might as well just get rid of planes

Comments

  • Hawxxeye
    7815 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    edited July 28
    Celsi_GER said:
    As so many things, it depends on how the game develops.
    Shooting down 20 newbie pilots which did not do much harm to the ground is less helpful to the objective than a guy who shoots down/seriously troubles20 pro-pilots destroying tanks and taking out large amounts of infantry.

    But I agree to what (I think) you want to say: Nobody should be condemned for "camping" in AA: He is just doing one of the many "jobs" the game provides for the player.
    As do the pilots: We don't call them "campers in the skies" and do not condemn them for not taking any flags: they indirectly add their share to reaching the objective.
    Actually there is for me one instance where I will still call out an AA user for "camping". When he could had used one of the AAs closer to the action or move his AA closer if it is mobile to an even better place, yet he chooses to stay in the area where the ground troops cannot easily each to avoid any deaths.
    .
    When I have for example an AA tank I will move it to where I think it will have the best ratio of benefit and risk for the maximum impact
  • Magikf1ngers
    254 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    Hawxxeye said:
    Celsi_GER said:
    As so many things, it depends on how the game develops.
    Shooting down 20 newbie pilots which did not do much harm to the ground is less helpful to the objective than a guy who shoots down/seriously troubles20 pro-pilots destroying tanks and taking out large amounts of infantry.

    But I agree to what (I think) you want to say: Nobody should be condemned for "camping" in AA: He is just doing one of the many "jobs" the game provides for the player.
    As do the pilots: We don't call them "campers in the skies" and do not condemn them for not taking any flags: they indirectly add their share to reaching the objective.
    Actually there is for me one instance where I will still call out an AA user for "camping". When he could had used one of the AAs closer to the action or move his AA closer if it is mobile to an even better place, yet he chooses to stay in the area where the ground troops cannot easily each to avoid any deaths.
    .
    When I have for example an AA tank I will move it to where I think it will have the best ratio of benefit and risk for the maximum impact
    I'll add to that and say I have a problem when AA users use the mobile /stationary AA against ground troops when they shouldn't be able to fire on a trajectory low enough to hit ground troops.
  • A_al_K_pacino_A
    1139 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    (Quote)
    I'll add to that and say I have a problem when AA users use the mobile /stationary AA against ground troops when they shouldn't be able to fire on a trajectory low enough to hit ground troops.

    They need to as a defence. Can't rely on teammates to keep them safe. A severe damage drop off to nothing after 30-40 metres might work.
  • DingoKillr
    4354 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    edited July 28
    (Quote)
    I'll add to that and say I have a problem when AA users use the mobile /stationary AA against ground troops when they shouldn't be able to fire on a trajectory low enough to hit ground troops.

    They need to as a defence. Can't rely on teammates to keep them safe. A severe damage drop off to nothing after 30-40 metres might work.

    Easy to add a MG for the driver to use.
  • DerDoktorMabuse
    421 postsMember, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    I hope DICE fix the smoke rounds its stupid that they loose range the higher you shoot them... these would be perfect to distract bombing runs even from far away, but nope when used against ground they have like normal range but when fired against a plane the suddenly loose like 50% range...
  • PSJackman4
    441 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    Jeez when is this thread just gonna die? lol 
  • cashm0n3y08
    272 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    trip1ex said:

    Yep.  AA helps your team's pilots a huge amount which in turn helps your team cap and hold objectives.

    TEams don't have too many guys on AA last I checked.  


    AA helps the Team?

    I don't think there is a solid answer to this. Yes AA can help the team if it is effective in neutralizing a pilot who is destroying all of your tanks, but it can also hurt your team as well. Consider this anecdote... 

    I have been in a lot of games where it is close for the first half of the round or so, then I'll get to 15-0 or 20-0 as pilot, then all of a sudden a good portion of the enemy team stops playing the objective and instead dedicates the rest of the game to ending my kill streak. The MAA tanks start rolling out (sacrificing the other tanks that are more effective at PTFO), sometimes entire squads or more will stop PTFO just to stay in their spawn to man SAA and FF to shoot me down. Next thing I know, I look up and my team has them all-capped. 

    I have also seen this effect with good tankers on kill streaks, where killing them becomes the other team's objective, which in turn, causes them to lose even more. 
  • Celsi_GER
    925 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    edited July 28
    In the second the pilot's hope dies to drive Dice to nerf AA to death again with their exaggerations and desinformation attempts.
  • Frindly-Fire-4
    396 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    Celsi_GER wrote: »
    In the second the pilot's hope dies to drive Dice to nerf AA to death again with their exaggerations and desinformation attempts.

