The New Patch Destroyed Air Game play

Comments

  • ProAssassin2003
    3864 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    Well if this isn't the biggest misinformation I've ever seen.

    FF isn't even close to one shot. And now has times it doesn't register. Yaay

    Mobile AA is still awful because of the bullet velocity.

    Still getting one shot by planes in Tanks.

  • TFBisquit
    2282 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    The majority is already, hence why this game is dying. Some still don't understand apparently.
  • VOLBANKER
    1712 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    edited May 13
    Still getting one shot by planes in Tanks.

    Still getting rocketed to death in SAA from out of range plane too.

    EDIT: That was on Fjell Conquest btw.
  • SirBobdk
    5294 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    VOLBANKER said:
    Still getting one shot by planes in Tanks.

    Still getting rocketed to death in SAA from out of range plane too.
    I used to do the same. Rockets was also a bad idea. Should have been bombs only.
    Dice have really made a lot of bad choices in BFV. And now when they have nerfed the pacific planes to death most are using the "rocket" plane version.
  • NLBartmaN
    4484 postsMember, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    SirBobdk said:
    SOMEMOSTER wrote: »
    Previous patch broke tank experience. Current one breaks air. You know what DICE will break in the final update. :)

    I would advise them to make the next game without vehicles. Most seem to want an infantry game and Dice have lost the knowledge how to make a combined warfar game.
    Then there is no longer a reason to buy BF ... it is the key feature of BF.
    There are lots of other games that are better in lots of ways than BF, I only play it for the combined arms ...

    That "most" you are talking about is the few players that actually like "hardcore lite"  BF V ... the rest of the players (that actually like vehicles) have already left (because of the poor weak unbalanced faction locked vehicles that are no fun to fly)
  • Celsi_GER
    789 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    edited May 13
    NLBartmaN wrote: »
    (Quote)
    Then there is no longer a reason to buy BF ... it is the key feature of BF.
    There are lots of other games that are better in lots of ways than BF, I only play it for the combined arms ...

    Agreed. As much as planes annoy me: A Battlefield without vehicles or even without planes is no BF anymore.
  • SirBobdk
    5294 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    edited May 13
    Celsi_GER said:
    NLBartmaN wrote: »
    (Quote)
    Then there is no longer a reason to buy BF ... it is the key feature of BF.
    There are lots of other games that are better in lots of ways than BF, I only play it for the combined arms ...

    Agreed. As much as planes annoy me: A Battlefield without vehicles or even without planes is no BF anymore.
    Agree. That's why we play BF and not cod. It's just sad to see how they have managed to turn this game in to a mess.
    I really hope they will get it right in BF6, but I fear they have lost the know how.
  • olavafar
    2261 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    My experience is that is shifted the balance to be in favor of bombers at the expense of fighters. SAA now destroys fighters very easy and from long range so bombers can basically make a bomb run and if they have an SAA in their spawn, they can safely fly back, repair and reload the bombs and no fighter can follow them there.

    Had a Fjell round yesterday where our team totally dominated air and ground but a bomber pilot in other team could still go 50+ kills (in a quite short game as we had all flags but A most of the game). There was really nothing we could do about it. The other side had the same problem with our bombers as we had all SAA positions except the one in their spawn. This means their fighters could not take out our bombers (they could not even leave spawn) and every time a squad in their team got to any other flag than A, they were instantly bombed.
  • spychodelics
    404 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    Things have changed. 
    I killed yesterday 3 planes on iwo jima fresh from the runway with the FF. I was the only one shooting them. 
    I killed an airplane from the US carrier AA over the second A. 
    I killed an airplane from the "Japanes" AA on third a in japanese spawn. 

    So yeah, i would say range and damage has changed for AA and FF. 

    I was browsing https://sym.gg/databrowser/#BFV_changes_L_to_M/Gameplay/Weapons/$BFV_M_12thMay2020/Gameplay/Weapons/Gadget/Launchers/Launcher_AntiAir_Rocket_Frag/launcher_antiair_rocket_frag_static_Mesh.txt
    there are no direct changes to the FF itself, but as we have seen this game engine is so brnched that no one really knows which setting changes something else. 

