F-35b Vs J-10... Please Fix!

[Chris_Redfield]

Re: F-35b Vs J-10... Please Fix!

Ok... now reread my post. What I said is that it shoudn't be THAT MUCH SLOWER, not superior.

You do know that the F15 is an air superiority fighter faster than both the J-10 and MiG-29 in r/l?

Who said anything about basing my post on your last one?

Does "air superiority fighter" mean a "maneuverable, fast and electronically well-equipped" ATA capable fighter? I think common sense tells us, it would.

Do you know the main reason why MiG is able to fight F35B so easily? Apart from its superior turn speed, the MiG is slower than the JSF, so when the F35B pilot decides to use multiple maneuvers to escape, the MiG is left behind, far enough so he can see all your maneuvers and just zoon through them in straight line, while keeping a solid lock all the time. Faster speed in BF2 doesnt automatically mean a jet would be better.

I wasn't trying to redicule him in any way (more likely the other way round), that's why I used those nice smilies.

Then why post it? He had a point, he wanted to make it clear. Ones a dedicated bomber with 5 bombs and a gunners LGMs as primary weapons, making it a ATS focused jet PRIMARILY. Other is a 6 missile equipped maneuverable jet which main focus is to take down those well equipped ATS-focused jets, making them fighters. The bombs on the fighters are a little extra, and everyone knows that pilots should have skills to actually use them effectively (by effectively I mean, bomb armor with precision and whatnot). So why pick on something youre agreeing with, anyway?

And you do understand that this statement was done in connection to the "it has bombs, so it's a bomber" thing yes? What he wanted to say is that regular infantry units carry grenades aswell without being a grenadier, so I think he already knows that.

Which makes it again, an attempt to ridicule a statement he would agree with in basics. So why do it?

The disadvantage is already given due to less AA payload, so it would be nice to at least be able to get away in a dogfighting situation.

Shift in firepower and capabilities to have better characteristics in ATS capabilities, MUST have a negative effect on ATA capabilities. The logic in this is simple.

Your suggestion has "nothing" to do with "getting away". "Getting away" means better maneuverability, you want to bring bombers on par with fighters so they become great BOMBERS AND dogfighters? If you choose a bomber, you better know how to escape the fight, not start one. If you choose a fighter, you better know how to start a fight, not escape one (aswell as focus on ATA, not ATS), I dont see how this logic can be left unseen?

Ah dude, sorry, I forgot that it makes absolutely no difference in speed whether a jet is loaded with 6 AMRAAMs or 4 of them and an extra payload of GBUs... my bad really.

In terms of RL or BF2? It doesnt in BF2, but it does in RL. Even if a little, it still does. Mass and drag would be first two coming to my mind. In BF2 you have 4X4 (5?) LGMs, 5 bombs and 4 missiles, vs 6 missiles and 2 bombs. Again, difference is there.

Established fact is also that the F15 isnt that great in close-in dogfights, with F16 for example outperforming it. Its higher fuel load gives an edge because it can perform longer in a dogfight.

For the second time, all I was saying is that the F15 should be only a little bit slower than the MiG29 so you at least have a chance to get away

So, now we get from "more missile payload" to "a little bit slower"?

Do you want an engagement monster or a jet capable of breaking a dogfight? Because a skilled pilot CAN break a fight. One way to break a fight with a MiG is to get the MiG as close as possible and then create a series of multiple maneuvers (like in F35B case). Speaking of F35B...

