Battlefield 5 brings back classic, majority flag rules. This initially kicked off when players on Reddit noted a higher than usual ratio of close games in Conquest. While this was initially dismissed as a placebo by most, some Battlefield 5 players insisted that there's a hidden catch-up mechanic in Conquest that gives the losing team a chance at a comeback. So you will most likely be one-shot anyway.In the days since the early access launch of Battlefield 5, players have discovered some abnormalities in flag capture speed in Conquest. So it only mattered for Strats which could have enough to have more air defence than fighter 3s air attack which meant Strats were the only planes that could not be one-shot by fighter 3s if hit.Īctually taking all the above into account then increasing air defence still doesnt matter if the enemy stacks air attack because iirc its easier to stack high air attack with the new modules than high air defence. And TACs and the like also didnt have enough air defence to stand against the air attack of fighter 2s and 3s or even just fighter 1s with upgrades. But you couldn't upgrade it pre-BBA anyway and back then a fighter 1 already had enough air attack to overcome a fighter 3s air defence entirely. Hell it must have been worth it pre-BBA then, too. Well I guess air defence is worth it then at all times if it works like HP. I must have misremembered how air defence works. You get me? Kinda hard to explain what I mean.Īnyway I am mostly interested in answers from meta players who know what they are doing and understand the underlying math and formulas from the game files (cuz i dont, i just repeat what i read other meta players write lol).Ĭlick to expand.Huh. The question is basically if air attack and air defence are now worth getting even if not stacked to the max on a strat bomber (so for instance putting a single defensive machine gun turret on a single engine CAS plane for extra air attack, and some plane armor for extra air defence) and at the cost of speed and agility, or if the latter two are still the most important stats for an aircrafts performance (especially fighters). Or maximising air attack as much as possible even at the cost of agility and speed? What about air defence? Is that now finally worth it? So the question now is, what's better for fighters? Maximising speed (and agility) by equipping only the minimum amount of weapons required and equipping the best possible engine? Now with BBA I know that they changed the formulas and that speed now gives a damage increase and agility was nerfed and also capped. As such jet fighters were actually worse than fighter 3s because they had less agility. Speed as a stat could also be completely ignored. Nor was it worth getting it on planes like tactical bombers were you couldnt stack it sufficiently. Meanwhile the increased air attack and air defence from heavy fighters was absolutely not worth the agility loss. Basically later model strategic bombers could stack air attack and air defence so high that they were untouchable by enemy fighters and actually inflicted losses upon them. Air defence was a stat that could be completely ignored unless you stacked it extremely high like in the context of strategic bombers. Having an agility advantage over your opponent gave you a massive damage reduction.Įxtra air attack was not worth it if it meant less agility. What about now?īasically pre-BBA agility was king. Air defence and air attack used to be negligeble unless stacked very high in Strats. Meta players - what's the new plane stat meta? It used to be agility pre-BBA, but they nerfed that now and also removed sources of extra agility.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |