Are aircraft out of balance?

Re: Are aircraft out of balance?

but trust me from my exp of flying (Lots of it), S2A are far more deadly than A2A, they turn harder and chase better. they can be dodged but not that easily, like a barrel roll will dodge a few S2A and then a few will hit while your still doing it.

I didn't say it was easy. I said it could be done, has been done, and continues to be done.

the carrier cant shoot missiles accuratly if your too close as the missiles are fired from a different position to the chaingun and you can make sure the missiles hit the carrier by hiding. if your not close to it and there is someone that knows how to use the aa shooting at you chances are you will go down or need alot of repair :)

I don't agree.

if i were to fly over any aa site and i dont drop flares.. i will get hit and most likely twice. flares will save your ass, when they do their job properly that is.

I also don't agree with this. I'm not going to say you're wrong (I think you are though) but my experiences in Jets are completely different from what you're claiming here. Either I'm just outrageously lucky, or your "scenarios" aren't as commonplace as you would like them to be.

if your good in a jet and can take out all of your targets, including those that are trying to take you out, then yes you deserve stay alive. and why the hell shouldnt you? because other people dont think its fair that your good??? its selfish and jealousy if people think otherwise.

You're not alive because you're "GOOD". Maybe in terms of Jet on Jet combat, yes. You're alive because you have the most powerful vehicle in the game, that also happens to be one of the hardest to hit. When you combine those two, it's not a miracle to see why a Jet pilot can have a field day on the ground units.

p.s your last game was 5/5/06 less than 2 weeks ago, theres no indication that you dont play it anymore

One match out of month! Give me a break. Fine, if you're going to be outrageously literall then "I don't play Vanilla BF2 hardly ever, like once a month or twice at best. Thus, my stats are not a very good judge of my talents because that haven't been calculating my 'true' playtime".

There. Hope that cleared it all up.

and i dont have prmm, but if you want to pwn me

...after a line like that. Forget it. No offense, I would just rather not play with or against you at all.

{WP}Paas

Re: Are aircraft out of balance?

The Anti-Air scared jets. It wasn't so much that people actually killed what they aimed at. It's just that Jet pilots "THOUGHT" they would die if shot at. With the current crop of A.A. it's kinda' like, " Ok, I might take a missile, but I'll just repair and be right back in the game. It's so worth the risk".

...with 1.2 A.A. it was along the lines of, "If there is a lock, I'm screwed. I better make sure the coast is clear before I start handling buisness. Maybe even ask some of the ground forces to clear out Anti-Air sites"

it was more its godlike ability, point click die, you had to spend all your time shooting aa sites, no time to do anything else. then there were the planes that had the same missile. it was instant death to anything flying.
heres how bad they were, showing even flares wouldnt save you: http://media.putfile.com/godlike-aa-missiles

Re: Are aircraft out of balance?

I think they balanced the air attack for the US against the opposition by making the Cobra the better manuverable attack chopper and the planes the slugs against the MIG-29 and J10. The F18 at least gives me a chance to fight back but they are only on a select few maps.

Re: Are aircraft out of balance?

I remember the forum posts after 1.2 patch. A HUGE bulk of newbies came out of their caves and started posting about how now jets need skills to operate, while they shot the jets down with 2 clicks and ZERO effort and skills. Do you spot the irony here?

I dont see irony. I see, this:
AA gets bumped up and starts to work well. FOrget the patch, dont care. However AA actually works, and pilots whined. AA gets nerfed back, and AA whines. There is no irony, just balance......the word you say you hate. Its obviously a balance issue. In fact when AA was bumped up and worked well, you still saw good pilots doing lots of bombings, and other things. What you did see, was lots of pilots getting downed, that flew idiotic........like close to the ground. In retrospect, do you not feel that a plane that decides to fly 50 feet off the ground, deserves to be shot down, in a one hit, shot? I do.
Going in for a bombing, or just a fighter pilot going down to get a few gunning kills, for some close ground combat, should do so with EXTREME RISK. As it is now, it appears there is low, to no risk. Besides, even if shot down, the stupid planes spawn so fast......... who cares if you get shot down from time to time.
Im hugely against jets and helos, and the amount of lameness they do in a game. And its getting worse. One reason, is its really easy to kill using them. Now, for you diehards, to become a super ace, sure i get you practiced tons, and deserve being so good. But please, dont insult the majority of folks intelligence by saying, you work really hard at getting kills in a helo and or jet.
Im the worst pilot on this forum. But you know what? The rare times i have gotten in a jet or helo........i cant help but to say to myself........wow.....this is so easy. No wonder, i sweat it out on the ground. Its more fun down here.