F-15
Diameter of turn: 332ft
Time to do 360 turn: 8 Seconds
Maximum speed at 300ft: 1070
Maximum speed at 800ft: 1900
Maximum speed at 300ft with AB: 1270
Maximum speed at 800ft with AB: 2540
Time required to do a 360 turn using only
Yaw at 300ft: 22 Seconds
Time required to do a roll at 300ft: 3 Seconds
AB fuel: 13.5 Seconds

MiG-29
Diameter of turn: 275ft
Time to do 360 turn: 7 Seconds
Maximum speed at 300ft: 1110
Maximum speed at 800ft: 1870
Maximum speed at 300ft with AB: 1320
Maximum speed at 800ft with AB: 2720
Time required to do a 360 turn using only
Yaw at 300ft: 20.8 Seconds
Time required to do a roll at 300ft: 2.5 Seconds
AB fuel: 14 Seconds

F-35B
Diameter of turn: 328ft
Time to do 360 turn: 8 Seconds
Maximum speed at 300ft: 1160
Maximum speed at 800ft: 1880
Maximum speed at 300ft with AB: 1550
Maximum speed at 800ft with AB: 3260-3540
Time required to do a 360 turn using only
Yaw at 300ft: 18 Seconds
Time required to do a roll at 300ft: 1.75 Seconds
AB fuel: 10.2 Seconds

Compare the data. Youll see that by default, youve got the means to escape the fight in the F15. Against a great pilot it can be piss-hard, but seriously- if he has a better jet, and hes better than you are, why are you complaining?

(and no don't come with "skill" or anything... I hop into the MiG/F18 too from time to time and it's quite easy to get them for any half decent pilot.) It doesn't have to be easy to be balanced y'know.

But it has to be "easier" for the MiG to trail F15, than vice versa. F15 doesnt have to chase a MiG anyway because its not its purpose. If you want F15 to do the job of F18, then its insane. If F18 doesnt give you cover, thats BF2 for you, stats and no teamwork. And dont give me that "half decent" stuff, A half decent pilot wont chase down a decent pilot, so you must be less than decent to match the chasers less than decent pilot.

Assuming that you mean Cleansweep, yes you're right on that. So what exactly would be the problem if we had a slightly better F15?

If we would want to match the F15 to make it closer to Su-34, to make it have slightly better maneuvering characteristics, no problem. If we would want to make it a dogfighter, even though its a bomber, then we DO have a problem. F15 doesnt even have to engage the Su. Its got 4 missiles for a reason. Although I would only give them 2. You should fire upon opportunity and GTFO before youre being engaged. You have a worse plane than a fighter, its a clear sign that your job is to bomb and evade. Isnt it a simple concept to grasp?

3rd time, I'm not talking about making the F15 an allround gunship,
but to give it the possibility to ESCAPE, nothing more. thank you.

Right, more missile payload will really give a bonus in "escaping". If you want to talk about escaping, talk numbers. F15 escaping from a MiG depends largely on the pilot. If the MiG is manned with Mr Awesome, and youre Mr I-just-watched-Top-Gun, then its logical to assume that youre "fvcked"... because hes got the better plane, hes got the skills. You dont have either of those. Youre dead. Accept it. This wouldnt be the case with pre-1.2 missiles, but now we have missiles that hit, so it all depends on what youve got. And if your F18 fella is busy chasing stats... well... you get the point.

Btw the F18 isn't too capable because it's aswell inferior, so we have 2 inferior Jets facing AA guns too... great.

No its not. I find F18 to be actually superior to the MiG because you can take the F18 as an enhanced (although slower) version of the F35B which I have most experience with out of all the fighters. In loops, the MiG is only slightly superior. I can say that most pilots agree that MiG vs F18 is the closest match in the game, if we say the missiles would hit on equal basis.

Haha all I did was point out for you that Dice DIDN'T get the F15 right as the only plane as it is actually a fast one. Not sure how I was trying to be a smartass here? But yeah, may it be...

No, I dont mean in REAL LIFE terms. Im talking GAME WISE here. ONLY game wise. Thats my point. Its worse in maneuvering than all the fighters, excet for roll speed (arguably), its slower than most fighters in speed. Comparing it to Su-30 for example which I would class as a figher, because that sh!t is better than F35B, I say DICE did get F15 right, as they got the match with the concept "fighters>bombers". Id say the other 2 bombers are a little overpowered for their purpose. This isnt a big of a deal for maps where they face F18 though, but is a big deal when they face a F35B.

You want Real Life facts, great, but they have no place in "jet balance in BF2" type of threads.