  • Hawxxeye
    7561 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    edited May 13
    On paper all the changes look amazing to me.
    .
    First of all the AA buff vs fighters returns us to the Fighter > bomber > AA >fighter balance. Ace-ish fighter pilots that cannot be touched from the ground have always been an issue in the BF games I played. (the situation described by Olavafar above is not an issue since they still won the round)
    .
    The "satellite flares" issue gets fixed so the flares have to be used at an altitude where the enemies can see them and counter them.
    .
    Several bugs finally get addressed including the godmode UK rockets.
    .
    .
    Sadly I do not see any mention of the bofors AA being available to the Germans as well

  • MammiBoo
    414 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    Hawxxeye said:
    On paper all the changes look amazing to me.
    .
    First of all the AA buff vs fighters returns us to the Fighter > bomber > AA >fighter balance. Ace-ish fighter pilots that cannot be touched from the ground have always been an issue in the BF games I played. (the situation described by Olavafar above is not an issue since they still won the round)
    .
    The "satellite flares" issue gets fixed so the flares have to be used at an altitude where the enemies can see them and counter them.
    .
    Several bugs finally get addressed including the godmode UK rockets.
    .
    .
    Sadly I do not see any mention of the bofors AA being available to the Germans as well

    Faceplanted. So where is that portion of the map where your principle applies fighter>bomber>aa applies? In your logic, fighter should attack a bomber over fighters spawn cause fighter cant chase bomber over bomber spawn because bomber is tanking aa's shell while fighter gets rekted by aa while chasing bomber. Also flare altitude of fighter is the most atrocious thing that DICE could came up with. Making fighters virtually useless to the team effort. Better remove every bomb and rockets from fighters than droping useless recon flares, at a range that anyone can destroy them in first second with that atrocious aim assist. I have no problems killing infys with mgs or hmg or cannons, but to have that skill level you need hundreds of hours in a fighter.
    I can understand your point to an extent but you have no logic whatsoever, and yes I can see from miles away that you are a bomber pilot, so in your case yes defend this pos because you can't be chased by fighters, so it is okay for you because they removed your biggest threat in the air, THE FIGHTERS.

    God dmn people use your brain, no one needs OP vehicles, we need balance. Overnerfing fighters and overbuffing AAs seem logical to you?no matter which side you are.... 
  • iwashighwayman
    159 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    edited May 13
    Fliger 1 shot kill a plane
    Increase the AA range that it shoots across the map
    increase the AA damage
    increase the Mobile AA range
    increase the Mobile AA damage
    plane Flares are useless now back to what thy where  at game lunched
    Just Why destroy the air game play in the game
    if some players hate planes thy can always play other mods without planes but why destroy the Original Battlefield experience .  do developers  play the game or just change things according to feedback ? fliger was powerful  before that patch and can deal 92 damage to a plane add to that 32 players can carry it  in a round , The AA range and damage was great before that patch . Things need to be corrected back .

    Oh look Tom Cruise is mad that he cant go 100-0 in BF V and then take spaceship to Xenu.
    (profanity removed by moderator)


    Post edited by Carbonic on
  • NLBartmaN
    4484 postsMember, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    Most of the problems with vehicles are in the game because vehicles (and their counters like SAA) are faction locked and not equal.

    Why is it so hard to just ONLY change the LOOK (to match the factions look) of a vehicle/weapon but have the same (in power, speed and other characteristics) vehicles/weapons on both sides ...

    I prefer "authenticity/historical accuracy" in the way things look and sound, but all weapons and vehicles options should ALWAYS be avalable to both sides to keep balance, even if certain (type of) weapons/features were not avaialable to the other faction in the actual event.

    Were it is needed, balanced and high performing stable consistent gameplay should ALWAYS go before everything else.
  • Hawxxeye
    7561 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    edited May 13
    MammiBoo said:
    Hawxxeye said:
    On paper all the changes look amazing to me.
    .
    First of all the AA buff vs fighters returns us to the Fighter > bomber > AA >fighter balance. Ace-ish fighter pilots that cannot be touched from the ground have always been an issue in the BF games I played. (the situation described by Olavafar above is not an issue since they still won the round)
    .
    The "satellite flares" issue gets fixed so the flares have to be used at an altitude where the enemies can see them and counter them.
    .
    Several bugs finally get addressed including the godmode UK rockets.
    .
    .
    Sadly I do not see any mention of the bofors AA being available to the Germans as well

