Divide Aircraft Br between Air / Ground / Naval

[Sir_Armand 203]

Situation: Aircraft is an integral part of all modes. Gaijin realises that a planes impact and performance differs between Arcade and Realistic mode. This is a good thing.
However, the impact of a plane in Realistic Air, ground and naval is also very different. A torpedo bomber for example, may be fantastic in Naval, but due to poor bomb loadout and/or flight characteristics a liability at it's Br in Air or ground. Since you don't choose your planes in Arcade ground, the subject is has no bearing on that mode, but the Torpedo bomber example works well for arcade too, where a torpedo bomber could be totally useless in air, but an incredible asset in Naval.

Quite simply, since a planes impact will be different in the three types of battle, it follows that the planes Br should reflect that in those modes.

This would benefit Gaijin by allowing Br to more corrrectly reflect a planes proper place in the Rank and Battlerating system, instead of being skewed by the type of battle it performs in. It would also make the algorithm more accurate, allowing for longterm balance and Br decompression.
It would benefit the players by placing planes in their correct Br ranges depending on the type of battle. And with the Br decompression such a system affords also benefits the players.

I therefore suggest that aircraft shall be given different Br in the different types of game, Air, Ground and Naval.

 

What do you think?
 

[Thatz 635]

Open for Discussion 
Note: I feel like this has been suggested in the past but I cannot find the suggestion. If I find an older suggestion that is the same as this one I will have to close/archive this one, but if there isn't a previous suggestion like this one, this one will stay open.

[Sir_Armand 203]

2 hours ago, Thatz said:

Open for Discussion 
Note: I feel like this has been suggested in the past but I cannot find the suggestion. If I find an older suggestion that is the same as this one I will have to close/archive this one, but if there isn't a previous suggestion like this one, this one will stay open.

It seems reasonable that it _should_ have been suggested before - but then again, It seems reasonable that it should have been implemented already too...

[NotKringe 227]

As one of the only few players who have played naval, this change is quite tricky to implement due to how some aircraft actually performs well in both anti-air and anti-ship duties, or that some were way too good at their anti-ship roles.

 

There are three examples of what I think it is very hard to balance by separate BR;

 

1) A naval fighter with great payload (like F6F/F4U) or a heavily-armed attacker/dive bomber with anti-air capabilities (like B7A2/Firebrand/Fw 190 F). These planes can perform well in both anti-air and anti-ship duties, is quite fast and harder to hit, and carry a heavy payload to disable/destroy enemy ships.

 

2) A jet aircraft with anti-ship capabilities (Kikka/Ar 234/F-80/F-84). These planes were often way too fast for most AA weaponry on the ship to catch up, have immense anti-air capabilities (except Ar 234 with no anti-air armaments), and can dive bombing an enemy ship and leave untouched.

 

3) A bomber with massive payload and or with special ordance (Pe-8/B-29/He 111 with Fritz X/He 177/Ju 288/Lancaster/Shackleton). These bombers can climb up to an higher altitude (or simply take an advantage of high spawn point in naval conquest) and saturate the targets with their massive payload. The Pe-8 can kill any type of ships in the game with FAB-5000 bomb, while He 111 and He 177 have Fritz X guided bombs, and others can just dump their massive payload from safe distance to overwhelm the enemy. These bombers have immense anti-ship capabilities if used correctly.

 

While I do agree that some plane may need a BR adjustment in some game modes to reflect their effectiveness, naval battles have several elements that made some planes either not so useful or just downright overpowered. Such as most of bluewater ship were imprevious to strafing, were often armed with wide array of AA weapons, and the battle usually took place at lower altitude. These problem were further worsened in arcade where mid-air reload is a thing, which can result in some CAS plane being capable of wipe out an entire enemy team in a few minutes.

 

So, while this separate BR changes can help fixing the concern about supersonic jet CAS and allow naval BR to decompress, it presents another problem of some aircraft that were quite effective in this game mode but have a huge flight performance gap in air battles may face each other with this effectiveness-based BR (i.e. a Pe-8 can face a Kikka or F-84 in higher rank battles). So it does need some adjustment to make it happen.

