Aircraft Flares

[Zulthus]

I've noticed a lot of people talking about the flares on aircraft, and whether the universal launcher will have the same reload time as the refresh on the flares.

I propose a fix to this.

For those of you who haven't played ARMA, they have a flare system where you start with a set amount (let's say 30) and they have a chance of warding off enemy missiles. The more you use, the more likely you are to survive.

ARMA 2 OA : Popping Flares - YouTube

The system would work something like that. Obviously, you can't have a large amount of flares to where you can just keep spamming them, but I'd say 30-50 would be a good amount per aircraft.

This way, your missile still has a chance to hit the aircraft. It also prevents the badly implemented faster refresh of flares compared to AA launchers. It's fair for both sides... the aircraft's flares don't recharge but there isn't a delay on using them, and the infantry still has a chance of hitting the target.

Thoughts?

[Stardouser]

Another possible thing, that's not realistic but would prevent overpowered aircraft, is if flares will only break the lock of a certain number of AA launchers. ie, if flares will break a max of 3 locks, and 4 guys are firing at you, 1 is guaranteed to get through.

But I'm not sure why we should worry about balancing it properly, people want AA infantry to own aircraft on a 1 to 1 basis...

[Toppopia]

I've noticed a lot of people talking about the flares on aircraft, and whether the universal launcher will have the same reload time as the refresh on the flares.

I propose a fix to this.

For those of you who haven't played ARMA, they have a flare system where you start with a set amount (let's say 30) and they have a chance of warding off enemy missiles. The more you use, the more likely you are to survive.


The system would work something like that. Obviously, you can't have a large amount of flares to where you can just keep spamming them, but I'd say 30-50 would be a good amount per aircraft.

This way, your missile still has a chance to hit the aircraft. It also prevents the badly implemented faster refresh of flares compared to AA launchers. It's fair for both sides... the aircraft's flares don't recharge but there isn't a delay on using them, and the infantry still has a chance of hitting the target.

Thoughts?

Only if... They look like this

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/4f/C-130_Hercules_10.jpg

Imagine at night time seeing a galaxy or something looking like that. Amazing!!

[Purple]

i have played a game like to this. it is a great system. you can risk the missles getting very close but that often dident work well.

[Zulthus]

Only if... They look like this

Imagine at night time seeing a galaxy or something looking like that. Amazing!!

That's pretty much the idea. The galaxy would obviously have flares more like that because it's a bigger aircraft and needs more protection against missiles. Man, that would be amazing at night...

[Freevoi]

Only if... They look like this

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/4f/C-130_Hercules_10.jpg

Imagine at night time seeing a galaxy or something looking like that. Amazing!!

i second this motion. could be possible aswell

[FastAndFree]

I'm not sure this is a good idea given how easy it is to resupply an aircraft

I could just keep spamming flares during my attack run and never be harmed by missiles, the only downside being that I would need to fly back to an air tower/Sunderer more often

[Zulthus]

I'm not sure this is a good idea given how easy it is to resupply an aircraft

That's the little problem here. I can't really think of a solution... it wouldn't be fair to the pilots to not be able to resupply, but it wouldn't be fair to the infantry if they just have unlimited flares...

Maybe they could cost a small amount of resources after you use the ones that came with the aircraft?

[Toppopia]

I'm not sure this is a good idea given how easy it is to resupply an aircraft

I could just keep spamming flares during my attack run and never be harmed by missiles, the only downside being that I would need to fly back to an air tower/Sunderer more often

Which means you are out of the fight for a longer time so the infantry has done his job, keeping aircraft away from the battle. So that is not over powered, its just you not being careful with your limited resources and you could last much longer if you paced yourself but you chose to be spammy with them and are no more useless in the fight. So problem solved.

[Purple]

That's the little problem here. I can't really think of a solution... it wouldn't be fair to the pilots to not be able to resupply, but it wouldn't be fair to the infantry if they just have unlimited flares...

Maybe they could cost a small amount of resources after you use the ones that came with the aircraft?

and its unfair to the pilots that infantry can run back and grab more missiles! besides things like turrets and the TR max will teal aircraft apart.

[Zulthus]

Which means you are out of the fight for a longer time so the infantry has done his job, keeping aircraft away from the battle. So that is not over powered, its just you not being careful with your limited resources and you could last much longer if you paced yourself but you chose to be spammy with them and are no more useless in the fight. So problem solved.

