80 missile on a Mi24 is too much for this mission, agree?
Definitely do not agree. Those are UNguided missiles of either HE or AT variety which usually require the pilot to get close to the target in a not so nimble helicopter that is so vulnerable to even a basic stinger it's not funny. Seriously, one stinger hit and the MI-24's engine is gone.
Those 8 missiles on the American choppers pretty much equate to 8 confirmed kills from upwards of 3-4kms away.
The only reason I'd take the MI-24 over the AH-64 in game is due to my personal preference and extensive self training on how to use that particular vehicle to its maximum potential.
I don't know how many games you play without me, but when I'm playing I rarely see 'ownage' by tanks. I rarely see squads of tanks either, except perhaps if the AI has been ordered to build them. 1 shot tank killing weapons are plentiful and cheap enough.
Are you playing with your eyes closed? There's a reason the HF is now the number 1 priority building in every game. A tank, particularly on Takistan, is so lethal it's not funny, ignoring the fact that players are driving a main battle tank up a mountain that in real life would not even be remotely possible. Games on Takistan simply become a game of who can get access to tanks first so that players just drive to a hill top, push tab and kill with ease.
People **** about their tanks getting wiped out because they can't kill the enemy jets or choppers. Once they have countermeasures it's almost impossible to kill them if they stay up high. All tanks get is a few smoke grenades. East have a better chance with Tungs, but West are out of luck against KA52s or Hinds taking out masses of tanks with Hellfires.
Again, I barely ever see players using mobile AA and even though East get access to the Tunguska which is an incredibly powerful tool we also have the balancing parameter which adds the Sidewinder to the Linebacker to increase its punch.
Also bare in mind that the MI-24 is not as potent as you think. I consider myself an extremely good MI-24 pilot and I can tell you right now they're nowhere near as powerful as you think. One avenger and it's pretty much game over for the Crocodile. The P, which is the most effective varient of my beloved MI-24 only has 4 ATAKA which take 2 to kill a TUSK. Every other weapon on that vehicle requires you to perform a head on attack which, like you said yourself, usually results in the pilot being shot down by a SABOT.
Tanks are not cheap and few people can afford to go through them like underwear. It's the people that run around as an infantrymen with Jav or Metis are usually the ones first able to afford chopper or jet. You buy a Jav once, and keep it every time you respawn, but take out a T90 once and you earn 2500 bounty (approx). T90 kills you and gets about $63.
Tanks (and other HF vehicles, not just the MBTs) are definitely far far too cheap. Also, a T90 or M1 kill will net you at most 1.5k. Your point on players respawning at no cost with Metis is semi valid, but the latest version of the mission addresses this with gear respawn cost. Suddenly that Metis + KSVK or Javelin + M107 kit out isn't so cheap anymore with a cost of 1.5k alone for a full kit out every time the player dies.
This parameter also address the ambo spam issue of players hitting respawn to get more ammo for their AT weapon.
Besides, aircraft are priced according to their value and rarity on the modern battlefield yet in real life you'd be lucky to see a handful of tanks in an area the size of Cherno/Taki yet in game we see hundreds.
When I buy a chopper or jet in game I am most certainly not thinking "hey can I recoup the cost of this chopper by killing X amount of enemy?"
instead I'm using my asset to help my team by shutting down movement of enemy units and if I happen to make back the money via kills then good for me.
As for players running around with just their lone infantry man and ambo, the downside to this is the time it takes those players to cap towns. Besides, it's a sound plan for the team to have a player or two to be designated pilots who save their money for a plane so that when the time comes the team can have someone in the air making use of that powerful asset.
This match, hopefully will mostly be PvP, so taking out Resistance towns with a tank, etc is not very relevant.
See this is where people are getting confused. This mission is PvE with PvP elements thrown in. Taking out resistance towns not relevant? Can I have some of what you're smoking? If all you're after is pure PvP why bother even having the towns? Why not just start the game with the map 50/50 split with no resistance at all?
A team that takes towns quicker gets higher income quicker. A tank sitting on a hill will literally clear a town in 3-4 shots. I know because I've done it. I took a town with 2 HE rounds on Taki the other night.
A good commander can spend up to 10k on AA and AT pods which can hold off several tanks, and do nothing against artillery.
The best defense is a good offense. Your idea of a giant sim city fortress being fun is not so fun for everyone else.
I hate to say this, but all your posts seem to be complaints that the game is too hard and you want easier and easier ways to kill/win.
If I want easier ways to win I'd simply do what I used to do in the past, grab the starting ambo and hunt your base down in 15-05 minutes and rape you then and there.
What I want to see is a dynamic battlefield with players using reasonable and non-cheap tactics to fight for each town with a variety of vehicles, weapons and strategies that attempt to emulate a modern battlefield. Throw in a bit of asymmetrical warfare via ambushes and sniping and I'll be happy.
Instead what I'm seeing are games that pretty much progress along the same lines every time and it's becoming incredibly stale incredibly fast.