Jump to content


high tier bombers... a suggestion to slightly nerf without nerfing, WG


  • Please log in to reply
36 replies to this topic

SpiritFoxMY #21 Posted 17 July 2020 - 01:41 AM

    Captain

  • Closed Beta Tester
  • 5600 battles
  • 3,156
  • [R-A-W] R-A-W
  • Member since:
    12-31-2012

I think that the best way to nerf bombers without actually nerfing them (and, relatively speaking, give every other class a fairer fight) is to remove Mining Plants completely. Replace them with something else. You could also remove all 80+ targets from the three major cap points and replace them with multiple 30 or 50 point targets. Also bump the points needed to capture a point up by maybe 20 or so to 200 instead of 180 and make sure all sectors have at least two ADAs.

 

What this will do is remove the keystones of Bomber dominance - basically their ability to instantly flip the most valuable sector in the game which can only be instantly flipped by bombers. Spreading out the points and increasing the score required to cap would indirectly nerf the Ju-287/EF-131 by requiring two passes solo instead of one. Changing the layouts of the sectors would also force them to make multiple passes at least before flipping.

 

This would make GAAs more viable since GAAs rely on steady damage to GTs over time over the massive burst of bombers. Buff GAA speeds and you'll have brought them back into relevance AND nerfed bombers without actually touching them.

 

By the same token, increase the number of GTs on Airfields and Airbases to give bombers the ability to flip those since right now, they cannot because there aren't enough GTs to destroy to make up the points required to capture. The single biggest balance fail of World of Warplanes IMO is the fact that specific targets can only be captured by certain classes which leads to maps where some classes are inherently advantaged over others.


Edited by SpiritFoxMY, 17 July 2020 - 01:43 AM.

***

But a truce to this mournful story

For death is a distant friend

So here's to a life of glory

And a laurel to crown each end


trikke #22 Posted 17 July 2020 - 02:09 AM

    Captain

  • Member
  • 4840 battles
  • 4,659
  • [R-A-W] R-A-W
  • Member since:
    01-26-2012

View PostCaptain_Underpants53, on 16 July 2020 - 07:37 PM, said:

I can see the 2 questions but evidently one of the answers is suffering from the Invisible Answer bug.  So I'll use my imagination and assume it's

 

D.  Kick trikke in the butt!

 

lol      i removed the 4th answer  D. WG will do nothing          because everyone would have just chosen D           not kick trikke's butt        no butt stuff at all

 

 

SFMY's answer:  'remove mines' is better than mine        or reduce the amount of money it makes     nope, just make it a pitiful garrison, or something new   


Spittoon says #smarterpilotswinmore       

losttwo #23 Posted 17 July 2020 - 11:57 AM

    which way do we go?

  • Community Ace
  • 8898 battles
  • 14,753
  • [S-S-G] S-S-G
  • Member since:
    05-15-2012

I certainly do not agree with " NERFING " any of the current planes, regardless of class.

I would, in the Spirit of agreement, have to side with FOX about the entire ground target game.

 

The mining plants are too easy for the humans to capture and a nightmare for the BOTS.

The bot GAA simply circle the plant and destroy the small targets thus taking the entire match to capture. ( bit of an exaggeration but you get my drift )

 

 

 

 



_Panzerkunst_ #24 Posted 17 July 2020 - 09:20 PM

    Senior Master Sergeant

  • Member
  • 7612 battles
  • 207
  • Member since:
    01-11-2014

The biggest "nerf" I'd want to see is an increased reload. RN, 287/131 have 50 sec base with Max Dmg of 52,000. The Su-10 has a base 80 sec reload right? If so it can be reduced to 56 sec for a Max Dmg of 72,800. 

I can see how they thought the reload times were relevant with the Max Dmg but the 287/131 can 1 pass neutral MBs and MPs, I don't think CCs tho. In 35 sec, they can cap another base across the map while the SU-10 has to wait 20 more sec. 

The 287/131 bomb load is way more usable because it doesn't need the extra 20k Dmg to cap- From the first drop, 131 can do 156,000 Dmg in 70 sec VS SU-10's 218,000 Dmg (which most would be wasted anyway) in 112 sec. 

That's 3 high value sectors in 70 seconds...Increase the base reload to at least 65, that's my opinion.  


