AA is OP again. Dmg vs light aircraft is way too high.

Comments

  • Skywalker
    4 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    A Flak 88 should shoot a plane in pieces if it flying within 100 meters nearby. Bombers are still like Tanks in the Air. If an AA shoot straight to the cockpit the pilot should be dead. Also no enginge failure etc. Planes can still score 30, 40, 50-0, only can get shot down by another plane. If something is overpower, it is the planes.
  • Feney_exe
    67 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member


    Lol cannot believe people are defending this.. The flight model, turn speed and systematic simply doesn't allow for planes to react, if you seriously think this is balanced then you are ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
  • XEN_wunderwaffle
    284 postsMember, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    edited February 2019
    Feney_exe wrote: »


    Lol cannot believe people are defending this.. The flight model, turn speed and systematic simply doesn't allow for planes to react, if you seriously think this is balanced then you are ****

    why should they get to react? How does a tank react to instakill 500/1000kg bombs?

    I'd counter that if you've been farming in planes since launch and are only now crying OP that your toy isn't as invincible as it used to be, you are, in fact, the one who is ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
  • TheSacar
    1005 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    edited February 2019

    Sounds a lot like all the pilot sweaties talking about other game balance (e.g. MAA) and saying planes that are already as easymode as they've ever been in any BF title need further buffs.

    a) Planes in BF1 were much more of an infantry farming easy mode as they are in BF5
    b) Did I say anywhere that I want planes to be buffed?
    Does this logic apply in the converse? Do you have to shut up about MAA balance because I have more kills with a single MAA tank than you do armor in total, and therefore obviously know so very much more that your little airhead couldn't possibly comprehend with only a couple hundred kills?

    You claimed to have had a round of 40:0 just by farming SAA. I said that I doubted that considering that this round would have been one quarter of your total kills and that I doubt so many SAA were active in one round.

    Screeching about the AA killing you in 2 seconds when the tanks you barely play die to planes in zero seconds (and aside from AA versions have next to zero means to defend against said planes) is just rich.

    If you read my posts, you will note that I am talking about fighters. Its not my fault that half of the people posting in these threads cannot tell one plane apart from another. And fighters do die in 2 seconds and certainly do not OHK tanks. And they have basically nothing to defend against tanks. Plus even a non AA tank can OHK any plane.

    Oh and as for SAA, here I get caught between two of them firing at me simultaneously and kill both by flying straight at them

    As a matter of fact I as a pilot do not think that this should be possible. AA damage should scale with the type of plane that is being shot at and all planes should have similar survival chances. Flying directly at AA and not turning away once shot at should not be possible or at least excessively hard. That would allow AA to achieve its purpose of area denial. However, as things stand, bombers and stukas have a good chance to survive, while fighters have terrible survival chances even if they turn away imediately.

    40-0 in one game vs them would only be hard because no player is dumb enough to try and use that deathtrap all game.

    So your post from before:

    I can literally go whole rounds in the Stuka or Mosquito doing nothing but farming SAA emplacements and go 40-0.

    was a lie...?
    .
    It is sad that you feel compelled to resort to insults like "pilot sweaties" and "your little airhead". Can't have a decent argument without resorting to playground tactics?
    .
    To me it is quite obvious that AA in its current state (mostly the Flakpanzer though) basically has the capability of rendering fighter planes useless. They are supposed to shoot down other planes, but when there is a Flakpanzer around, they cannot. Either they just die instantly or the enemy planes flee into the Flakpanzer's range and are quite safe there. You weren't happy when AA was useless, but fighter pilots should be ok with their fighters being useless?
  • XEN_wunderwaffle
    284 postsMember, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    edited February 2019
    yeah you sweaty good job taking an obvious hyperbole like I'm literally killing 40 SAA scrubs a game.

    About the brainpower I'd expect from someone who thinks an invincible vehicle is balanced.

    it's glaringly obvious you are a little derriere disturbed about your crutch actually getting a counter as of the most recent patch. That said, it's hardly useless at its primary purpose which is killing other plane types and assisting vs armor (which it can, rockets or 250lb bombs can cripple a full health tank or kill one that is damaged). You simply can't be a literal potato who just flys at the MAA paying it no mind whatsoever as you could before.


    It's already far more versatile and survivable than any land vehicle. Tanks can do nothing to air unless its flown by a literal potato. MAA is effective vs fighters (bombers can still kill you like nothing if they aren't bad) and non-assault infantry but is pants vs other tanks and anything with a rocket launcher

    SAA is the bar for useless. When scrubfires are that bad then we'll talk. Until then get gud or fly something else if you cant.




  • Kauzer_RF
    229 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    TheSacar wrote: »
    Amazing. Pilots who have been flying for days are getting killed by the Flakpanzer while the guy who has a combined 140 kills in the Stuka tells us how he is going 40:0 "farming SAA emplacements". In no round I have ever played have I seen 40 SAA emplacements manned. I simpy cannot avoid getting a feeling that someone is making things up.
    .
    Meanwhile the guy with an anti-air tank as his profile picture keeps telling us that the AA isn't all that powerful and might even need further buffing. Biased a little?

    Sounds a lot like all the pilot sweaties talking about other game balance (e.g. MAA) and saying planes that are already as easymode as they've ever been in any BF title need further buffs.