Re: Are aircraft out of balance?

And every time these posts come out with the title of "balance", they just reek of the point jealousy and whatnot.

I remember the forum posts after 1.2 patch. A HUGE bulk of newbies came out of their caves and started posting about how now jets need skills to operate, while they shot the jets down with 2 clicks and ZERO effort and skills. Do you spot the irony here?

lol thats all i got, "take that skilless n00b" from the guy sat in a point click aa turret :laugh:
i made a vid of the aa doing the most incredible kills and posted on the ea forums and the usual karkand nubs come along saying, "whats wrong with that? it looks fair to me" e.t.c lol

Re: Are aircraft out of balance?

Every time you say "I want AA to be a competition to jets", I see you saying "I want a direct kill when I shoot from the lock-on". Simple as that. You dont want some fancy **** that promotes teamwork. You wouldnt team up with another AA partner to take out a jet. You wouldnt even want to partner up with a buddy pilot to use him as a decoy and making you the hitter. You wouldnt want any of this nonsense crap.

I think you finally blew your lid on the other side of the debate there. Granted, some people do want an instant kill weapon. I'm not one of them, I want Jets to "FEAR" what's desgined to kill them. I want Jets to understand that Static A.A. sites are a real danger, and that they should respect the area they are in unless friendlies have captured them.

...stripping bombs from fighters would be an excelent step in this direction, hell, that would just about do it completely. Problem is, I don't think EA is going to fly with that concept so I take it upon myself of thinking of other ways to accomplish the same task.

*Jet flies, you see AA, you jump in, take a lock, fire 2 and kill. Score 1 point and proceed shooting the grunts*

:laugh:

Tell me something. WHY should it be easy for you to take me down, when I actually work to take YOU down. I admit, it isnt hard to aim the machine gun, but to get that far, I did a lot.

:laugh:, you're so full of crap here. I don't even think you mean this. Look, you know like I know that the cannon range of a Jet is past that of A.A. Assuming you're a much better pilot that me, and me having already logged every Static Anti-Air point in my brain, and attack angle, you just take them out and carry on about your buisness.

I can honestly say I'm not shot down by ground A.A. anymore. The only thing that can take me out of the Sky at this point is a Jet. Now, seeing as there are better pilots than me and I ignore ground units in favor of them (I'm a horrible bomber. Well, not horrible. About a 50% success rate) I get shot down a lot.

...yet, if things go the way you mentoned them. Just keep in mind you're the one who suggested it. :p

Im not saying that AA needs nerfing, whatever. I am saying that you have to find a way to use it effectively an get off the complaining. You so desperately want a weapon that would drop a pilot, that youre not thinking of balance.

The problem is with A.A. there is no room to grow. You learn quickly you cannot sit on it all the time. You learn even quicker that it's not going to hit with the second missile if the first one does. Then you learn that if a Jet is flying at you you're probably gunna' die.

Boom-bow-bam! Anti-Air master. So, if you get a bunch of those together, yes... it works out lovely. Probably won't kill the Jet but it's a viable scare tactic.

Yet, why should it take a "SQUAD" to stop one man in a Jet? It doesn't take a squad to stop a Helo, a Tank, a Boat, a Car. Hell, it doesn't even take a squad to take flags. Yet, it takes a full blown, dedicated, alert, and "understanding of the game mechanics" squad to down "ONE" fighter pilot.

I am biased, but I support some outrageous nerfs on jets that would alter their role. For example. Either stripping the bombs from jets, or decreasing their splash damage of the bombs so they become a direct-hit anti-armor items. And some other nerfs.

Hooray?

And every time these posts come out with the title of "balance", they just reek of the point jealousy and whatnot.

Are you putting your pinky in the air!? "You ground pounders are just jealous because we can fly Jets and you can't!".

...I know that's not what I'm reading; am I?!

I remember the forum posts after 1.2 patch. A HUGE bulk of newbies came out of their caves and started posting about how now jets need skills to operate, while they shot the jets down with 2 clicks and ZERO effort and skills. Do you spot the irony here?

