I am repeating a suggestion I made on the Test server BEFORE jets went live.
Enlisted originally differentiates between Attackers and Fighters for a reason. They both have different roles.
Before Jets, BR 5 typically only had ONE aircraft in the air at a time capapble of mass destruction. (P-47, Ju188, Tu-2 etc…japan has nothing), And one Fighter to keep them in check. Even then “ONE” attacker was enough to upset many a foot slogger.
With Jets coming in with massive payloads and being labelled “fighters”, Its just doubled up (essentially 2 attackers in the AIR at all times)…This becomes a constant barrage of destruction.
Suggestion:
These Jets are in Ground attack configuration, they should “NOT” be spawned in as fighters
To top it off, you also removed 50% fuel, and payload effect on aerodynamics JUST on jets
this is a MASSIVE advantage over all other Aircraft that not only have less performance, but have to deal with weight imbalance.
some jets have over 900kg of weight removed!!! (Su-9 and me 262)
Meteorand F-80 dont have to deal with wingload imbalance when only dropping one bomb! (Wing mounts)
NOTE: (this suggestion is not including proposed meteor payload nerf.)
Benefits:
By making them attackers, players actually have to make a choice between CAS, and Anti CAS.
Meteor, F-80 cant be in the sky at the same time as P-47
Jabo cant be in the sky at the same time as Ju 188
Su-9 cant be in the sky at the same time as TU-2
Kikka -…benefits Japan as it gives them an actual High BR attacker (which they sorely lack)
Future Proofing:
Leaves room for Late war “fighter Props” or “Jet Interceptors” to counter jets without competing for the same spawn slot
Conclusion:
It seems to me that this has always been the best course of action:
It retains the “one attacker”, “one fighter” that Enlisted was designed for
It Provides Japan with a MUCH needed high BR attacker
Players have to chose their poison (meteor? or P-47)
BR 5 Jets in “Ground Strike configuration” should be “Attackers”, not “fighters”
Yeah. I think making them so at this point would upset players that like them as they are (or purchased something like the F-80)…The Jabo is a groundstriker though
Still annoyed over Narhwal ammo belt change
I dont mind Jets in ground strike configuration…they are a lot of fun…they just MUST be the right class…Attacker
thats not to say interceptor variants cant be added later as a counter balance to them
Seem logical since fw190d12 is classified as a attacker
But at the same time I fear it will just make actual bombers obselete. Jets are just too good against other planes to be called attackers.
IMO, no jet should have payload other than Ar234 or perhaps an event me262. However, it won’t happen since DF is selling premium f80.
I still think a spawn point system will be much better in terms of balancing without having to deal with all these arbitrary categories by DF.
yeah, I really think that screwed up alot aswell, but thats another discussion
also whats that got to do with anything? The jets would still be BR 5. (unless you mean to say Rifleman screwed over all other classes, so Jets can screw over attackers?)
I think if the planes get distributed better accross the BRs in a BR ±0 scenario, More vehicles will have a place (this avoids Jet making other bombers obsolete for example)
for example (future additions required and available to round out…everyones got their own ideas about what goes where…)
Most of these matchups are very useable against and with each other. there is a bit of context missing. In the original thread there are quite alot of payload tweaks
also dont mind that. Warthunder changed from class + point type spawn, to point based on ordnance including AP ammunition
Per se… fighters and bombers should both perform at a high level in all capacities for BRV.
Rules are broken when you enter high tier… no longer do you have limited automatics or lesser powered vehicles.
By your logic fighters like ap4c and every other one that has ground striking abilities should be an attacker… fighters should be able to do both jobs in high tier and there is no exception for the jet.
I once again point you to the playground that is BRV… i find it quite annoying (honestly) suggestions like this trying to change up the core factor of what makes BRV fun (imo)
especially considering i’m assuming you have opinions of SF rifles… if you don’t like it don’t play BR3+ there are plenty of historically famous weapons in the lower tiers.
This would lead to people like you complaining about two jets being in the air… but realistically you wouldnt because there wouldn’t be any payload but it still would happen 100%
By the new rules I can only suggest one thing a time. Knowing full well that it doesnt even scratch the surface.
So the answer is no. I would be pushing to restore these boundaries accross the board, as I did in another thread that suggests too many changes to be permitted.
