the cost of a missile or the machine they pilot. The fact that you're implying that pilots are supposed to close in with guns instead of using the dedicated and primary weapon system of shooting down other aircraft as safely and efficiently as possible is absurd.

Guns are fallback weapon systems for when your missiles fail or your target is too close for a missile launch. This was a lesson taught in Vietnam. Note the progression of gun-less F-4 Phantoms to the F-4E.

Originally posted by DeeZPlays:

- 75% of the time anti air missiles collide and will set the cockpit a light which can burn the pilot alive which is a breach of several human rights laws.

Yes, which law establishes that you can't kill the enemy in active combat? You must be extremely shocked by the existence of flamethrowers with a statement like this! Have you heard of Napalm? Thermobaric bombs? I would highly recommend reviewing Protocol III of the Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons before spouting nonsense (because I doubt you'd actually look it up, I included a very important part of the Protocol below) .

Protocol III states though that incendiary weapons do not include:

Munitions designed to combine penetration, blast or fragmentation effects with an additional incendiary effect, such as armor-piercing projectiles, fragmentation shells, explosive bombs and similar combined-effects munitions in which the incendiary effect is not specifically designed to cause burn injury to persons, but to be used against military objectives, such as armoured vehicles, aircraft and installations or facilities.

Originally posted by DeeZPlays:

And this game aims for "realistic" regardless allowing a jet to spam missiles is very unrealistic.

You clearly have no idea what you're talking about. If that wasn't already established. The F-8 Crusader, an aircraft known as the "Last Gunfighter," scored 2 Gun kills. The rest of its 17 kills (19 in total) were scored with missiles. By spamming them. You know, the thing you claim doesn't happen.

Your literally mentioning weapons that are banned for use in conflict. Flamethrowers are banned, Thermobaric weapons are banned for use.

Im not saying to save money im saying rule of war states if you have to take a life you have to do this the most humanely way possible. Setting someone on fire is not humane.

same as if a aircraft is damaged and going down you must allow the pilot of the aircraft to eject safely.

Name modern conflict now that missile spamming was used? better yet IR guided weapons. You can't because it doesn't happen dump fire missiles are another thing entirely guided weapons do not get spammed. because while life always takes priority every nation has a military budget and spamming IR guided weapons is a heavy heavy cost. Hence why every nation is now building fighters that are extremely advanced as far as strike capability goes but don't carry much ammunition.

Not once did i say that modern aircraft can't spam but on a realistic level it doesn't happen. For several reasons. Hence the reason for 90% of aircraft now carry a standard payload and have cannons with plenty of ammo. Missile spamming is costly and dangerous to civilian life hence why its not done.

Rules back then are different to what they are now...

20-40 years ago sure missile spamming probably was a thing but so was Flamethrowers, napalm etc. which are all now banned.

I can slure out a loads of facts on what aircraft did do 20-30 years ago but things have changed massively since then its 2021 now.