The Anti-Air scared jets. It wasn't so much that people actually killed what they aimed at. It's just that Jet pilots "THOUGHT" they would die if shot at. With the current crop of A.A. it's kinda' like, " Ok, I might take a missile, but I'll just repair and be right back in the game. It's so worth the risk".

...with 1.2 A.A. it was along the lines of, "If there is a lock, I'm screwed. I better make sure the coast is clear before I start handling buisness. Maybe even ask some of the ground forces to clear out Anti-Air sites"

Furthermore. This "zero effort" thing you keep clasping too, while in principle makes sense, doesn't account for the fact there is limited "skill based" things you can do with an stationary, auto-locking, weapon.

Aside from firing the missiles seperate of one another (Fire one missile. Wait, fire another one after flares or after evasive actions) there aren't any viable tacitcs to down a Jet from static A.A.

Mobil Anti-Air is a different story, yet it's missing throughout most of the game.

Now, I understand that you do not have the time nor the patience to play in AA like I play in a jet.

If A.A. was "Playing", I would be all over that. In reality, you're just sitting there spinning waiting on the game to tell you when to click.

Its just not that fun.

...or fun at all for that matter.

But please, come up with something better than ultrakiller nonsense.

I think you're just paranoid it might happen at this point bud. I don't think EA is going to go the "Ultrakiller" route again. I'm praying what they do is add mobile Anti-Air for every Jet present on a given map. Also, maybe up the damage of Mobile-Anti-Airs cannons so Jets don't feel inclined to nose dive in it's direction with their suicide bomb runs.

OR! Maybe just increase the time it takes a Jet to respawn. Instead of the 15 seconds of every other vehicle. Maybe 1 minute or so. I mean, if it's going to be as powerfull as it has always been, there needs to be a serious penalty for that much power.

...with great power comes great responsibility? Eh?

{WP}Paas

Re: Are aircraft out of balance?

Bull. You can outturn S2A. I've had it done "Millions Upon Millions" of times against me. Granted, I'm not as lucky as some; yet I've watched as a pilot completely neglects flares and goes untouched by my Anti-Air missiles.



Play a round of Wake. Fly at the Carrier and stafe along it's side with a Jet. Now, if one of the carriers Anti-Air guns was to unload a missile payload on you "WITHOUT" flares and you're moving at that angle odds are only 2 missiles out of the entire payload will hit you.

...now, if you factor in flares, maybe 1 missile out of the entire payload will hit you.

Which says a lot. It says that Jets moving at certain angles in conjucntion to the Anti-Air that's being aimed at that run a very low risk of getting hit. So, a reasonable A.A. gunner, such as myself, knows to only fire at Jets come at me, or away from me.

Now... a Jet coming "AT" me is probably going to take out the site with out without a indicator. He knows the danger of having a bit of life loss, and he would prefer not to risk it. So, the timeframe for engagements in that instance is almost none.

Ok, so what about a Jet flying away? Easy prey right? No. Flares. Not saying anything wrong with the concept of them but they are the saving grace for a Jet when he's flying at the only angle were he can be engaged with a reasonably high success rate. So, you fire a missile at him, he either has to drop flares or run the risk of being torn out of the sky.

...yet, after he drops flares you won't get a second shot from even a semi-aware pilote. He will strafe you at your Statics weak spot, with or without you on it, and he will give you some cannon love that even satan would call perverted.



Yes, take up my carrier example and you will see exactly what I'm talking about. Granted, you can argue, "The missile just missed you, you didn't dodge anything" until you're blue in the face; dun' care. I consider a missile that doesn't hit me, and is aimed at me, to be a dodged missile.



...ok. I know this. Your point?



Wait, you with your paragraph of assumptions and such are going to tell me I haven't dodged a missile before or that it's impossible to dodge a missile? You're kidding right? This isn't 1.2 mah' man, if missiles still couldn't be dodged don't you think the outcry from the Airborne community would be kinda', you know... LOUD?

I don't wanna' base my arguement off of outside factors though. So, go play a round of any map you choose, fly straight over an Anti-Air site and see if you're touched. It's the same concept as when a Helo "Tunnels" around a static site. If he's at the right distance the missiles cannot correctly compensate for his movements and he's darn near untouchable. This is a common thing for the small island on Wake.



Ok. What are the figures then? I know there is a difference, but what is that difference and why is it there when the missiles are not "overbuffed" as they were considered by many in 1.2?