"If You Want Peace, Prepare For War."

trikke #25 Posted 18 July 2020 - 02:00 AM

    Captain

  • Member
  • 4840 battles
  • 4,659
  • [R-A-W] R-A-W
  • Member since:
    01-26-2012

that would be a nerf, and i'm trying to stay away from the n word

 

i realize that shuffling the targets in the cap each battle wouldn't be as effective as either adding clouds or changing mines to strongholds

 

i want to allow bomber guys to fly the planes that they worked so hard to earn, not hollowed out shells

 

i want WG to consider alternatives to nerfing         

 

cloud banks would force bombers to fly under, or fly inside the cloud and guesstimate a quick dive-and-dump, then pull back up into the clouds to escape         

 

test it on the NA server, please?


Spittoon says #smarterpilotswinmore       

SpiritFoxMY #26 Posted 18 July 2020 - 02:20 AM

    Captain

  • Closed Beta Tester
  • 5600 battles
  • 3,156
  • [R-A-W] R-A-W
  • Member since:
    12-31-2012

View Post_Panzerkunst_, on 18 July 2020 - 05:20 AM, said:

The biggest "nerf" I'd want to see is an increased reload. RN, 287/131 have 50 sec base with Max Dmg of 52,000. The Su-10 has a base 80 sec reload right? If so it can be reduced to 56 sec for a Max Dmg of 72,800. 

I can see how they thought the reload times were relevant with the Max Dmg but the 287/131 can 1 pass neutral MBs and MPs, I don't think CCs tho. In 35 sec, they can cap another base across the map while the SU-10 has to wait 20 more sec. 

The 287/131 bomb load is way more usable because it doesn't need the extra 20k Dmg to cap- From the first drop, 131 can do 156,000 Dmg in 70 sec VS SU-10's 218,000 Dmg (which most would be wasted anyway) in 112 sec. 

That's 3 high value sectors in 70 seconds...Increase the base reload to at least 65, that's my opinion.  

 

Personally though, the Su-10 is a lot more "handy" than the Ef-131 largely due to its bombload and the size of maps at tier 9 and 10: the Su-10 and one-load a lot more sectors than the EF-131 can and, again based on personal experience, the time taken for an Su-10 to fly between sectors on an average sized map at tier 10 is about 50 seconds, meaning that you can easily dump all your bombs, cruise over to the next sector and still have all your bombs ready to go within 6 seconds of reaching the target. While the EF-131's insane reload works best on maps with Mining Plants and other large targets close to each other, the Su-10's longer reload doesn't really hamper it because it doesn't need to reload as often as the EF-131 (and I personally consider it the more dangerous of the two bombers).

 

I do agree on increasing reload times on the EF-131, but tbh, I have an even more radical proposition: don't give them an ordnance equipment slot.

 

If we're talking about reload speeds, the 50 seconds on the EF-131 and 70 seconds on the Su-10 are good enough and cripplingly bad respectively. Forcing people to play with those reloads would immediately neuter the most broken aspect of both these planes forcing the EF-131 to play a lot more riskily to ensure accuracy or to accept the 50 second reload before he can come back for another pass while the Su-10 will literally have nothing to do for 70 seconds other than seek out combat which it is perfectly capable of. Taking that slot and moving it to the Airframe would also give both bombers something a little more interesting to play with - faster dive speed? Fewer Crits? More HP? - without completely breaking the game. 

 

I mean, if it were up to me, the Su-10 is just so difficult to balance I'd just remove it entirely and replace it with the Tu-14 which would be more in line with the rest of the Russian bomber line with twin 23mm cannons in the nose and two in the turret. Make it a fat Multirole like the Tu-2 and Tu-10 instead of the all-conquering murder machine it is right now.


***

But a truce to this mournful story

For death is a distant friend

So here's to a life of glory

And a laurel to crown each end


trikke #27 Posted 18 July 2020 - 02:44 AM

    Captain

  • Member
  • 4840 battles
  • 4,659
  • [R-A-W] R-A-W
  • Member since:
    01-26-2012

and...   my most best dream fix that i could possibly hope for, would be the introduction of high tier Russian jet heavies with huge hitpoint pools and gigantic 88mm guns

 

and that seems to be a favorite counter move, one that WG loves to do         stoke the flames of pure revenge by creating an OP plane, then sell a premium OP killer

 

it's been long enough, WG         raise the curtain on the Tu-1.2 and the Tu-1.3       take my money, WG


Spittoon says #smarterpilotswinmore       

Captain_Underpants53 #28 Posted 18 July 2020 - 02:49 AM

    Major

  • Member
  • 31665 battles
  • 5,124
  • [USMIL] USMIL
  • Member since:
    04-17-2017
This whole argument is based on the supposition that the bombers are OP.  I reject that supposition.
MSgt, USAF, (ret)

SpiritFoxMY #29 Posted 18 July 2020 - 03:57 AM

    Captain

  • Closed Beta Tester
  • 5600 battles
  • 3,156
  • [R-A-W] R-A-W
  • Member since:
    12-31-2012

View PostCaptain_Underpants53, on 18 July 2020 - 10:49 AM, said:

This whole argument is based on the supposition that the bombers are OP.  I reject that supposition.