[Sir_Armand 203]

On 04/02/2022 at 12:53, NotKringe said:

it presents another problem of some aircraft that were quite effective in this game mode but have a huge flight performance gap in air battles

I am sorry, but I wonder if you could clarify your post.
I've read it many times, but I fail to see how splitting Br between A/G/N would in any way create the issues you mention, if anything it would help mitigate them. 
I am clearly missing something, so please elaborate a bit if you would be so kind?

[SaperPL 446]

I'm in for such change as it could open up a way to have plane spawns in ground arcade in a way that BRs would balance them against tanks.

[NotKringe 227]

21 minutes ago, Sir_Armand said:

I am sorry, but I wonder if you could clarify your post.
I've read it many times, but I fail to see how splitting Br between A/G/N would in any way create the issues you mention, if anything it would help mitigate them. 
I am clearly missing something, so please elaborate a bit if you would be so kind?

 

Basically, some aircraft in naval battles is extremely effective at CAS despite their seemingly low BR and poor flight performances. The Pe-8 that I've brought up as an example has the 5 tons bomb that can decimate the entire enemy team if left unchecked (especially in AB) and thus may warrant a higher BR due to extreme effectiveness against naval targets. However, this also means it may potentially face another CAS planes with superior flight performances that can easily intercept it (like a jet aircraft, for example).

 

Other examples being the Lancasters which have huge payloads that may justify its higher effective BR, but is mostly helpless against faster jets that it may have face due to being slower and more sluggish when carrying their payload.

 

So, my suggestion for this is to keep a plane from a certain BR ceiling away from naval mode (such as planes with AAM or with subsonic speed) for a more fair fight, and to sort some of these "slower plane with big payload" at lower BR than these high-speed or more universal planes. Like, if there's 10 BR ceiling, the weak and sluggish Wellington can stay at its original 2.3 - 3.0 rank, the jack-of-all-trades like late variant Hellcat stays at 4 - 5 BR, some big bombers with an ability to carpet bombing like Lancaster may warrant 5 - 6 BR, a dive bomber-capable aircraft with big bombs and good protection like Ju 288, AD-4, or AM-1 got 6-7 BR, the "tactical nuke" capable bomber like Pe-8, B-29, or He-177 got 7-9 BR, and super-fast jets with sizeable bombs like Kikka or Su-11 gets 10 BR. This will help to prevent some of the most effective CAS to nuke the entire team at lower rank, while pitting them against an equally capable interceptors and anti-air defence.

 

Of course, this is not perfect, since there will a lot of pure-bred fighters and strikers that is only capable at anti-air duties and will be a dead weight when no one spawns as a CAS or PT boats. So I would like to hear how you'll sort this out.

 

[Sir_Armand 203]

On 21/02/2022 at 15:57, NotKringe said:

there will a lot of pure-bred fighters and strikers that is only capable at anti-air duties and will be a dead weight when no one spawns as a CAS or PT boats. So I would like to hear how you'll sort this out.

I still do not see how splitting the br between A/G/N would cause this. What you are describing is where we are today. You seem to be asking me to "fix" Naval per se, and the only thing my suggestion does in that regard is to divide the br in N from the Br in A/G, the other issues are not covered by my suggestion, but is probably worth it's own topic. 

Edited February 22, 2022 by Sir_Armand
grammar

[NotKringe 227]

6 hours ago, Sir_Armand said:

I still do not see how splitting the br between A/G/N would cause this. What you are describing is where we are today. You seem to be asking me to "fix" Naval per se, and the only thing my suggestion does in that regard is to devide the br in N from the Br in A/G, the other issues are not covered by my suggestion, but is probably worth it's own topic. 

 

Well, I concede on that point. Perhaps doing separate BR to prevent high-performance jets will do the trick.

[Sir_Armand 203]

I believe the A-10 is going to illustrate my point perfectly when it arrives. It's air vs ground Br will be completely disproportionate.