Re: F-35b Vs J-10... Please Fix!

You can escape in the F15E. Its hitbox isnt as HUGE as the SMALLER F35, so you are ok

I actually meant escape in terms of maneuvering out of the lock but yeah, the easier alternative would be to just add some F35s which would make all missiles automatically lock onto them instead of the F15. :laugh:
But seriously, if you are facing a skilled MiG pilot, it's almost impossible to get away once he's spotted you. (while your F18 comrade is busy bombing something 'cause it's useless trying to chase the MiG anyway )

Re: F-35b Vs J-10... Please Fix!

You can escape in the F15E. Its hitbox isnt as HUGE as the SMALLER F35, so you are ok

Re: F-35b Vs J-10... Please Fix!

That is funny. Youre trying to point out that the F15 should be great in dogfighting because its an air superiority fighter in real life. The undeniable fact is that F15 in BF2 holds superior ATS power so it has to lose some in ATA to make it an easier prey for jets that specialize in ATA combat, still talking about Battlefield 2. Comparisions to real world is USELESS because its done so for the gameplay balance sake. Obvious point you just cant understand.

Ok... now reread my post. What I said is that it shoudn't be THAT MUCH SLOWER, not superior.

I KNEW IT! I knew you would jump at him for saying that. God youre so predictable that youre not even going to accept the point he made without trying to ridicule him. Look past the words and try to understand the concept, not play... what did you call me? Mr Smartass? Youre doing it right now!

I wasn't trying to redicule him in any way (more likely the other way round), that's why I used those nice smilies.

Lavadisk, you do understand that having grenades doesnt make you a grenadier in real life? For example in my countries military, grenades are a part of regular troops armament. And I believe its the same with US army aswell.

And you do understand that this statement was done in connection to the "it has bombs, so it's a bomber" thing yes? What he wanted to say is that regular infantry units carry grenades aswell without being a grenadier, so I think he already knows that.

If we compare the potential impact of a bomber in Battlefield 2, on the ground troops, a significant decrease in ATA combat capabilities is encouraged. Right now Su-34 is engaging F35B as if it was an equal match, to me, that is unacceptable.

The disadvantage is already given due to less AA payload, so it would be nice to at least be able to get away in a dogfighting situation.

What kind of nonsense is this? Payload weight has nothing to do with why it is what it is! Its balance in ATA/ATS performance for the sake of gameplay balance aimed towards both air and ground troops. Obviously if a jet can perform significant role against ground troops, jets performing less in that area should have an easier time combating that said jet. In other words, fighters, which have less of an impact on the ground should hunt jets that have huge impact on the ground, and they shouldnt have too much of a hard time doing so.

Ah dude, sorry, I forgot that it makes absolutely no difference in speed whether a jet is loaded with 6 AMRAAMs or 4 of them and an extra payload of GBUs... my bad really.
For the second time, all I was saying is that the F15 should be only a little bit slower than the MiG29 so you at least have a chance to get away (and no don't come with "skill" or anything... I hop into the MiG/F18 too from time to time and it's quite easy to get them for any half decent pilot.) It doesn't have to be easy to be balanced y'know.

As an example, in Oman, a Su-34 duo can stop ALL American armor in the start of the round with relative ease. OCS, while MiG chases the F18, Su can keep the waters clean! Because F15 isnt that good match against Su-34 in ATA. And so on.

Assuming that you mean Cleansweep, yes you're right on that. So what exactly would be the problem if we had a slightly better F15?

That is correct, F-15 shouldnt be doing ATA anyway, its his wingmans job. And F18 is more than capable of doing the work. And it isnt too much at all. If anything, I would like the bombers be a little more equal because the gap in turn capabilities between the three is astonishing. Since were not dealing with PvP ATA problems that much as we would with fighters, I think tweaking in armament to balance the inbalances in maneuvrability are in order.

3rd time, I'm not talking about making the F15 an allround gunship, but to give it the possibility to ESCAPE, nothing more. thank you.
Btw the F18 isn't too capable because it's aswell inferior, so we have 2 inferior Jets facing AA guns too... great.

