Welcome to symthic forums! We would love if you'd register!
You don't have to be expert in bit baking, everyone is more than welcome to join our community.

You are not logged in.

## "Tank Hunter" Attack Plane

Hey! If this is your first visit on symthic.com, also check out our weapon damage charts.
Currently we have charts for Battlefield 3, Call of Duty: Black Ops 2, Medal of Honor: Warfighter and Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3

Posts: 3,080

Date of registration
: Apr 26th 2013

Platform: PS4

Location: Arizona, USA

Reputation modifier: 14

Sunday, December 18th 2016, 4:49pm

### "Tank Hunter" Attack Plane

Hello all, piloting in Battlefield 1 is the most diverse and enjoyable as it has ever been and I'd like to discuss the "Tank Hunter" version of the Attack Plane, specifically the practicality of its implementation in game. In comparison to the default 20mm cannon and 10kg bombs that arrive with the standard Attack Plane, the Tank Hunter requires more skill and finesse to successfully operate (which I believe we can all agree on), but proves to be far more rewarding in terms of anti-vehicular capabilities (as it well should). However, is the current skill gap too wide for it to be a relaible option rendering it a subsidary to the default Attack Plane?

Personally I cannot determine if this is indeed the case and, while a subjective observation, I have noticed that Tank Hunter pilots are a rarity even on armor heavy Conquest maps, Sinai Desert immediately springs to mind. Now does lack of use imply that the Tank Hunter Attack Plane should receive an upgrade in some manner? Whether it be an increase to the 350m/s velocity to the 37mm cannon, a reduction to the 6m/s^2 gravity value, or an improvement to the overall damage against heavily armored vehicles? Or, alternatively, does it perform well as is?
To Aim Assist or not to Aim Assist, that is the question.
For 'skill cannons,' that is.

Nope, Aim Assist or bust.

the Sebstalder is quiet good since it can 3hit kill at any distanc ,but In my opinion i actually thikn the sweeper is better, its got a really really fast firerate that can beat alll those Noobmaticos, Helregall adn shitguns in close quarters , and its also really accurate out to like l;ong range,. overall great allround gun, jsut my 2$tho Up and down. Bounce all around Posts: 3,093 Date of registration : Apr 15th 2013 Platform: PC Location: Sweden Battlelog: Reputation modifier: 14 Sunday, December 18th 2016, 5:17pm The answer as to why it isn't as popular as the standard attack plane is simple: it can't farm infantry as well. That is the main reason at least. The higher skill floor is another reason. The tank hunter is fun, but a lot harder to use than the other options. The cannon's low velocity and high drop makes it hard to use at long range, limiting the amount of shots you can get on target in a strafe and making it very awkward and hard to use against aircraft that aren't piloted by morons. The payoff of landing a hit on a plane isn't great either, only something like 35 damage on attack planes from the top of my head and similar damage to the other planes. You are far more reliant on the secondary seat in the tank hunter than in other planes. I think the tank hunter plane is in a pretty good spot, balance wise, but it could use a small buff, either to ease of use (velocity, drop or splash against vehicles) or reward (damage or ROF). The risk/reward ratio of it is a bit too skewed right now, it could use a little nudge. Personally, I wouldn't mind it getting a small buff to its velocity, but we risk running into the BF4 AH situation where the tank hunter can outrange its counters. The safer thing to buff would probably be rate of fire, damage or splash, which would give a bit better reward for the "risk" put in. ### Things people said ### Quoted from "Pheo" And reading Youtube comments still gives me Turbo Cancer. ### Quoted from "NoctyrneSAGA" It really is quite frustrating when Helen Keller sets up her LMG in the only doorway in/out of an area. ### Quoted from "Watcher-45" What kind of question is that? Since when is cheese ever a bad idea? ### Quoted from "LeGarcon" Hardline is a fun and sometimes silly Cops and Robbers sorta thing and I think that's great. Or it would be if it didn't suck. Posts: 414 Date of registration : Mar 25th 2014 Platform: PC Battlelog: Reputation modifier: 6 Sunday, December 18th 2016, 6:02pm DICE rightfully balanced it looking at it was capable of in the beta. But more direct AT damage would be welcome. Nothing big, 10 to 20% more damage vs armor, landing more than one shot is quite difficult against vehicles in one strafe. RIP Sraw Posts: 3,080 Date of registration : Apr 26th 2013 Platform: PS4 Location: Arizona, USA Reputation modifier: 14 Sunday, December 18th 2016, 6:03pm ### Quoted from "C0llis" it can't farm infantry as well Agreed. And come to think of it, Sinai Desert, Empire's Edge, (50/50 split on St. Quentin Scar and Fao Fortress) and now Giant's Shadow are the only true "open" maps with aircraft at our disposal where the Tank Hunter would prove more viable. Theatres such as Ballroom Blitz, Monte Grappa, and potentially St. Quentin Scar and Fao Fortress tend to favor the standard Attack Plane ### Quoted from "C0llis" The payoff of landing a hit on a plane isn't great either, only something like 35 damage on attack planes from the top of my head and similar damage to the other planes. You are far more reliant on the secondary seat in the tank hunter than in other planes. Absolutely. The damage against enemy aircraft is rather weak for the precision required to actually make contact with a target. Before the damage reduction to gunner projectiles, quick switching to the rear machine gun was a reliable tactic to scare off enemy pilots or even outright shoot them down, but now even mediocre pilots on my tail output more damage than I can dish out to their engine and other components. ### Quoted from "Iwo_Jima" But more direct AT damage would be welcome. Nothing big, 10 to 20% more damage vs armor, landing more than one shot is quite difficult against vehicles in one strafe. The only issue I envision with a damage increase to the 37mm cannon is that coupling 3 direct hits with 2 precision bomb strikes already instakills a tank. Each shell inflicts 20 damage points and both 50kg bombs net 40 damage points, totaling 100 damage. The catch is that those bombs will need to land within 3m of the tank to cause maximum damage if I understand the data files correctly (it could just be for infantry though, direct impacts may be necessary to damage armor). So theoretically, a damage increase would be overkill, it's just that in practice 3 direct hits with the cannon with a perfect bombing run is largely unlikely. Therefore, a velocity increase, fire rate improvement, or gravity reduction would probably be the ideal choices. Yet, any improvement here may cause the cannon to be too effective against aircraft. It is a conundrum. To Aim Assist or not to Aim Assist, that is the question. For 'skill cannons,' that is. Nope, Aim Assist or bust. ### Prepare your laughbox ### Quoted from "Zer0Cod3x" the Sebstalder is quiet good since it can 3hit kill at any distanc ,but In my opinion i actually thikn the sweeper is better, its got a really really fast firerate that can beat alll those Noobmaticos, Helregall adn shitguns in close quarters , and its also really accurate out to like l;ong range,. overall great allround gun, jsut my 2$ tho