[LeChance 926]

I can see your point, but have some reservations about it. Mainly, all modes with planes and other vehicle types, save Arcade Ground Battles, have the respawn point system to determine plane spawns in those modes. While I am not now, or ever have been a fan of this respawning system, it does provide varying amount of spawn points for planes according to certain criteria. Bomb/armament load outs being key. A heavier load out requires more points earned to spawn. This makes sense, as it were. Ground Arcade is what it is . . . and they have continually done things to make planes less & less viable in that mode. The current spawning system for planes makes them practically useless in most scenarios, again . .  it is what it is. That coupled with the random/arbitrary selection of planes a player might get just make it . . .  meh. The thing is, there is a certain "skill set" associated with selecting a line up. Arcade Ground line up's, player only gets to select the tank portion, RB Air, you get 1 plane . . . all other modes require players to think about it a bit. Again, I can see your point and it might be possible to do something along the lines you suggest, however . ..  seems like opening a can of worms in a snake pit. And remember, it is very hard to get the toothpaste back in the tube once you squeeze it out . . . . lol. It could work, and players would still have to use their noodles to make good line up's, no matter what BR's any vehicles have, in whatever mode.
Player's abilities to make good/balanced line up's is a skill set, that part should not change . . .

Good Luck

 

[CountBuggula 33]

On 20/03/2022 at 07:48, LeChance said:

...all modes with planes and other vehicle types, save Arcade Ground Battles, have the respawn point system to determine plane spawns in those modes. 
 

Edit: Nothing to see here...I had a stupid brain moment.  Carry on.

Edited March 25, 2022 by CountBuggula

[El Gato 75]

Yes! Because A-10 Late maybe is 10.0 for Ground RB but it definitely isn't 10.0 for Air RB

[Allyedge 50]

30 minutes ago, vrabaci said:

Yes! Because A-10 Late maybe is 10.0 for Ground RB but it definitely isn't 10.0 for Air RB

Here is a solution, play the A-10 in the role it was supposed to play in, which is a ground attacker.

 

If you bring it to Air RB, that's your problem. No plane in this game has different BRs for different game modes, and no one has to change anything just because you paid 59.99$ on an A-10. 

[El Gato 75]

49 minutes ago, Allyedge said:

Here is a solution, play the A-10 in the role it was supposed to play in, which is a ground attacker.

 

If you bring it to Air RB, that's your problem. No plane in this game has different BRs for different game modes, and no one has to change anything just because you paid 59.99$ on an A-10. 

Lol yea i agree, i didn't buy i don't waste money, i am currently 95k rp away from late version and i won't be playing it in air rb i will take HSTV-L + A10 Late and brrrrt

[Allyedge 50]

3 hours ago, vrabaci said:

Lol yea i agree, i didn't buy i don't waste money, i am currently 95k rp away from late version and i won't be playing it in air rb i will take HSTV-L + A10 Late and brrrrt

Good choice.

[El Gato 75]

47 minutes ago, Allyedge said:

Good choice.

40k RP away from it lol

[Allyedge 50]

5 hours ago, vrabaci said:

40k RP away from it lol

Well, have fun with it then!

[Sir_Armand 203]

 

On 20/03/2022 at 14:48, LeChance said:

While I am not now, or ever have been a fan of this respawning system, it does provide varying amount of spawn points for planes according to certain criteria. Bomb/armament load outs being key. A heavier load out requires more points earned to spawn

But separating the Br between A/G/N would change nothing about the spawn points.

 

On 26/03/2022 at 09:12, Allyedge said:

Here is a solution, play the A-10 in the role it was supposed to play in, which is a ground attacker.

 

If you bring it to Air RB, that's your problem. No plane in this game has different BRs for different game modes, and no one has to change anything just because you paid 59.99$ on an A-10. 

OK, first, this change is in no way, shape or form created FOR the A-10 Premium. I have not purchased it, and I started this thread long before it was announced, it was merely an example.
Second - your solution to some planes Br being way too high for a certain type of game is not to play them - but do we not have enough Br's where just a few planes are used? With a separation Br could be better balanced, and we might see a bit of variety.

I mean, isn't it a pity that if a plane is overused in ground-R and gets hit with the nerf hamer- it is simultaneously nerfed in air and Naval mode - where it might be perfectly well balanced before, but now is useless?