And way to go, Mr Hypocrite, you called me Mr Smartass, while this whole silly argument wouldnt be happening if you didnt try to be one in the first place.

Haha all I did was point out for you that Dice DIDN'T get the F15 right as the only plane as it is actually a fast one. Not sure how I was trying to be a smartass here? But yeah, may it be...

[Chris_Redfield]

Re: F-35b Vs J-10... Please Fix!

Haha I didn't make an *** out of myself, I just made you look stupid cause you tried to mark the tough guy and if you wanna play like this, I'll play with you.
You didn't understand the whole point anyway, so no need to talk any further to you if you just keep on trying to be the smart***.

That is funny. Youre trying to point out that the F15 should be great in dogfighting because its an air superiority fighter in real life. The undeniable fact is that F15 in BF2 holds superior ATS power so it has to lose some in ATA to make it an easier prey for jets that specialize in ATA combat, still talking about Battlefield 2. Comparisions to real world is USELESS because its done so for the gameplay balance sake. Obvious point you just cant understand.

In Battlefield 2 terms, its a bomber, not a fighter. And way to go, Mr Hypocrite, you called me Mr Smartass, while this whole silly argument wouldnt be happening if you didnt try to be one in the first place.

Dude, I know it's in general BF2 lingo referred to as bomber, I just
wanted to play with mister smarty a bit.

You didnt play anything, except for being a moron.

[/quote]Btw using your description of a bomber... the J-10 would be one too...
Still... it's not a bomber actually [/quote]

I KNEW IT! I knew you would jump at him for saying that. God youre so predictable that youre not even going to accept the point he made without trying to ridicule him. Look past the words and try to understand the concept, not play... what did you call me? Mr Smartass? Youre doing it right now!

Lavadisk, you do understand that having grenades doesnt make you a grenadier in real life? For example in my countries military, grenades are a part of regular troops armament. And I believe its the same with US army aswell.

What my actual point was in the first place is that there is no reason to make the F15 THAT MUCH inferior to the "fighter" planes...

If we compare the potential impact of a bomber in Battlefield 2, on the ground troops, a significant decrease in ATA combat capabilities is encouraged. Right now Su-34 is engaging F35B as if it was an equal match, to me, that is unacceptable.

of course there has to be a slight performance loss due to the higher payload

What kind of nonsense is this? Payload weight has nothing to do with why it is what it is! Its balance in ATA/ATS performance for the sake of gameplay balance aimed towards both air and ground troops. Obviously if a jet can perform significant role against ground troops, jets performing less in that area should have an easier time combating that said jet. In other words, fighters, which have less of an impact on the ground should hunt jets that have huge impact on the ground, and they shouldnt have too much of a hard time doing so.

As an example, in Oman, a Su-34 duo can stop ALL American armor in the start of the round with relative ease. OCS, while MiG chases the F18, Su can keep the waters clean! Because F15 isnt that good match against Su-34 in ATA. And so on.

but imo it is a bit much now. (although this isn't such a real problem as the F15 primary targets in BF2 should be on the ground anyway)

That is correct, F-15 shouldnt be doing ATA anyway, its his wingmans job. And F18 is more than capable of doing the work. And it isnt too much at all. If anything, I would like the bombers be a little more equal because the gap in turn capabilities between the three is astonishing. Since were not dealing with PvP ATA problems that much as we would with fighters, I think tweaking in armament to balance the inbalances in maneuvrability are in order.

Re: F-35b Vs J-10... Please Fix!

nobody made an *** out of them selfs and vintageologist is right. and a fighter is a fighter. just cause it has bombs dosent make it a bomber and who cares about what its like in real life. just cause i have a few nades in my pocket in bf2 dosent make me a grenader, im and infantry troop. so the areo planes are jets. get it got it good.