I doubt the merit of your claim here. I think you're just spewing but I'm willing to have an open mind if you can give me some concrete facts as to the distance A.A. locks vs. the visial and effective range of a Jet's cannon fire.



Wait. So just because you're good in a Jet you should be "graced" with the path of killing anything in site with very little chance of being shot down?

...well, if that's the logic going around can I get my old M203 back for Assault? I mean, I got good with it so obviously I deserved all of the kills I was getting regardless if a majority of the community though it was overpowered.



If you had even half of a brain, you would know I don't play Vanilla anymore. Thus', I don't have ranks. Catch me on PRMM anyday though, I'll force feed you some Air Combat there if you like.

...and instead of coming up with half-brained cheap shots. How about coming back with a worthwhile debate?

...it seems like I have to explain myself to you stat-junkies everytime I give a perspective.

{WP}Paas

dude you wrote so much that i cant be arsed to reply to all of it :laugh:

but trust me from my exp of flying (Lots of it), S2A are far more deadly than A2A, they turn harder and chase better. they can be dodged but not that easily, like a barrel roll will dodge a few S2A and then a few will hit while your still doing it.

the carrier cant shoot missiles accuratly if your too close as the missiles are fired from a different position to the chaingun and you can make sure the missiles hit the carrier by hiding. if your not close to it and there is someone that knows how to use the aa shooting at you chances are you will go down or need alot of repair :)
if i were to fly over any aa site and i dont drop flares.. i will get hit and most likely twice. flares will save your ass, when they do their job properly that is.

if your good in a jet and can take out all of your targets, including those that are trying to take you out, then yes you deserve stay alive. and why the hell shouldnt you? because other people dont think its fair that your good??? its selfish and jealousy if people think otherwise.

p.s your last game was 5/5/06 less than 2 weeks ago, theres no indication that you dont play it anymore..
and i dont have prmm, but if you want to pwn me at flying on an empty cleansweep map or something then pm me :)

Re: Are aircraft out of balance?

SImple......give massive points to vehical operators, using the vehical in its semi-quazi, gaming use.

Tanks killing other tanks........big, fat meaty points. Tanks killing infantry...... how about .5 points.
If a tanker realizes that spaming a flag, for 20 minutes, getting 40 kills, only is gonna get 20 points............ perhaps, he would be more intent on moving on and actually hunting down that enemy tank, doing the same stupid thing he was doing before. Hell, i'd give a tanker, 15 points for an armor kill.
Same theory with planes, and helos. Give, .5 for infantry kills, and bigger points for armor and other plane/helo kills.
I mean it really makes sense.
Why in the hell should someone surrounded in a big piece of armor, with a big ol' splash damage bullet, and a super accurate machine gun, and can take 3-4 AT hits, before he gets out, and then is a normal soldier again,....why the hell should he be getting 2 points per kill, same as the out in the open soldier? Dont make sense.

If your a soldier, and peak around a corner....and another soldier, an enemy, does the same thing 100 feet away....... there is a 50/50 chance you will die.
While the tanker, has pretty much a 100% chance he wont die, and will get the kill. The points dont make sense if you think about it.
Again, same logic can be applied to planes and helos.
You've all seen the copter, hover around at or near, a flag, and the gunner, killing 20 team mates EASILY within 30 seconds. Again, when compared to ground, soldier combat......getting the same points....it dont add up.
No wonder people camp runways, and tank spawns. Its easy. I dont care who you are.........getting more kills, is easy in a tank or plane, or helo. Its not that hard. Yet they share the same points?

blah. stupid, really stupid.

[Chris_Redfield]

Re: Are aircraft out of balance?

Every time you say "I want AA to be a competition to jets", I see you saying "I want a direct kill when I shoot from the lock-on". Simple as that. You dont want some fancy **** that promotes teamwork. You wouldnt team up with another AA partner to take out a jet. You wouldnt even want to partner up with a buddy pilot to use him as a decoy and making you the hitter. You wouldnt want any of this nonsense crap.

What you want is this.

*Jet flies, you see AA, you jump in, take a lock, fire 2 and kill. Score 1 point and proceed shooting the grunts*

Tell me something. WHY should it be easy for you to take me down, when I actually work to take YOU down. I admit, it isnt hard to aim the machine gun, but to get that far, I did a lot.

Im not saying that AA needs nerfing, whatever. I am saying that you have to find a way to use it effectively an get off the complaining. You so desperately want a weapon that would drop a pilot, that youre not thinking of balance.