    Get in a plane and post a full game of you getting kills with the OP plane that you claim , but we know the answer you wont and you cant. We are here to discuss a problem in the game balance but you are here to discharge your buried hatred to planes that probably you failed to achieve any Success using them. Dont write back answer with the video please.
  • Celsi_GER
    925 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    edited July 28
    Lol, the good old "get in a plane" again?

    You are not here to "discuss" . Discussion requires the willingness to reconsider one's own position. You never showed even a hint of that.

    You are here to repeat your doubtful claims, half-baked theories and desinformation again and again until even the last sane person is sick of being caught in your BS Bingo game and stops contracting you.
    See if this will really happen.
    See if Dice really will fall for your desinformation campaign and nerf AA again.
    There is no significant problem with Air <> Antiair balance.

    I have no hatred. I am quite relaxed and considering our "discussions" as a welcome opportunity to polish up my casual English which turned out not to be as good as my business English.
  • Frindly-Fire-4
    396 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    Celsi_GER wrote: »
    Lol, the good old "get in a plane" again?

    You are not here to "discuss" . Discussion requires the willingness to reconsider one's own position. You never showed even a hint of that.

    You are here to repeat your doubtful claims, half-baked theories and desinformation again and again until even the last sane person is sick of being caught in your BS Bingo game and stops contracting you.
    See if this will really happen.
    See if Dice really will fall for your desinformation campaign and nerf AA again.
    There is no significant problem with Air <> Antiair balance.

    I have no hatred. I am quite relaxed and considering our "discussions" as a welcome opportunity to polish up my casual English which turned out not to be as good as my business English.

    Again bla bla bla where is the video.
  • xKusagamix
    1199 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    FF ain't really the problem. Go ahead and take yourself out of the game and sit next to your spawn resupply all you want. 

    The range of the SAA and MAA is the problem. I'd much rather DICE buff the damage output and decrease the range so us pilots can get some of the map back, it will also give smarter MAA and SAA users, who are patient and know when to engage, a better chance at killing planes. It will also make it less advantageous for MAA tanks to sit way back in their spawn safe from anything that isn't a plane.

    There's an argument floating around on here from certain people that say "you shouldn't need a plane to take out a plane", well ok, then a plane shouldn't be the only option of taking out an MAA.

    Yes, I know, infantry and tanks can take out MAA, but let's be realistic in how MAA is being used, they rarely leave the spawn, so in reality, planes are the only threat to these MAA's. Why leave the spawn if it provides you infinite health and ammo, you can reach planes across most of the map, and no one else can touch you?  Might as well sit there and munch on some doritos while you're at it.
    But it's not enough, ground wants 2 bags of Doritos. To be honest, all this sounds more like they want to be untouched. Awsome well spent 8 days of flight time so i can achieve that, how fun.

    facts on table:

    AA dominates sky. Planes can roam around only when there is no AA users.

    But hey, i have an idea. Since AA f-ups so many i.e dogfights, time to turn friendly fire on? Get my point?


    MAA can shot across the map so can planes. Go on tell us how planes are so disadvantage.
    All MAA/SAA can shoot across the map, but not all planes can. Why are people just basing the planes range of effectiveness around some Fighter and Attack planes with Rockets anyway?

    There're hardly anyone flying the Bombers in Asia region anymore, because Bombers altitude, speed, maneuver make its an easy threat for SAA/MAA from afar and if they can't destroy its then fine, there're alway guys with Fliegerfaust waiting.

    That's why i'm all against the current SAA/MAA range even i'm mainly playing as infantry, they need to be reduce and compensate with something else rather than just blindly buffing the range to counter Fighters plane. I have no problem with the FF.
  • Magikf1ngers
    254 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member

    3. On maps with the fighters, they spend their time dogfighting instead of supporting the team. They're also going to complain about the dogfighting because it does nothing to help the team.

    Are you high?

    EDIT: You are right, in WW2 pilots spend their time on dogfights instead supporting ground. Tank goes vs tank = not supporting team. You know, you guys have funny opinions there. :D
    So no - and I don't appreciate the condescending tone.  I stated my opinion concisely and without insulting anyone.  

    Yes - fighters are made for dogfighting, to an extent.  In WWII - for the most part  - fighters were made for bomber escorts and to take down bombers.  If you've ever studied WWII history, you'll see that.  

    Yes - there were plenty of dogfights, and most were either during, on the way to, or returning from bomber escort missions.  Fighters were meant to take out bombers more than anything.  In the Pacific, they were mostly escorting bombers that were going to take out carriers and other naval targets, and in Europe, they were escorting the big bombers that were meant to take out industrial and military targets.  