This actually makes sense. You don't necessarily need to destroy the aircraft with ground AA, just keep him on his toes. Let your team's aircraft take them out. Infantry will just be good for keeping them away and being annoying.

[captainkapautz]

Meh, as long as Scythe and Mosquito, no idea about Reaver, can out run the missile under full burner I'd rather have aircraft randomly explode whenever they drop flares or activate afterburner.
Small chance, like 40-50%, higher if you do both flares and burner at the same time, like 90%.

[Biscuit]

want to add that flares should be most effective if the aircraft is in a good amount of speed vs. a hovering aircraft.

[Toppopia]

Or make it so flares are only effective if missiles approach from behind, for some reason World in Conflict (RTS) did this with helicopters, even though the flares worked in all directions it said in the description. (Flares divert incoming missiles. Only effective against missiles approaching from behind) So maybe add a higher chance of avoidance if missiles come from behind, since flares are more of a retreating tool. so that would be good.

[Stardouser]

How about if flares have to be combined with movement? ie, not just magically make the missile break lock with flares alone? That way, firing a guided missile at aircraft will make it turn away from wherever it was going.

[Hypevosa]

Here's how I feel it should work.

Pilots have a switch. Said switch has 2 settings - chaff and flares.

People using missile launchers have 3 options, heat seeking, radar guided, laser guided.

When the pilot receives the warning they've incoming missiles, they'll need to read the HUD to note if it's a Radar or an infrared lock. Chaff will cause the Radar guided missiles to fly off target, and the Flares will cause the heat seeking missiles to fly off target, as in real life. This is 100% effective though, but now any time you have a group of soldiers using different rocket launchers to assault the same bird, that squad will be better off as long as the pilot doesn't have a good wingman who can help cover the other type of countermeasure.

The third option puts the kill strictly in the hands of the operator. The laser guided missile requires you keep the laser painting the target. If you're not painting something, the missile just flies straight like a dumbfire rocket, and if it can't see the laser, it won't hit that target. So now you have to keep the laser on the fast moving fighter plane of you want the missile to hit. Assuming the thing doesn't have the best zoom in the world, this would actually be a feat of considerable skill.

Problem solved.

[DayOne]

This is not something I've thought about but something that would make a major impact on the game.

I'm all for limited flares but I hope bigger craft have more flares. Also different types/level of flares. Basic flares work as mentioned in Hypevosa's post but with higher levels you get more advanced flares that cover all types of lock, but these take up more room and so you get less.

Still, won't stop you getting ripped apart by MAX flak ;)

[ArmedZealot]

The flairs would only matter if aircraft couldn't already boost out of range and outpace most AA missiles.

Not to say that I don't want them. They would be pretty awesome to see if the devs do the visuals right, but their role is already taken.

[DayOne]

The flairs would only matter if aircraft couldn't already boost out of range and outpace most AA missiles.

Not to say that I don't want them. They would be pretty awesome to see if the devs do the visuals right, but their role is already taken.

Can they do this? Source?

Missiles are faster than aircraft. Also with the scale I imagine launchers would have a fairly long range on their lock.

[ArmedZealot]

Can they do this? Source?

Missiles are faster than aircraft. Also with the scale I imagine launchers would have a fairly long range on their lock.

Ever tried to take down a reaver that wasn't already on top of you with a starfire max?

[Toppopia]

Can they do this? Source?

Missiles are faster than aircraft. Also with the scale I imagine launchers would have a fairly long range on their lock.

In the TB night ops, the only aircraft that TB shot at were basically at the maximum range so its easy to escape from that far, but in close range i highly doubt the aircraft would have avoided him, unless they did some crazy manoeuvres or hid behind a building.

[captainkapautz]

Can they do this? Source?

Missiles are faster than aircraft. Also with the scale I imagine launchers would have a fairly long range on their lock.

Source is TBs first missile fired at a Scythe.

[ArmedZealot]

In the TB night ops, the only aircraft that TB shot at were basically at the maximum range so its easy to escape from that far, but in close range i highly doubt the aircraft would have avoided him, unless they did some crazy manoeuvres or hid behind a building.

At close range flairs wouldn't protect an aircraft from being hit anyways, unless missiles suddenly are able to fly backwards.

[Bromaxulon]

That's the little problem here. I can't really think of a solution... it wouldn't be fair to the pilots to not be able to resupply, but it wouldn't be fair to the infantry if they just have unlimited flares...

Maybe they could cost a small amount of resources after you use the ones that came with the aircraft?