I am biased, but I support some outrageous nerfs on jets that would alter their role. For example. Either stripping the bombs from jets, or decreasing their splash damage of the bombs so they become a direct-hit anti-armor items. And some other nerfs.

And every time these posts come out with the title of "balance", they just reek of the point jealousy and whatnot.

I remember the forum posts after 1.2 patch. A HUGE bulk of newbies came out of their caves and started posting about how now jets need skills to operate, while they shot the jets down with 2 clicks and ZERO effort and skills. Do you spot the irony here?

Im tired LOL. But seriously, look at your posts people.

Now, I understand that you do not have the time nor the patience to play in AA like I play in a jet. Its just not that fun. But please, come up with something better than ultrakiller nonsense.

Re: Are aircraft out of balance?

Indeed, those are my stats Mr. Zipp0r and I am relatively proud of them... Gunny Sgt with a nearly 1:1 KD... Im average to just above average...

I have zero desire to be an Ace pilot, I think my stats clearly show that I have chosen my role as a mixed infantry fighter who can hold down the fort in the armored vehicles also...

lol, tbh the only time I'm in an aircraft with any reliability is when Im gunning an attack helo for a buddy... and even that isnt too often.

I do sometimes practice jets in single-player because I used to be a decent pilot in BF1942 but the ground-game in BF2 is way deeper than it was in '42 so Im having a blast with that.


I'm still waiting for your wizardly tutorial for 'pwning n00bs' in AA.

Thanks Billy.

blah blah blah.... and complain on forums that planes are too easy.

Is that really what you think "we" think? I think jets are great, my complaint is that they have no reliable counter on the ground.

the sorely missed fact here is that this is a game and in games you must have some semblence of balance for all parties to have a similar shot at fun.

Should I be able to shoot down your jet with my MP5? No, dont be ridiculous. Should it take 3 giant bombs to kill a soldier running across a field? no.... of course not.

Should AA be a serious consideration for jet-jockeys rather than a minor annoyance? Yes.

Zipp0r, if your in-game name is Zipp0r then you have something like 52,000 kills and 31,000 of them came in aircraft... you are just as biased in this situation as you percieve myself to be. You are not a bastian of fairness, you are a fly-boy who doesnt want his toy to get any weaker.

No doubt you are a skilled pilot, its clear from your stats... so dont get it twisted and think im railing on your skills... Im saying that the AA solution is a piece of crap in this game, and so far 60-70% of the people who voted in this poll agree with me...



wait wait, I can see it from here...... they all suck, right?

Re: Are aircraft out of balance?

This seems to be a topic for several people..it may be stronger but I suppose it does suck that us talking about it wont do anything......

Re: Are aircraft out of balance?

i'd say a good 60-70% will hit and they will follow you no matter what turns you do

Bull. You can outturn S2A. I've had it done "Millions Upon Millions" of times against me. Granted, I'm not as lucky as some; yet I've watched as a pilot completely neglects flares and goes untouched by my Anti-Air missiles.

althought in that 30-40% you can pull a few moves and it luckily misses, but its rare.

Play a round of Wake. Fly at the Carrier and stafe along it's side with a Jet. Now, if one of the carriers Anti-Air guns was to unload a missile payload on you "WITHOUT" flares and you're moving at that angle odds are only 2 missiles out of the entire payload will hit you.

...now, if you factor in flares, maybe 1 missile out of the entire payload will hit you.

Which says a lot. It says that Jets moving at certain angles in conjucntion to the Anti-Air that's being aimed at that run a very low risk of getting hit. So, a reasonable A.A. gunner, such as myself, knows to only fire at Jets come at me, or away from me.

Now... a Jet coming "AT" me is probably going to take out the site with out without a indicator. He knows the danger of having a bit of life loss, and he would prefer not to risk it. So, the timeframe for engagements in that instance is almost none.

Ok, so what about a Jet flying away? Easy prey right? No. Flares. Not saying anything wrong with the concept of them but they are the saving grace for a Jet when he's flying at the only angle were he can be engaged with a reasonably high success rate. So, you fire a missile at him, he either has to drop flares or run the risk of being torn out of the sky.

...yet, after he drops flares you won't get a second shot from even a semi-aware pilote. He will strafe you at your Statics weak spot, with or without you on it, and he will give you some cannon love that even satan would call perverted.

so you can dodge a missile by getting out of the locking distance?

