No one should be able to go sixty and zero in battlefield. That is clearly the sign of a broken game mechanic, not good game design. It's absurd that air can pop a counter measure, fly off for ten seconds, rinse repeat, and never die.Cool down timers on vehicle countermeasures need to be greatly increased. Air vehicles extreme mobility needs to come at the cost of a FUEL LIMIT. If someone is determined to be in an air vehicle the entire game they should be forced to fly back to base for refueling with a substantial refuel time. If dice isn't going to balance the time to kill Air then they need to greatly increase the time out of combat air must spend to keep their vehicle. A five minute lock out timer for any pilot seat would be a good addition as well. This would discourage players from monopolizing air the entire game, and also prevent seat swapping exploits that are used to break cooldowns. Ideally air would be powerful hit and run but also be easily killed.No one should be able the endlessly dominate a battle from bad game design.

Less than 1% of the player base can fly.The rest cant stay a live for more than 2 minutes.You dont balance a game around 1%.You will always see insane good pilots going 60-2 just like good tankers do.If everyone can do it then I agree, but it has never been like that and I dont expect it to be like that in BF2042.BFV was bad because of the carpet bombing, fire bombs and rocket spam but most planes went down in flames within a few minuts. Only the realy good pilots did 60-2 and could stay a live for a long time and only on a few maps like ivo jima and fjell.

@SirBobdk wrote:Less than 1% of the player base can fly.The rest cant stay a live for more than 2 minutes.You dont balance a game around 1%.You will always see insane good pilots going 60-2 just like good tankers do.If everyone can do it then I agree, but it has never been like that and I dont expect it to be like that in BF2042.BFV was bad because of the carpet bombing, fire bombs and rocket spam but most planes went down in flames within a few minuts. Only the realy good pilots did 60-2 and could stay a live for a long time and only on a few maps like ivo jima and fjell.BFV isn't just bad for aircraft it's straight up broken. Plane rockets outrange AA so even a rookie pilot is practically untouchable from the ground.You can still have a balanced game while allowing the genuinely good players to excel. BF1 is a good example of this with what I consider one of the better balanced Battlefield games when it comes to ground/air.Battlefield 4 suffered from an over-reliance on lock ons essentially placing a hard cap on your ability to affect the outcome of your engagement with aircraft, often with the best you can hope for is shooing the enemy jet/heli away for a few seconds while their flares recharged. Especially after all the nerfs they made to SRAW, stingers and IGLAsGiven the AA options in 2042 I am somewhat optimistic about how the ground/air balance will develop but given Dice Sweden's history of balancing the ground/air balance around the lamentations of that 1% it could easily go either way.

@No1StingerUserUK You know as well as I do that when Air is in the ascendancy, ground need to 'git gud' but when AA is in the ascendancy, it suddenly becomes unbalanced and 'unfair'.

@JABUKI_68if you balance for the 1% , then 99% of player base can't use that vehicle anymore, so that sounds like a terrible idea, plus the top 1% in another vehicles like tanks also dominate just as hard, if we start balancing all vehicles for the top 1%, then vehicles will be there only for the cinematic effect and might as well be all removed.Also BF V was a step back vehicle gameplay wise anyway compared to all previous titles, infantry wise(gunplay and movement) it was the best in the battlefield series on the other hand.

I would completely disagree. That 1% of players that break the game by exploiting the weaknesses of the game mechanics is exactly what you balance for.