This post has been edited 3 times, last edit by "JSLICE20" (Dec 18th 2016, 6:28pm)

Posts: 1,590

Date of registration
: Jan 12th 2014

Platform: PC

Battlelog:

Reputation modifier: 13

Sunday, December 18th 2016, 6:46pm

I have yet to see anyone really take advantage of the TH plane's theoretical ability to solo tanks. It takes way too long and it's way too fiddly to accurately deploy all of the shots and bombs you need for a killing blow.

It certainly shouldn't be buffed to BF3 levels of anti-vehicle derping that the jets had, but it needs a bit of loving.

The default attack plane and especially the bomber (which costs the same slot) can meaningfully influence flag flips mostly by farming infantry on radius, but that's a very important role. The TH plane doesn't really have that capability and there are better options for anti tank like the barrage bomber and the torp bomber if you need to do it by air.

Holy War? No Thanks.

Posts: 2,408

Date of registration
: Jul 25th 2013

Platform: PC

Battlelog:

Reputation modifier: 13

Sunday, December 18th 2016, 7:51pm

Yeah I do not know how often you would see it, if you play vehicles only, but I doubt it is used at all. I hope Battlefield tracker gets hands onto the various loadouts used, so that we can see which one's are overly popular.

C0llis is right though, the Tank Hunter isn unrewarding in what really matters to most people: Easy kills. I guess though if you are really good, you could rack up some serious points with destroying all these vehicles.

Posts: 32

Date of registration
: Aug 11th 2014

Platform: PC

Location: France

Battlelog:

Reputation modifier: 5

Sunday, December 18th 2016, 8:19pm

I think the main issue with that loadout is how difficult it is to land 2 shots in one strafe before unloading your bombs on target. Maybe tweak the main gun's velocity and/or gravity ? Otherwise it is indeed quite specialized and thus would still be less frequent that the regular Attack Plane, even with a buff.

Posts: 3,080

Date of registration
: Apr 26th 2013

Platform: PS4

Location: Arizona, USA

Reputation modifier: 14

Monday, December 19th 2016, 7:28pm

It is clear why the stock Attack Plane is favored in terms of anti-infanty firepower and even anti-aircraft capabilities, but the Tank Hunter, for its specialized role at dishing out heavy damage to armor, does not perform at the level of anti-tank prowess as the traditional Attack Plane does in regards to infantry.

In other words, the Attack Plane is more efficient at its role of eliminating infantry than the Tank Hunter version is at eliminating tanks. As the Tank Hunter one would expect that the Tank Hunter be excellent at destroying tanks. Currently, it isn't. Just like how the default Attack Plane lacks the necessary firepower to inflict heavy damage to armor, so does the Tank Hunter lack the necessary firepower to inflict heavy damage to infantry (in this case multiple infantry in quick succession, since that is the Attack Plane's specialty).

The goal is not to create an equilibrium between how frequent these versions are utilized, but one in terms of their roles identical to how the relationship of classes operate. Assault is the optimal anti-vehicle option while Support is the optimal anti-infanty option (based on average ranges and volume of bullets available in their arsenal). So must the relationship be between the different variations of planes and tanks included.
To Aim Assist or not to Aim Assist, that is the question.
For 'skill cannons,' that is.

Nope, Aim Assist or bust.