Yes, take up my carrier example and you will see exactly what I'm talking about. Granted, you can argue, "The missile just missed you, you didn't dodge anything" until you're blue in the face; dun' care. I consider a missile that doesn't hit me, and is aimed at me, to be a dodged missile.

no you got out of range before/as it was fired, the tone means youve been locked onto as well as a missle chasing you.

...ok. I know this. Your point?

you didnt dodge anything.

Wait, you with your paragraph of assumptions and such are going to tell me I haven't dodged a missile before or that it's impossible to dodge a missile? You're kidding right? This isn't 1.2 mah' man, if missiles still couldn't be dodged don't you think the outcry from the Airborne community would be kinda', you know... LOUD?

I don't wanna' base my arguement off of outside factors though. So, go play a round of any map you choose, fly straight over an Anti-Air site and see if you're touched. It's the same concept as when a Helo "Tunnels" around a static site. If he's at the right distance the missiles cannot correctly compensate for his movements and he's darn near untouchable. This is a common thing for the small island on Wake.

the difference between aa range and pilots radar range is very small, after you line up and start shooting the aa is able to shoot back.

Ok. What are the figures then? I know there is a difference, but what is that difference and why is it there when the missiles are not "overbuffed" as they were considered by many in 1.2?

I doubt the merit of your claim here. I think you're just spewing but I'm willing to have an open mind if you can give me some concrete facts as to the distance A.A. locks vs. the visial and effective range of a Jet's cannon fire.

i dont think so, if a player is good then he deserves the kills he gets in the plane. its a killathon for me yes, i'll go after everything, planes, choppers, boats, infantry, tanks e.t.c

Wait. So just because you're good in a Jet you should be "graced" with the path of killing anything in site with very little chance of being shot down?

...well, if that's the logic going around can I get my old M203 back for Assault? I mean, I got good with it so obviously I deserved all of the kills I was getting regardless if a majority of the community though it was overpowered.

maybe if you were better you could manage more than your average of 22kills per hour in a plane ? oh wait you play karkand all day like most other people that cant fly and complain on forums that planes are too easy. :laugh:

If you had even half of a brain, you would know I don't play Vanilla anymore. Thus', I don't have ranks. Catch me on PRMM anyday though, I'll force feed you some Air Combat there if you like.

...and instead of coming up with half-brained cheap shots. How about coming back with a worthwhile debate?

...it seems like I have to explain myself to you stat-junkies everytime I give a perspective.

{WP}Paas

Re: Are aircraft out of balance?

...from a ground perspective it gets very annoying. In the air, it's a free-kill-a'thon.

{WP}Paas

i dont think so, if a player is good then he deserves the kills he gets in the plane. its a killathon for me yes, i'll go after everything, planes, choppers, boats, infantry, tanks e.t.c

maybe if you were better you could manage more than your average of 22kills per hour in a plane ? oh wait you play karkand all day like most other people that cant fly and complain on forums that planes are too easy. :laugh:

Re: Are aircraft out of balance?

Hey lay off the jet jockey bashing!

http://bf2s.com/player/28362292/

In their defence as I've said there are a lot of players that do just want insta kill weapons then there are players that just want something a bit more potent than it is now. Thing is the two get merged then one side flames the other and then it just goes downhill from there.

Re: Are aircraft out of balance?

The same thing happens with Tanks in Karkand, they usually avoid each other and go for the raping of the troops. Ofcourse there will always be those people who are persistent and take down the tank with their tank. Same with jets. Some idiots will avoid each other, some will go after each other and nothing else, some inbetween. I've seen it happen in planes, choppers, tanks etc.. on various maps. Just one of those things really.

Now, factor in the ideal that in the Anti-Jet situation "JETS" are commonly known as the balancing factor in themselves.

For instance; many would say," Well, you need to get a good fighter pilot in order to stop the air rape!". Yet, the same doesn't apply for every other vehicle. A Tank doesn't need another Tank to destory it, hell, that isn't even factored into the "needs" on most maps. Same for APCs, Helos, everything; except Jets.

Now, when two Jets just avoid each other in favor of strafing rounds on the ground pounders for a good 15 minutes you run into a delima. The small balance factor that was in play is no longer in play so effectively all you have to take out a Jet is a short-locking Static Anti-Air, and the few and far between Mobile Anti-Air.

...from a ground perspective it gets very annoying. In the air, it's a free-kill-a'thon.

{WP}Paas