    Faceplanted. So where is that portion of the map where your principle applies fighter>bomber>aa applies? In your logic, fighter should attack a bomber over fighters spawn cause fighter cant chase bomber over bomber spawn because bomber is tanking aa's shell while fighter gets rekted by aa while chasing bomber. Also flare altitude of fighter is the most atrocious thing that DICE could came up with. Making fighters virtually useless to the team effort. Better remove every bomb and rockets from fighters than droping useless recon flares, at a range that anyone can destroy them in first second with that atrocious aim assist. I have no problems killing infys with mgs or hmg or cannons, but to have that skill level you need hundreds of hours in a fighter.
    I can understand your point to an extent but you have no logic whatsoever, and yes I can see from miles away that you are a bomber pilot, so in your case yes defend this pos because you can't be chased by fighters, so it is okay for you because they removed your biggest threat in the air, THE FIGHTERS.

    God dmn people use your brain, no one needs OP vehicles, we need balance. Overnerfing fighters and overbuffing AAs seem logical to you?no matter which side you are.... 

    A plane should not be able to easily harass a enemy plane over its own spawn. I have seen enough ridiculousness with planes spawning with enemy fighters on their tail already.
    If the bombers end up being too durable then they can always nerf them against fighters/AA more.
    .
    .
    The flare change was not the best one they could had done. If I was them I would be making it so the flares do not light up until they reach the 100m altitude but the planes should drop them from as high as they like. I guess that was too much coding for an abandoned game...
    .
    .
    I need to get in and see myself how much the fighters are being affected by this (that is why I specifically said on my previous post  "on paper".
    .
    .
    I am an infantryman, a tanker, a fighter pilot and yes even a bomber pilot. I like to pick whatever helps my team the most. In BFV in general a fighter is pretty boring with the stall meta dogfights to me I guess.
    .
    .
    I want nothing to be invincible and that includes even bombers as well. I have years of spite since BF3 against fighters who ravage the enemy airforce (and anything else they can damage sufficiently) while shrugging off any AA off them with countermeasures.
    One should never have to be really good at using scissors as the only way to beat scissors, there has to be a rock that is good enough for any scissors.
  • ninjapenquinuk
    2244 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    NLBartmaN said:
    Most of the problems with vehicles are in the game because vehicles (and their counters like SAA) are faction locked and not equal.

    Why is it so hard to just ONLY change the LOOK (to match the factions look) of a vehicle/weapon but have the same (in power, speed and other characteristics) vehicles/weapons on both sides ...

    I prefer "authenticity/historical accuracy" in the way things look and sound, but all weapons and vehicles options should ALWAYS be avalable to both sides to keep balance, even if certain (type of) weapons/features were not avaialable to the other faction in the actual event.

    Were it is needed, balanced and high performing stable consistent gameplay should ALWAYS go before everything else.
    I'd agree there. I like the faction specific vehicles but the performance, especially with planes,  should not be wildly different. The Spitfire with 8 high rpm MGs should do the same damage per second as a BF109 with its slow firing cannons. The performance of the planes in game should be similar. Same with bombs. Ok planeA only carried one big bomb, but it should do the same or very Similar damage as PlaneB with 2 smaller bombs, with maybe slight differences in area of affect etc, but for all intents and purposes they should act the same. As for Tanks, I don't mind the asymmetric aspect as it should be easier to balance. AA or AT or Stationary MG guns should do the same damage for both sides irrespective of real life values 
  • MammiBoo
    414 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    Hawxxeye said:
    MammiBoo said:
    Hawxxeye said:
    On paper all the changes look amazing to me.
    .
    First of all the AA buff vs fighters returns us to the Fighter > bomber > AA >fighter balance. Ace-ish fighter pilots that cannot be touched from the ground have always been an issue in the BF games I played. (the situation described by Olavafar above is not an issue since they still won the round)
    .
    The "satellite flares" issue gets fixed so the flares have to be used at an altitude where the enemies can see them and counter them.
    .
    Several bugs finally get addressed including the godmode UK rockets.
    .
    .
    Sadly I do not see any mention of the bofors AA being available to the Germans as well