You guys seem to forget that their are direct fire weapons that are designed to take down aircraft that completely ignore flares and other A.M.S.

Flare system only protects pilots from half the threats, this is not a problem and does not need to be modified or limited from what the current system is, which (i assume) is giving the pilot a limited number of flares with the ability to resupply them.

[Timealude]

I think the only aircraft that would need them are galaxies and maybe libs... the others could simply out run the missiles seeing as right now they have a limit of travel. Also If they were to add some sort of defense against AA for aircraft, you would at least in theroy be able to use it on a GG for obvious reasons. I honestly wouldnt even mind having a stealth side grade for a galaxy that would be active for a limited time...like say 10 seconds.

[lolroflroflcake]

Limited flares is a great idea it adds an more depth to role of pilot in the game, and you shouldn't be worried about pilots resupplying them. The only ones that will survive long enough to resupply will be the ones flying hit and run. Guys who try to hover around in aircraft will probably find themselves getting blown up despite the flares because they are giving up their primary mode of defense, speed.

[Toppopia]

If you are hovering and deploy flares, the flares take ages to fall, so the splash damage from the rocket will still damage you quite a bit in an aircraft.

[Sledgecrushr]

I want missiles with radar lock.

[Toppopia]

I want missiles with radar lock.

I can imagine pilots to avoid that flying roughly 10 metres above the ground. Imagine the dog fights. :eek:

[Zulthus]

You guys seem to forget that their are direct fire weapons that are designed to take down aircraft that completely ignore flares and other A.M.S.

Flare system only protects pilots from half the threats, this is not a problem and does not need to be modified or limited from what the current system is, which (i assume) is giving the pilot a limited number of flares with the ability to resupply them.

The current system is just like every generic flare system, recharging ones. (AFAIK)

If you got to choose between flares that recharge at the rate of which an AA missile is reloaded or a limited amount of rapid fire flares, which one would you prefer?

[Toppopia]

The current system is just like every generic flare system, recharging ones. (AFAIK)

If you got to choose between flares that recharge at the rate of which an AA missile is reloaded or a limited amount of rapid fire flares, which one would you prefer?

Make a poll???

[Timealude]

How about making flares a side grade?

[Toppopia]

How about making flares a side grade?

Thats what they would be, choosing flares over some other defensive ability, like extra armor, and as long as our character says things like.

When you are being locked.
"We've got missile lock"
If you have flares equipped and use them.
"Launching flares"
Or.
"Flares away"

Little things like that that make your character not some mute who never talks. And adds a little extra 'something to gameplay' I'm mostly thinking of Modern Warfare 2 when you are assaulting the Gulag and the pilot says "Guns guns guns" when he starts firing.

Or Modern Warfare 3 when in the AC130 in Iron Lady, your character says "Shot Out!" Or someone remarks "Nice shot."

Something like that wouldn't help gameplay too much but will help immerse yourself better, and if you have passengers then they can hear you so it won't be completely useless.

[Timealude]

Thats what they would be, choosing flares over some other defensive ability, like extra armor, and as long as our character says things like.

When you are being locked.
"We've got missile lock"
If you have flares equipped and use them.
"Launching flares"
Or.
"Flares away"

Little things like that that make your character not some mute who never talks. And adds a little extra 'something to gameplay' I'm mostly thinking of Modern Warfare 2 when you are assaulting the Gulag and the pilot says "Guns guns guns" when he starts firing.

Or Modern Warfare 3 when in the AC130 in Iron Lady, your character says "Shot Out!" Or someone remarks "Nice shot."

Something like that wouldn't help gameplay too much but will help immerse yourself better, and if you have passengers then they can hear you so it won't be completely useless.

would also give them more of a reason to use an in game voice chat for inner vehicle com

[Toppopia]

would also give them more of a reason to use an in game voice chat for inner vehicle com

Hmm, I wonder if they will add a feature sort of like BF3, where gunner positions had their own counter measures for the aircraft, but i would rather a purely co-pilot role who handles all counter measures, since BF3 a jet being piloted by one person is stupid, do any of the aircraft in this have a co-pilot seat? Or are they all one seater? Because then co-pilots could activate counter measures while the pilot focuses on whats important. Killing as many people as possible.

[Khorneholio]

I'm a big fan of the flares as a limited resource but usable at will idea.