What my actual point was in the first place is that there is no reason to make the F15 THAT MUCH inferior to the "fighter" planes... of course there has to be a slight performance loss due to the higher payload, but imo it is a bit much now. (although this isn't such a real problem as the F15 primary targets in BF2 should be on the ground anyway)

Re: F-35b Vs J-10... Please Fix!

Haha I didn't make an *** out of myself, I just made you look stupid cause you tried to mark the tough guy and if you wanna play like this, I'll play with you.
You didn't understand the whole point anyway, so no need to talk any further to you if you just keep on trying to be the smart***.


Dude, I know it's in general BF2 lingo referred to as bomber, I just wanted to play with mister smarty a bit.
Btw using your description of a bomber... the J-10 would be one too...
Still... it's not a bomber actually

nobody made an *** out of them selfs and vintageologist is right. and a fighter is a fighter. just cause it has bombs dosent make it a bomber and who cares about what its like in real life. just cause i have a few nades in my pocket in bf2 dosent make me a grenader, im and infantry troop. so the areo planes are jets. get it got it good.

Re: F-35b Vs J-10... Please Fix!

Listen, do you hear people say "ground attack fighter", "air superiority fighter", "attack plane" in Battlefield 2 OR do you hear people actually say "bomber"? Because I hear people say "bomber". I KNOW what a F15 is in real life, but Im not dragging that **** in here just to make myself look "smrat" and educated in real life... erm, yeah.

If its not a bomber in BF2, then what is it? You just said its used as a ground attack plane, which successfully makes it a bomber, right?

Youve successfully made an *** out of yourself, let this be an educational opportunity for you, that you shall not forget.

As for F15 made more maneuverable, its a friggin bomber, not a fighter (pun intended), if anything, the other jets should be toned down a bit. F15 is worst of all 3 bombers, and in the big picture it deserves that status because idealistically, bombers are less maneuverable, however, other 2 are a lot more maneverable AND they have better fighters, compared to the F35B.

In air force, USMC is inferior, in BF2. I wouldnt want DICE to touch the maneuverability (turn radius in particular), but if they would like to change something, agility would be great. Like F35B holds great roll speed, they could add such upgrade to the F15 aswell.

Haha I didn't make an *** out of myself, I just made you look stupid cause you tried to mark the tough guy and if you wanna play like this, I'll play with you.
You didn't understand the whole point anyway, so no need to talk any further to you if you just keep on trying to be the smart***.

THE f15e drops bombs
therefore it is a bomber
irrefutable logic

Dude, I know it's in general BF2 lingo referred to as bomber, I just wanted to play with mister smarty a bit.
Btw using your description of a bomber... the J-10 would be one too...
Still... it's not a bomber actually

Re: F-35b Vs J-10... Please Fix!

Haha it's used as ground attack plane in BF2 but it is never a bomber, the B2 is a bomber X-D Ok enough of that crap, still, the BF2 F15 should be at least bit more maneuverable...

THE f15e drops bombs
therefore it is a bomber
irrefutable logic

[Chris_Redfield]

Re: F-35b Vs J-10... Please Fix!

Haha it's used as ground attack plane in BF2 but it is never a bomber, the B2 is a bomber X-D Ok enough of that crap, still, the BF2 F15 should be at least bit more maneuverable...

Listen, do you hear people say "ground attack fighter", "air superiority fighter", "attack plane" in Battlefield 2 OR do you hear people actually say "bomber"? Because I hear people say "bomber". I KNOW what a F15 is in real life, but Im not dragging that **** in here just to make myself look "smrat" and educated in real life... erm, yeah.

If its not a bomber in BF2, then what is it? You just said its used as a ground attack plane, which successfully makes it a bomber, right?

Youve successfully made an *** out of yourself, let this be an educational opportunity for you, that you shall not forget.

As for F15 made more maneuverable, its a friggin bomber, not a fighter (pun intended), if anything, the other jets should be toned down a bit. F15 is worst of all 3 bombers, and in the big picture it deserves that status because idealistically, bombers are less maneuverable, however, other 2 are a lot more maneverable AND they have better fighters, compared to the F35B.