 

Only three tbh - the Ju-287, EF-131 and Su-10. Most of the other bombers are alright and a couple are actually underpowered (looking at you B-17D)


***

But a truce to this mournful story

For death is a distant friend

So here's to a life of glory

And a laurel to crown each end


HoujuuNue #30 Posted 18 July 2020 - 11:07 AM

    Senior Master Sergeant

  • Closed Beta Tester
  • 9865 battles
  • 139
  • [PZMOE] PZMOE
  • Member since:
    02-24-2012
Higher tier PvE planes need a HP nerf

trikke #31 Posted 18 July 2020 - 11:59 AM

    Captain

  • Member
  • 4840 battles
  • 4,659
  • [R-A-W] R-A-W
  • Member since:
    01-26-2012

View PostHoujuuNue, on 18 July 2020 - 06:07 AM, said:

Higher tier PvE planes need a HP nerf

 

that makes so much sense      OP, but light on HP      

 

whereas my idea of premium superheavies sounds like a good great plan to me personally, it would cause immediate unintended consequences     

 

i wouldn't stop after killing all the bombers, i would then go after GAs and other heavies      then WG would have to build premium superLFs

 

best choice...   nerf the hitpoints just on the OP bombers             or cloud banks to bring them down to the altitude level of more planes

 

the ball is in your court, WG        do the right thing for everybody        surely there's screams on the CIS server about this


Spittoon says #smarterpilotswinmore       

Lose_dudes #32 Posted 25 July 2020 - 11:13 PM

    Senior Master Sergeant

  • Member
  • 1101 battles
  • 178
  • [524] 524
  • Member since:
    01-24-2020
I don't see why they need to n*** bombers. I got 3000 on the ju-88a--my top, and 7000 on the sb. I would've kept the Ar-2 if that p-38 hadn't kept killing me...

 


I swear, as soon as age permits, I will use Fire and Steel to arrest the destiny of Rome War thunderS***_****f.

SpiritFoxMY #33 Posted 26 July 2020 - 04:49 AM

    Captain

  • Closed Beta Tester
  • 5600 battles
  • 3,156
  • [R-A-W] R-A-W
  • Member since:
    12-31-2012

View PostLose_dudes, on 26 July 2020 - 07:13 AM, said:

I don't see why they need to n*** bombers. I got 3000 on the ju-88a--my top, and 7000 on the sb. I would've kept the Ar-2 if that p-38 hadn't kept killing me...

 

 

We're talking about tier 9 and 10 bombers quite specifically here.


***

But a truce to this mournful story

For death is a distant friend

So here's to a life of glory

And a laurel to crown each end


Lose_dudes #34 Posted 26 July 2020 - 05:55 PM

    Senior Master Sergeant

  • Member
  • 1101 battles
  • 178
  • [524] 524
  • Member since:
    01-24-2020
Heavies always kill bombers
I swear, as soon as age permits, I will use Fire and Steel to arrest the destiny of Rome War thunderS***_****f.

trikke #35 Posted 05 August 2020 - 02:54 AM

    Captain

  • Member
  • 4840 battles
  • 4,659
  • [R-A-W] R-A-W
  • Member since:
    01-26-2012

View PostLose_dudes, on 26 July 2020 - 12:55 PM, said:

Heavies always kill bombers

 

well, it must be true, if he took the time to type it         

 

i personally am looking forward to meeting CU in battle really soon

 

i will copy/paste this in battle chat      he will have no choice but hit Esc and retreat to the hangar      and look hard at himself in the mirror 

 

it's over, old man      over     maybe fly GAs or something?     or tanks?


Spittoon says #smarterpilotswinmore       

Captain_Underpants53 #36 Posted 05 August 2020 - 06:04 AM

    Major

  • Member
  • 31665 battles
  • 5,124
  • [USMIL] USMIL
  • Member since:
    04-17-2017
:izmena:
MSgt, USAF, (ret)

CorvusCorvax #37 Posted 06 August 2020 - 04:08 PM

    Major

  • Member
  • 4893 battles
  • 5,398
  • [OWSS] OWSS
  • Member since:
    01-26-2012

View PostLose_dudes, on 26 July 2020 - 05:55 PM, said:

Heavies always kill bombers


LOL.






1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users