    Fighters were not put up just to have dogfights.  That's a waste of resources and strategically unsound.  

    I'm not looking for 100% accuracy - but when, in the game, a pilot deems it necessary to be a squad leader and doesn't do anything to support his squad, then that's a problem.  Either lead the squad or give it over to someone that will, on the ground.   Then when someone calls an attack on B or defense on B - then at least pretend to attempt to support the squad anyway.  Fly CAP over them and take out anyone that's harassing the squad, be it tanks or aircraft, or even troops.  

    Going off and hunting down dogfights doesn't support the team, all it does is give the pilot the (admittedly fun) chance to have a dog fight.  

    It boils back down to one of my basic problems with recent versions of Battlefield (mainly 1 & V), and that's the lack of team play and the tendency for people to want to play a freaking sniper and camp in spawn, or sit in spawn with armor and do nothing towards capturing or defending points.  Add to that the fact that people tend to try to dogfight - even in fracking bombers - instead of support the ground efforts, and it's just not a team game then.  

    And yes - I agree that if a tank is going vs tank, where they tend to be outside the objectives and throwing shells a half-mile away from each other, then yes, I have a problem with that.  However, if it's tank vs tank inside objectives and it's to defend the troops trying to capture or defend the points, then I don't have a problem with that.  Just like I don't have a problem with aircraft attacking each other when one is trying to take out an objective ground target.




  • xKusagamix
    1199 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    FF ain't really the problem. Go ahead and take yourself out of the game and sit next to your spawn resupply all you want. 

    The range of the SAA and MAA is the problem. I'd much rather DICE buff the damage output and decrease the range so us pilots can get some of the map back, it will also give smarter MAA and SAA users, who are patient and know when to engage, a better chance at killing planes. It will also make it less advantageous for MAA tanks to sit way back in their spawn safe from anything that isn't a plane.

    There's an argument floating around on here from certain people that say "you shouldn't need a plane to take out a plane", well ok, then a plane shouldn't be the only option of taking out an MAA.

    Yes, I know, infantry and tanks can take out MAA, but let's be realistic in how MAA is being used, they rarely leave the spawn, so in reality, planes are the only threat to these MAA's. Why leave the spawn if it provides you infinite health and ammo, you can reach planes across most of the map, and no one else can touch you?  Might as well sit there and munch on some doritos while you're at it.
    But it's not enough, ground wants 2 bags of Doritos. To be honest, all this sounds more like they want to be untouched. Awsome well spent 8 days of flight time so i can achieve that, how fun.

    facts on table:

    AA dominates sky. Planes can roam around only when there is no AA users.

    But hey, i have an idea. Since AA f-ups so many i.e dogfights, time to turn friendly fire on? Get my point?


    MAA can shot across the map so can planes. Go on tell us how planes are so disadvantage.
    All MAA/SAA can shoot across the map, but not all planes can. Why are people just basing the planes range of effectiveness around some Fighter and Attack planes with Rockets anyway?

    There're hardly anyone flying the Bombers in Asia region anymore, because Bombers altitude, speed, maneuver make its an easy threat for SAA/MAA from afar and if they can't destroy its then fine, there're alway guys with Fliegerfaust waiting.

    That's why i'm all against the current SAA/MAA range even i'm mainly playing as infantry, they need to be reduce and compensate with something else rather than just blindly buffing the range to counter Fighters plane. I have no problem with the FF.
  • Magikf1ngers
    254 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member

    3. On maps with the fighters, they spend their time dogfighting instead of supporting the team. They're also going to complain about the dogfighting because it does nothing to help the team.

    Are you high?

    EDIT: You are right, in WW2 pilots spend their time on dogfights instead supporting ground. Tank goes vs tank = not supporting team. You know, you guys have funny opinions there. :D
    So no - and I don't appreciate the condescending tone.  I stated my opinion concisely and without insulting anyone.  

    Yes - fighters are made for dogfighting, to an extent.  In WWII - for the most part  - fighters were made for bomber escorts and to take down bombers.  If you've ever studied WWII history, you'll see that.  

    Yes - there were plenty of dogfights, and most were either during, on the way to, or returning from bomber escort missions.  Fighters were meant to take out bombers more than anything.  In the Pacific, they were mostly escorting bombers that were going to take out carriers and other naval targets, and in Europe, they were escorting the big bombers that were meant to take out industrial and military targets.  

    Fighters were not put up just to have dogfights.  That's a waste of resources and strategically unsound.  