In air force, USMC is inferior, in BF2. I wouldnt want DICE to touch the maneuverability (turn radius in particular), but if they would like to change something, agility would be great. Like F35B holds great roll speed, they could add such upgrade to the F15 aswell.

Re: F-35b Vs J-10... Please Fix!

You do know that were talking about a GAME and in GAME TERMS the Su-30, Su-34, F-15 are BOMBERS and thus SLOWER, LESS MANEUVERABLE, WORSE in dogfighting terms than fighters, right? Right?

Dont teach a daddy how to date women, especially when youre a virgin. If you know what I mean.

Haha it's used as ground attack plane in BF2 but it is never a bomber, the B2 is a bomber X-D Ok enough of that crap, still, the BF2 F15 should be at least bit more maneuverable...

[Chris_Redfield]

Re: F-35b Vs J-10... Please Fix!

You do know that the F15 is an air superiority fighter faster than both the J-10 and MiG-29 in r/l?

You do know that were talking about a GAME and in GAME TERMS the Su-30, Su-34, F-15 are BOMBERS and thus SLOWER, LESS MANEUVERABLE, WORSE in dogfighting terms than fighters, right? Right?

Dont teach a daddy how to date women, especially when youre a virgin. If you know what I mean.

Re: F-35b Vs J-10... Please Fix!

Colony- F15 was probably the ONLY bomber that DICE got right :laugh: , its slow, it has a horrible turn radius, slow reaction et cetera.

You do know that the F15 is an air superiority fighter faster than both the J-10 and MiG-29 in r/l?

[Chris_Redfield]

Re: F-35b Vs J-10... Please Fix!

thats true but thats not balance. a normal 1 vs 1 should be equal.

By your logic, its 2 F35Bs vs 1 MiG should be 2:1 in win/lose ratio? I disagree.

The way I see it, F35B are multipurpose, so you give them a choice to excel at something and suck at other, or create a superbeast that excels at all.

It's only 2 F35s against one MiG at Gulf Of Oman. But yes, in that case you are right. And you are also right that it's not as extreme as with the J10, but still the F35 is always inferior and that sucks somehow.

Correct. F35B isnt a pure dogfighther though. They are excellent ATS planes with excellent gunning platform, very nice bomb spread and awesome reaction time to the controls. I wouldnt mind reducing its turn radius a bit, boost up that afterburner a little and increase roll speed. However, you have to accept that USMC has F18, as a pure dogfighter, with F15 as a pure bomber, where F35B is a mix of two. Therefore I really dont feel that sad for its poorer characteristics against pure fighters such as MiG and J10.

Youve got Zatar, with 2 MiGs starting up against 2 F35Bs, and almost all PLA maps with 2 fighters vs 2 fighters, with PLA ones vastly superior to the F35Bs. BUT, you also have the 2 Essex towers working for the F35B, so its somewhat balanced. Ive created a long post dealing with jets maneuvering balance in details with multiple solutions to the problem, in DICE feedback thread, go check it out.

As you noticed, Im not touching the obvious flaws and inbalancies in the missile locks, I leave that to DICE because that is a bug, a real problem, whereas the problems with jets can be overcome with skill, luck (LOL), some awareness and a lot of teamwork, so Id class them as secondary issues. Doesnt mean Im not aware that jets need to be balanced for the sake of gameplay enjoyment, however, most people dont see the bigger picture so vast majority of suggestions are plain wrong.

Colony- F15 was probably the ONLY bomber that DICE got right :laugh: , its slow, it has a horrible turn radius, slow reaction et cetera.


Have you guys noticed that USMC starts mostly at a disadvantage and has a lot more to lose in a map than other teams? Its as if the USMC team is for players one step above others, while the PLA and MEC are with a "handicap"?

Re: F-35b Vs J-10... Please Fix!

I see all these complaints about the F35, but no one says anything about the F15E?

The F15E feels like you are trying to fly a huge skyscraper around.

Every US jet is inferior to enemy jets in this game in turn radius by a huge margin