Balance unkillable Air vehicles | EA Forums

74 Replies

SirBobdk
Seasoned Ace
4 years ago
Less than 1% of the player base can fly.
The rest cant stay a live for more than 2 minutes.
You dont balance a game around 1%.
You will always see insane good pilots going 60-2 just like good tankers do.
If everyone can do it then I agree, but it has never been like that and I dont expect it to be like that in BF2042.
BFV was bad because of the carpet bombing, fire bombs and rocket spam but most planes went down in flames within a few minuts. Only the realy good pilots did 60-2 and could stay a live for a long time and only on a few maps like ivo jima and fjell.
JABUKI_68
4 years ago
I would completely disagree. That 1% of players that break the game by exploiting the weaknesses of the game mechanics is exactly what you balance for.
Noodlesocks
4 years ago
@SirBobdk wrote:
Less than 1% of the player base can fly.
The rest cant stay a live for more than 2 minutes.
You dont balance a game around 1%.
You will always see insane good pilots going 60-2 just like good tankers do.
If everyone can do it then I agree, but it has never been like that and I dont expect it to be like that in BF2042.
BFV was bad because of the carpet bombing, fire bombs and rocket spam but most planes went down in flames within a few minuts. Only the realy good pilots did 60-2 and could stay a live for a long time and only on a few maps like ivo jima and fjell.
BFV isn't just bad for aircraft it's straight up broken. Plane rockets outrange AA so even a rookie pilot is practically untouchable from the ground.
You can still have a balanced game while allowing the genuinely good players to excel. BF1 is a good example of this with what I consider one of the better balanced Battlefield games when it comes to ground/air.
Battlefield 4 suffered from an over-reliance on lock ons essentially placing a hard cap on your ability to affect the outcome of your engagement with aircraft, often with the best you can hope for is shooing the enemy jet/heli away for a few seconds while their flares recharged. Especially after all the nerfs they made to SRAW, stingers and IGLAs
Given the AA options in 2042 I am somewhat optimistic about how the ground/air balance will develop but given Dice Sweden's history of balancing the ground/air balance around the lamentations of that 1% it could easily go either way.
Icemangooo
4 years ago
@JABUKI_68if you balance for the 1% , then 99% of player base can't use that vehicle anymore, so that sounds like a terrible idea, plus the top 1% in another vehicles like tanks also dominate just as hard, if we start balancing all vehicles for the top 1%, then vehicles will be there only for the cinematic effect and might as well be all removed.
Also BF V was a step back vehicle gameplay wise anyway compared to all previous titles, infantry wise(gunplay and movement) it was the best in the battlefield series on the other hand.
SirBobdk
Seasoned Ace
4 years ago
@NoodlesocksWrote
You can still have a balanced game while allowing the genuinely good players to excel. BF1 is a good example of this with what I consider one of the better balanced Battlefield games when it comes to ground/air.
————————————————————————————————————
BFV was garbage and the most unbalanced game in the series.
BF1 was one of the most balanced games, but still the good pilots went 60-2.
SirBobdk
Seasoned Ace
4 years ago
@JABUKI_68
It seems to me that you want to take down a jet by you self.
Thats not how it works unless your in an AA or MAA.
It has always taken 2-3 infantry men with stingers to take down a jet or chopper.
And thats how it should be imo.
neplasimse
Seasoned Veteran
4 years ago
I dont recall rockets to outrange AA. I would say the rockets have the equal range if not a bit less than AA. It might feel this way because you cant kill a plane with one shot.
And to be honest, the buff of AA and FF turned BFV in the situation it is now.
But now some players have the satisfaction of killing a plane (easier ... for their skillgroup ...).
SirBobdk
Seasoned Ace
4 years ago
@frantayps wrote:
I dont recall rockets to outrange AA. I would say the rockets have the equal range if not a bit less than AA. It might feel this way because you cant kill a plane with one shot.
And to be honest, the buff of AA and FF turned BFV in the situation it is now.
But now some players have the satisfaction of killing a plane (easier ... for their skillgroup ...).
Rockets didnt out range AA imo.
Carpet bombing and rockets was a mistake in a ww2 game imo.
it just started an arms race that Dice couldnt control and ended up as a disaster.
Flying in any BF game is easy, but it takes a lot of hours to get good at it and get a lot of kills. For those who do not fly, it seems easy and maybe that is why they also want to shoot it down easily.
Noodlesocks
4 years ago
@frantayps wrote:
I dont recall rockets to outrange AA. I would say the rockets have the equal range if not a bit less than AA. It might feel this way because you cant kill a plane with one shot.
And to be honest, the buff of AA and FF turned BFV in the situation it is now.
But now some players have the satisfaction of killing a plane (easier ... for their skillgroup ...).
Technically yes but practically no. Planes can launch their entire payload with pinpoint accuracy from roughly the same range that AA can hit with a shot or two. However, that payload will kill before the AA can effectively defend itself despite it supposedly being the direct counter to aircraft. Even the heavy AA cannons can not effectively counter aircraft before a killing blow is delivered from maximum range. When you consider that they made rockets effective against every target; infantry, tanks and AA, gave those aircraft the ability to 3D spot targets and made ground targets glow, you are left with a broken game where even the most casual pilots can rack up a ridiculous K/D with minimal skill and effort.
SirBobdk
Seasoned Ace
4 years ago
@Noodlesocks Ok, know what you mean. You could launch the rockets while getting hit by AA og still get away while the rockets would destroy the AA.