    Faceplanted. So where is that portion of the map where your principle applies fighter>bomber>aa applies? In your logic, fighter should attack a bomber over fighters spawn cause fighter cant chase bomber over bomber spawn because bomber is tanking aa's shell while fighter gets rekted by aa while chasing bomber. Also flare altitude of fighter is the most atrocious thing that DICE could came up with. Making fighters virtually useless to the team effort. Better remove every bomb and rockets from fighters than droping useless recon flares, at a range that anyone can destroy them in first second with that atrocious aim assist. I have no problems killing infys with mgs or hmg or cannons, but to have that skill level you need hundreds of hours in a fighter.
    I can understand your point to an extent but you have no logic whatsoever, and yes I can see from miles away that you are a bomber pilot, so in your case yes defend this pos because you can't be chased by fighters, so it is okay for you because they removed your biggest threat in the air, THE FIGHTERS.

    God dmn people use your brain, no one needs OP vehicles, we need balance. Overnerfing fighters and overbuffing AAs seem logical to you?no matter which side you are.... 

    A plane should not be able to easily harass a enemy plane over its own spawn. I have seen enough ridiculousness with planes spawning with enemy fighters on their tail already.
    If the bombers end up being too durable then they can always nerf them against fighters/AA more.
    .
    .
    The flare change was not the best one they could had done. If I was them I would be making it so the flares do not light up until they reach the 100m altitude but the planes should drop them from as high as they like. I guess that was too much coding for an abandoned game...
    .
    .
    I need to get in and see myself how much the fighters are being affected by this (that is why I specifically said on my previous post  "on paper".
    .
    .
    I am an infantryman, a tanker, a fighter pilot and yes even a bomber pilot. I like to pick whatever helps my team the most. In BFV in general a fighter is pretty boring with the stall meta dogfights to me I guess.
    .
    .
    I want nothing to be invincible and that includes even bombers as well. I have years of spite since BF3 against fighters who ravage the enemy airforce (and anything else they can damage sufficiently) while shrugging off any AA off them with countermeasures.

    Quite sad. Defending the cheapest vehicle in the game aka bomber. I am a jack of all trades as well, but simply put I dunno if I have level 2 unlocked on 2 bombers. I guess not. This says a ton about bombers. Simply put it is not my fault as a fighter pilot that I have to resupply on and on on those 2 ammo points on each map. This includes enemy spawn, because this is the game Dice Imagined.

    Also it is a HUGE consensus that bombers should have never existed in this game. I dunno how DICE realised that the CHEAPEST tools in the game, THAT REQUIRE ZERO SKILL, should be DEFENDED. Aka bombers and AA.

    The perfect tool would have been nerfing flare range not altitude, removing bombers, make STUKA's and brit side par to AP specs in BF1, and improving dogfight for fighters. AA was fine as it was before this pos. 

    To me seriously I appreciated your posts as a pilot prior to this patch. Now I realised I overapreciated your views, in fact you are glad the cheapest tool in the game, is the easiest tool atm to be abused.

    Sad but true 
  • ninjapenquinuk
    2244 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    I assume AA damage is not range effective? If it's not then maybe it should be against certain planes, such as fighters. We don't want AA so powerful it cna blast fighters easily across the map, but fighters shouldn't also be able to line up on an AA and take hit after hit before firing off rockets or dropping bombs on the AA. So. At the AAshould do greater damage the closer the fighters get. 
    Saying all that, I had no issue pre patch shooting down planes with decently sited AA. The problem is the AA positions are either headshot magnets or give you no field of fire. For example, on Hamada breakthrough there are 2 AA on the first sector for defenders. The one on the defenders left is hunkered down out of sight of snipers but you can't actually see any planes til they are basically overhead-so pointless. The one on  the right is in the open. If the attackers push up you will be sniped out of in constantly, however if they don't you have a great field of fire and can shoot down plane after plane with ease
  • almothana11
    51 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    edited May 13
    Friendly-Fire is right, Fliegerfausts can one shot planes:

    and the type 10 cannons on the Pacific maps can destroy a plane in two shots

  • Hawxxeye
    7561 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    edited May 13
    MammiBoo said:
    Hawxxeye said:
    MammiBoo said:
    Hawxxeye said:
    On paper all the changes look amazing to me.
    .
    First of all the AA buff vs fighters returns us to the Fighter > bomber > AA >fighter balance. Ace-ish fighter pilots that cannot be touched from the ground have always been an issue in the BF games I played. (the situation described by Olavafar above is not an issue since they still won the round)
    .
    The "satellite flares" issue gets fixed so the flares have to be used at an altitude where the enemies can see them and counter them.
    .
    Several bugs finally get addressed including the godmode UK rockets.
    .
    .
    Sadly I do not see any mention of the bofors AA being available to the Germans as well

