Forum Discussion
Very nice post, sir or madam. I have always felt that Jets were a shoe-horned feature into Battlefield. It would make more sense in my mind if the fixed wing aircraft were all light attack/CAS designated air frames like the A-10. Even the F-18 felt out of place though it does fill that role as well. Don't you think the really hot aircraft, like the F-15/22/35 'types' would be better suited as a Commander call in, like the C-130 was in BF4? Instead of loitering like the C-130 though, the Strike Jets would be directed to an area selected by the commander.
Just a thought.
@Snack_Weasel While I think the A-10 Thunderbolt would be AWESOME to fly in Battlefield like they are used in ARMA and other games. I really feel like the apache and nightbird do the job well from a CAS standpoint. Also while the A-10 is quite literally a butt pucker for any infantryman on the ground caught in its cross hairs. You have to agree the merits of Heli's in close quarters CAS like cities. The effect on target and consistent albeit "gentler" pressure of a Helicopter is imo a better fit to the explosive devastation an A-10 would rain down. If A-10's were added there would still be a need for a fighter jet either way. While A-10's can dogfight they are not really designed for that. If we used A-10s I think we would need to sacrifice the Apache over one of the fighter jets we currently have considering the current jets have almost zero impact on ground targets.
As for making the fighters a commanders call. If the fighters called in could then be operated by an actual pilot. I could see some fun in that idea. However if the commander call for a fighter plane is more like what many games including BF did which were simply "kill streak rewards" from COD. I am not down with that. I love the aerial combat of BF because that wasn't something I really got to experience in the military.
- 4 years ago@killroywuzhere03 very nice read! 10 out of 10 for effort. One thing to keep in mind, which dice also talked about when changing stuff up for bfv, is that the main reason for players to quit playing was getting killed feeling they could in no way have avoided it by different choices or by improved skills. With emphasis on ‘feeling’. It is why I sometimes feel there are too many choppers after the infantry now and I can spawn in on a hot flag only to get blown away by enemy air support again and again. My own fault for spawning hot, sure, but the alternative is often a flag far away and a long run/ drive to get anywhere. Jets are very hard to counter by infantry because of their speed and so they should have limited options against infantry.
- 4 years ago
@mesterKGI could not agree more. There are definitely times where a player "feels" that way. Dice needs to also understand that sometimes it "feels" that way because it IS that way.
As for your statement on the infantry and jets. I whole hearted agree with you. Jets MUST remain mostly anti-air. Which is why outside of the VTOL planes I did not make any statements regarding the inaccuracy of the 25mm or 30mm when strafing targets. I feel this is necessary in this game due to plane speeds. While the planes do feel slow to pilots from a ground perspective they zip.
The reason I gave the Panther the ability to attack infantry in this rework is due to its VTOL ability. I believe using VTOL to attack enemy ground troops is a equally risky venture as VTOLs engage and disengage is exceptionally slow. Leaving the plane vulnerable to locks. That said if it was me in the dev seat and they used my changes. I would be watching the long barrel 25mm cannon closely on the VTOL planes that can attack infantry. If I felt the weapon was too strong I already have 3 nerf options for it. 1) would be to make it overheat faster. 2) would be to make the bloom of the cannon increase with sustained fire. Basically you would be able to take burst shots at infantry but if you slum on the trigger for too long your shots become more inaccurate. 3) would be to reduce the ROF of the gun as well. That reduces their ability to strafe at full speed and increases the need to be in VTOL.
Also the design of the VTOL planes loadouts is specifically to provide high risk. The miniguns I mentioned are in fact the same on the night bird. As you know they need to be rather close to use them. Same would apply with the VTOL planes.
Finally, with the new token system mentioned above. You would actually have less choppers in the air at one time. Because I put both Nightbird and Attack Heli's in the same group. Players have to decide which of the two to use.
Example: hourglass on a bot match you get 3 aircraft tokens. 2 for Attack (Jet/Attack Heli) 1 for Transport (Condor/Nightbird). With the current system you can actually have 2 apache's and 1 nightbird in the sky. With my token changes you would have 1 Jet (Panther/Raptor) 1 Chopper (Apache/Nightbird) 1 Transport (Condor/C-17) max. So in this case more is less and less is good for ground troops enjoyable gameplay!
- 4 years ago
I suppose my example of the A-10 was to highlight the use of subsonic fixed wing aircraft in Battlefield as it has traditionally been focused on squad level battles - rather than theatre based strategy. Think the A-29 Super Tucano. That's my take anyway. Don't modern super sonic jets typically use guided munitions from 10's of thousands of feet? It's effective for sure, but in Battlefield terms they would basically be satellites raining death on dozens of players at a time. I just don't think they fit, certainly not in a CAS role at low altitude.
- 4 years ago@Snack_Weasel I see what you mean. Your correct that normally super sonic jets can lock from quite a distance away. That's where the game design portion comes into play. Unlike real war, simulated war games must incorporate a semblance of balance and sacrifice realism to a degree. That is so both sides have an equal advantage and the ultimate victory goes to those of more skill. In that sense you have to look at battlefield as a chess board. Each piece has a fundamental purpose and restrictions to how it is used.
The problem I see with using turboprop CAS aircraft instead of jets. Is that their role is close air support which has already been claimed. Adding another CAS vehicle further tips the scales. Yes the A-29 is a chopper killer of sorts, but it also has ground attack abilities. So at most I would say it would be a possible replacement for the F-35. However it does not resolve the major issue with air vehicles right now and breaks the "futuristic" feel of the game.
The huge problem right now is there is an over abundance of CAS in the air and not enough anti-air to threaten it. Choppers in this game right now are extremely durable, are hard to see, are able to engage jets head to head, and can even defeat jets completely by reaching max altitude and forcing jets to engage in the choppers killbox.
That combined with the fact that DICE decided to create two separate aircraft for US and RU. Then make the insane decision to make one extremely mobile and give the other VTOL which they miss judged as an acceptable counter. So not only do fighter jets not have the edge on their prey. But anyone playing RU in the felon has the superior advantage over the US F-35. Unfortunately it doesn't matter what planes or choppers you substitute if the balance equation remains the same you will find the same result.
The only proper fix is to separate the planes into specific roles that both restrict and define their reason for existence. Using slower planes like subsonic turboprop engines will not fix the problem. Just slow down the gameplay. Think of it like I said in the OP. The aerial vehicles need to be broken down into a "rock paper scissors" system. Where certain vehicles have the advantage over others. But leaving the flexibility for rock to beat paper if they are skilled enough. Its like a pawn vs. a rook in chess. The rook has the advantage of movement over the pawn which makes it more dangerous to the pawn. But that doesn't mean a pawn cannot defeat a rook.
Just as a Chopper Killer has the major advantage over a chopper but the chopper still has a chance at beating it. Where as Dog Fighter (the Queen of aerial pieces) the advantage over all aerial vehicles. You have to counter a Dog Fighter with another Dog Fighter. Like two Queens facing off, and the only victor is the one with superior skill or tactics.
However all these "pieces" I mentioned have to be available to both sides. Which doesn't exist right now. Battlefield right now is like playing chess game where only one side has a queen and the other does not. Until they fix that, ground troops are going to feel helpless against aerial CAS vehicles.
About Battlefield 2042 General Discussion
Recent Discussions
- 16 minutes ago
- 16 minutes ago
- 5 hours ago
- 17 hours ago
- 24 hours ago