[Radeon77pl 10]

+1

Some aircraft have very little merit in Air RB while having decent trackrecord outside of it. One example I can think of is Brigand - not really good at air RB, but ground is a driffrent story- 3 separete bomb drops, 16 rockets and 4x 20mm hispano is simply too good at 4.0. I'm using it at 4.7 with frequent uptiers to 5.7 and beyond and it still kicks ****. Similar but not as defined story goes to Hellcats.

Curious are also cases of japan. turn fighters where they can dominate air engagements and only thing preventing them from dominating ground is lack of mixed loadouts (I preffer to destroy AAA with accurate RP-3 or HVAR) Where they can be simply unfair. I'm not sure if mustangs aren't in similar situation as i love displacment turns too much to give them a try (That is being in situation of  "no one can touch me as i'm too speedy at runaway). 

[Foraaikou 6]

I completely support this

 

some planes are incredible overpowered on one mode while being literally unplayable on other

 

an example would be the A-4E Early, I'm pretty confident that thing could go up to 10.3 and maybe more in Ground RB and still perform amazing while at it's current BR(8.7) it's almost useless on Air RB with it's AIM-9Bs, relatively low top speed, bad acceleration, under average turn rate, etc etc. all of this while facing stuff like the MiG-21s, Su-7s, Hunter Fs, etc. etc. it struggles hard to keep up with anything it faces unless it gets downtiered

[Maverall 1,043]

How has this not been done yet? The problems this would help fix are extremely obvious with the new planes being added. A10 and Su25 to be exact. They are extremely effective in Air RB with the undodgeable-without-flares missiles, fighting planes that mostly have no flares, but once the missiles have been fired, their effectiveness drops to almost nothing. The incentive to add Aim9L and R60M to these planes is obvious - to make all kinds of players buy those planes. Both the aircraft enjoyers and tankers can be competetive in their respective gamemodes. But this is a much more elegant solution. It would improve the game immensely.

[tigrebleu74 11]

I really like the idea, but I see both a potential issue and a possible counterargument.

 

 

Potential issue

 

A lot of people could struggle with their Ground RB lineups if many planes got their BR modified. Imagine this before/after scenario:

 

Slot     Before           After           

- 1 -     4.0 fighter     4.7 fighter

- 2 -     3.7 bomber   3.7 bomber

- 3 -     4.0 SPAA      4.0 SPAA

- 4 -     4.0 tank        4.0 tank

- 5 -     3.3 SPG        3.3 SPG

- 6 -     3.7 tank        3.7 tank

- 7 -     3.3 tank        3.3 tank

 

Suddenly my BR 4.0 lineup can send me into BR 5.7 hell! I could replace the BR 4.7 plane with a suitable BR 3.3, 3.7 or 4.0 one, but unless it's in the same slot, I will have to pay to train the crew again. For some players, who put their planes in different slots, this could prove costly (it takes a lot of Silver Lions to retrain crews at high tier).

 

 

Possible counterargument

 

I may be wrong, but I don't think the actual Battle Rating (BR) difference would be very big for most aircraft after such a change. There would be some exceptions (A-10, for instance), but I wouldn't be surprised to see most planes having only a third of a BR (0.3) difference between air, ground and naval.

 

Let's take the B6N2a Model 12Ko (currently at BR 2.3) as an example. It's decently agile and fast, and it has good payloads for taking out tanks or ships. Yet with no offensive armament, it's an easy prey for enemy fighters, which are more likely to be present in air battles. So let's say its future Battle Ratings are as follow: 2.0 (air), 2.3 (ground), and 2.3 (naval).

 

If that plane ends up in a BR 1.3-2.3, 1.7-2.7 or 2.0-3.0 match, having a BR of 2.0 or 2.3 won't make much of a difference in the end, air, ground or naval. It would be more relevant in a 1.0-2.0 match or in a 2.3-3.3 one, but even considering that, would that BR 0.3 change really make a difference in the end?

 

Now, if a plane with a BR of 5.3 would end up being BR 4.0 in air, 5.7 in ground, and 5.3 in naval, it would matter more. However, I can't think of a plane that would see its BR change so dramatically.

Edited November 23, 2022 by tigrebleu74

[CokeSpray 7,272]

Suggestion passed to the developers for consideration.