    Faceplanted. So where is that portion of the map where your principle applies fighter>bomber>aa applies? In your logic, fighter should attack a bomber over fighters spawn cause fighter cant chase bomber over bomber spawn because bomber is tanking aa's shell while fighter gets rekted by aa while chasing bomber. Also flare altitude of fighter is the most atrocious thing that DICE could came up with. Making fighters virtually useless to the team effort. Better remove every bomb and rockets from fighters than droping useless recon flares, at a range that anyone can destroy them in first second with that atrocious aim assist. I have no problems killing infys with mgs or hmg or cannons, but to have that skill level you need hundreds of hours in a fighter.
    I can understand your point to an extent but you have no logic whatsoever, and yes I can see from miles away that you are a bomber pilot, so in your case yes defend this pos because you can't be chased by fighters, so it is okay for you because they removed your biggest threat in the air, THE FIGHTERS.

    God dmn people use your brain, no one needs OP vehicles, we need balance. Overnerfing fighters and overbuffing AAs seem logical to you?no matter which side you are.... 

    A plane should not be able to easily harass a enemy plane over its own spawn. I have seen enough ridiculousness with planes spawning with enemy fighters on their tail already.
    If the bombers end up being too durable then they can always nerf them against fighters/AA more.
    .
    .
    The flare change was not the best one they could had done. If I was them I would be making it so the flares do not light up until they reach the 100m altitude but the planes should drop them from as high as they like. I guess that was too much coding for an abandoned game...
    .
    .
    I need to get in and see myself how much the fighters are being affected by this (that is why I specifically said on my previous post  "on paper".
    .
    .
    I am an infantryman, a tanker, a fighter pilot and yes even a bomber pilot. I like to pick whatever helps my team the most. In BFV in general a fighter is pretty boring with the stall meta dogfights to me I guess.
    .
    .
    I want nothing to be invincible and that includes even bombers as well. I have years of spite since BF3 against fighters who ravage the enemy airforce (and anything else they can damage sufficiently) while shrugging off any AA off them with countermeasures.

    Quite sad. Defending the cheapest vehicle in the game aka bomber. I am a jack of all trades as well, but simply put I dunno if I have level 2 unlocked on 2 bombers. I guess not. This says a ton about bombers. Simply put it is not my fault as a fighter pilot that I have to resupply on and on on those 2 ammo points on each map. This includes enemy spawn, because this is the game Dice Imagined.

    Also it is a HUGE consensus that bombers should have never existed in this game. I dunno how DICE realised that the CHEAPEST tools in the game, THAT REQUIRE ZERO SKILL, should be DEFENDED. Aka bombers and AA.

    The perfect tool would have been nerfing flare range not altitude, removing bombers, make STUKA's and brit side par to AP specs in BF1, and improving dogfight for fighters. AA was fine as it was before this pos. 

    To me seriously I appreciated your posts as a pilot prior to this patch. Now I realised I overapreciated your views, in fact you are glad the cheapest tool in the game, is the easiest tool atm to be abused.

    Sad but true 
    I am not defending bombers, I just hate invincible fighters farming the enemy planes because the other side does not have a fighter with 341342342 hours on it
    I would had preferred attack planes that used their guns to strafe the ground over carpet bombers that are either a free kill or boring as hell farming machines.
    But as luck had it, the direct fire cannons of the planes were nerfed to the ground...Stukas with cannons used to be much more fun...
    .
    I am surprised  by how much you read my posts above as a declaration that I apparently "love bombers and want to try to go 100-0 every match"
    .
    Take a break, sip some tea and read again please.
    .
    As I said above : One should never have to be really good at using scissors as the only way to beat scissors, there has to be a rock that is good enough for any scissors.
    .
    Do you really feel betrayed that I declared that I do not want invincible fighters?
Sign In or Register to comment.