    I'm not looking for 100% accuracy - but when, in the game, a pilot deems it necessary to be a squad leader and doesn't do anything to support his squad, then that's a problem.  Either lead the squad or give it over to someone that will, on the ground.   Then when someone calls an attack on B or defense on B - then at least pretend to attempt to support the squad anyway.  Fly CAP over them and take out anyone that's harassing the squad, be it tanks or aircraft, or even troops.  

    Going off and hunting down dogfights doesn't support the team, all it does is give the pilot the (admittedly fun) chance to have a dog fight.  

    It boils back down to one of my basic problems with recent versions of Battlefield (mainly 1 & V), and that's the lack of team play and the tendency for people to want to play a freaking sniper and camp in spawn, or sit in spawn with armor and do nothing towards capturing or defending points.  Add to that the fact that people tend to try to dogfight - even in fracking bombers - instead of support the ground efforts, and it's just not a team game then.  

    And yes - I agree that if a tank is going vs tank, where they tend to be outside the objectives and throwing shells a half-mile away from each other, then yes, I have a problem with that.  However, if it's tank vs tank inside objectives and it's to defend the troops trying to capture or defend the points, then I don't have a problem with that.  Just like I don't have a problem with aircraft attacking each other when one is trying to take out an objective ground target.




  • SirBobdk
    5321 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    Celsi_GER said:

    There is no significant problem with Air <> Antiair balance.


    Imo there is. Just went 52-4 on Twisted Steel because of a friendly MAA who keept me safe from me109.
    2 x Flak Panzer didnt change anything since I could farm from own half of the map.
    It has become so easy on Twisted Steel and Panzerstorm since it rare you have to deal with fighters.
    Before patch I had fighters on my tail all the time, but not anymore.
    Still think it is a mistake to limit fighters ability to counter other plane.
  • Celsi_GER
    925 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    SirBobdk wrote: »
    (Quote)
    Imo there is. Just went 52-4 on Twisted Steel because of a friendly MAA who keept me safe from me109.
    2 x Flak Panzer didnt change anything since I could farm from own half of the map.
    It has become so easy on Twisted Steel and Panzerstorm since it rare you have to deal with fighters.
    Before patch I had fighters on my tail all the time, but not anymore.
    Still think it is a mistake to limit fighters ability to counter other plane.

    I understand this argument and tried to acknowledge it by using the word "significant". I didn't want to write "there is no problem at all".
    As you know, I am sympathetic to your cause. But the more "extreme" pilots in this thread sometimes make it very hard for me to stay fair and openminded.
  • Celsi_GER
    925 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    Celsi_GER wrote: »
    Lol, the good old "get in a plane" again?

    You are not here to "discuss" . Discussion requires the willingness to reconsider one's own position. You never showed even a hint of that.

    You are here to repeat your doubtful claims, half-baked theories and desinformation again and again until even the last sane person is sick of being caught in your BS Bingo game and stops contracting you.
    See if this will really happen.
    See if Dice really will fall for your desinformation campaign and nerf AA again.
    There is no significant problem with Air <> Antiair balance.

    I have no hatred. I am quite relaxed and considering our "discussions" as a welcome opportunity to polish up my casual English which turned out not to be as good as my business English.

    Again bla bla bla where is the video.

    I am not narcissistic enough to record my game performance on video. And I won't start to do so just because some weird guy in some forums thinks that the game has to work according to his personal rules.
  • GrizzGolf
    1442 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    Planes are fine
  • Frindly-Fire-4
    396 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    Celsi_GER wrote: »
    Celsi_GER wrote: »
    Lol, the good old "get in a plane" again?

    You are not here to "discuss" . Discussion requires the willingness to reconsider one's own position. You never showed even a hint of that.

    You are here to repeat your doubtful claims, half-baked theories and desinformation again and again until even the last sane person is sick of being caught in your BS Bingo game and stops contracting you.
    See if this will really happen.
    See if Dice really will fall for your desinformation campaign and nerf AA again.
    There is no significant problem with Air <> Antiair balance.

    I have no hatred. I am quite relaxed and considering our "discussions" as a welcome opportunity to polish up my casual English which turned out not to be as good as my business English.

    Again bla bla bla where is the video.

    I am not narcissistic enough to record my game performance on video. And I won't start to do so just because some weird guy in some forums thinks that the game has to work according to his personal rules.

    You refuse to watch the video's , refuse to try the plane , refuse to record , refuse to belive what people say about the issue (those are all your own words in past posts) who is the weird guy , it's you.
Sign In or Register to comment.