    Does this logic apply in the converse? Do you have to shut up about MAA balance because I have more kills with a single MAA tank than you do armor in total, and therefore obviously know so very much more that your little airhead couldn't possibly comprehend with only a couple hundred kills?

    Screeching about the AA killing you in 2 seconds when the tanks you barely play die to planes in zero seconds (and aside from AA versions have next to zero means to defend against said planes) is just rich.

    Oh and as for SAA, here I get caught between two of them firing at me simultaneously and kill both by flying straight at them


    oh and a 3rd one dead seconds later that did all of 5 damage, just to highlight what a complete joke SAA is balance wise

    40-0 in one game vs them would only be hard because no player is dumb enough to try and use that deathtrap all game.

    yet I don't hear you lot of airheads bleating about that balancing issue like you do the German MAA. I wonder why?

    Topic is about AA DMG vs light aircraft (fighters). You posted video from armored stuka.... Are you blind?
  • Kauzer_RF
    229 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    Good example
  • warslag
    1606 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, BF1IncursionsAlpha Member
    If the MAA is going to be like that in Firestorm then it's going to be an act of self-sabotage from EA DICE because it will drive people nuts.
  • AychAychAych
    10 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    This is not really about fighters.
    This is still about bombers.
    AA is tuned in response to bombers, not fighters.
    Fighters are just collateral damage.
  • barnesalmighty2
    1620 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    I just played a game only in a plane 109 & rockets had no issue shooting up the AA and farming kills. AA hurts but it is meant to take a few hits locate the gun loop dive and fire 2 rockets easy kill and often a destroy. The rockets do enough damage to AA tanks that the more often than not flee.
    I personally think they're in a good spot right now and any decent pilot should be fine still.
  • DropInDropOut
    355 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    Feney_exe wrote: »


    Lol cannot believe people are defending this.. The flight model, turn speed and systematic simply doesn't allow for planes to react, if you seriously think this is balanced then you are ****

    at least he's using it against planes, most players use it to shred entire infantry squads in 1/10 that time from halfway across the map
  • dnuckles
    1 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Member
    It is pretty bad. You can be in the air literally for 10 seconds before you are shot out of the sky in like 4 hits. It would be ok if the planes didn't take 20 mins to spawn.
  • warslag
    1606 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, BF1IncursionsAlpha Member
    I would actually suggest removing the AA/MMA completely from the game. Or perhaps just have stationary, destroyable AA to protect airfields. Well, if their were airfields on the map.

    This would make the planes the only option to deal with other planes. Players would then use them more instead of being overly worried about losing in dogfights.
  • TheSacar
    1005 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    warslag wrote: »
    I would actually suggest removing the AA/MMA completely from the game. Or perhaps just have stationary, destroyable AA to protect airfields. Well, if their were airfields on the map.

    This would make the planes the only option to deal with other planes. Players would then use them more instead of being overly worried about losing in dogfights.

    That is not a viable option. 90% of the players of recent Battlefield titles wouldn't touch a plane if they were getting paid to to it. And half of the remaining 10% wouldn't know what to do with one if they actually took one. The average BF player just doesn't want to fly. They just want to kill pilots from the ground without much effort.
  • DingoKillr
    4304 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    warslag wrote: »
    I would actually suggest removing the AA/MMA completely from the game. Or perhaps just have stationary, destroyable AA to protect airfields. Well, if their were airfields on the map.

    This would make the planes the only option to deal with other planes. Players would then use them more instead of being overly worried about losing in dogfights.
    Rubbish, weak AA just results in mainly bombers. That has been proven twice since launch when AA was weak.
  • SirBobdk
    5296 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    @DingoKillr wrote
    Rubbish, weak AA just results in mainly bombers. That has been proven twice since launch when AA was weak.
    Not in CQ.
    Here I only saw Bombers going down in flames. (PC)
    MAA has brought back German bombers as they no longer need to fear spitfires.
  • DingoKillr
    4304 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    SirBobdk wrote: »
    @DingoKillr wrote
    Rubbish, weak AA just results in mainly bombers. That has been proven twice since launch when AA was weak.
    Not in CQ.
    Here I only saw Bombers going down in flames. (PC)
    MAA has brought back German bombers as they no longer need to fear spitfires.
    That might have more to do with British MAA.
  • MonicasCigar
    113 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    Kauzer_RF wrote: »
    Thx for the patch. Now fighters die in 2 seconds. It is almost impossible to escape. Looks like dmg from AA was increased like x3 or even more from previous build. This is insane, make something middle DICE.

    err.. one aa still can't take down a fighter without every shot hitting perfectly and a string of other good luck like absolutely nothing in the way. :p
  • SirBobdk
    5296 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    DingoKillr wrote: »
    SirBobdk wrote: »
    @DingoKillr wrote
    Rubbish, weak AA just results in mainly bombers. That has been proven twice since launch when AA was weak.
    Not in CQ.
    Here I only saw Bombers going down in flames. (PC)
    MAA has brought back German bombers as they no longer need to fear spitfires.
    That might have more to do with British MAA.
    So we should buff the british MAA as well making it impossible to fly.
    Don't sound like balance to me.
Sign In or Register to comment.