This adds a whole new layer to a pilot's defensive strategy. It also opens up a variety of attack plans for AA soldiers: Stationing an AA unit under the flight path that the enemy aircraft will take to their nearest resupply point, and hitting them after they've made their attack run and exhausted all their defenses... harassing enemy craft with missile after missile, knowing you aren't going to hit, just so you can open up a shot for your buddy once you've forced the enemy to waste all their countermeasures.

It adds to player options and tactics, and differentiates PS2 from the simple Missile-Flare system that other popular shooters use.

[Toppopia]

I'm a big fan of the flares as a limited resource but usable at will idea.

This adds a whole new layer to a pilot's defensive strategy. It also opens up a variety of attack plans for AA soldiers: Stationing an AA unit under the flight path that the enemy aircraft will take to their nearest resupply point, and hitting them after they've made their attack run and exhausted all their defenses... harassing enemy craft with missile after missile, knowing you aren't going to hit, just so you can open up a shot for your buddy once you've forced the enemy to waste all their countermeasures.

It adds to player options and tactics, and differentiates PS2 from the simple Missile-Flare system that other popular shooters use.

Like in BF3 me and my friends would take turns shooting the enemy jet so after it launched its flare, my friend would launch straight after so it didn't have time to use them again. But i would like limited flares. unlimited is asking for trouble.

[Timealude]

Hmm, I wonder if they will add a feature sort of like BF3, where gunner positions had their own counter measures for the aircraft, but i would rather a purely co-pilot role who handles all counter measures, since BF3 a jet being piloted by one person is stupid, do any of the aircraft in this have a co-pilot seat? Or are they all one seater? Because then co-pilots could activate counter measures while the pilot focuses on whats important. Killing as many people as possible.

Like I said before I think only galaxies and liberators should have it, just for the fact that they cant out run AA as well as the fighters. The galaxies and liberators are already set up for other people so it wouldnt much if any to the dev time to just add flares to one of the gunners.

[The Kush]

cooldown between flares but 30 is way too many 5 at most in my opinion


EDIT: Actually just have a cooldown, you can use a flare every x minutes depending on what balances the gae right

[Mechzz]

I want missiles with radar lock.

Higby has talked in the past about sidegrades being available for heat-seeking, radar-guided, laser-guided and video-guided. Superb!

[Zulthus]

cooldown between flares but 30 is way too many 5 at most in my opinion


EDIT: Actually just have a cooldown, you can use a flare every x minutes depending on what balances the gae right

The flare every x amount of time never really works. You either have the recharge too fast where the infantry can never take you down with their AA or it's too slow and the pilot has no chance of escaping.

On the 30 flares, I said that they only had a chance of working, they don't magically make the missile fly in a different direction every time. This would make the pilot use a set of them while flying away. The whole point of the idea is to make infantry more 'annoying' than 'deadly', not really being a threat to a pilot but still keeping them on their toes. They would have to resupply flares as well.

[Mechzz]

It adds to player options and tactics, and differentiates PS2 from the simple Missile-Flare system that other popular shooters use.

Perfect Khorneholio!

From now we should refer to CoD, Battlefield, etc. collectively as OPS (other popular shooters). It's not derogatory, but hopefully takes the sting from those who see them as the plague in modern guise.

Long live OPS ! (other video games are available)

[Mechzz]

The flare every x amount of time never really works. You either have the recharge too fast where the infantry can never take you down with their AA or it's too slow and the pilot has no chance of escaping.


Agreed. The pilot should have enough flares to fool X missiles and should be able to use them as quick as he wants.

My proposal for X = 5 for a basic plane with more available as the pilot upgrades his vehicle.

Galaxies should get more - maybe twice as much.

[Toppopia]

I think all aircraft should have it as a side grade, but smaller aircraft get it for the loss of some equipment like extra health or faster speed. Because we don't some aircraft having an advantage and some not, so all aircraft should have flares but at a sacrifice for an important function.

[Timealude]

I think all aircraft should have it as a side grade, but smaller aircraft get it for the loss of some equipment like extra health or faster speed. Because we don't some aircraft having an advantage and some not, so all aircraft should have flares but at a sacrifice for an important function.

The smaller aircraft already have advantages like more mobility and higher speeds. Im sure you have seen the newer ones in the TB video, and that phoenix rocket could barely hit those scythes. I understand where your coming from having all aircraft balanced but it would seem useless to have them on aircraft that already have the ability to dodge missiles.

[Toppopia]

The smaller aircraft already have advantages like more mobility and higher speeds. Im sure you have seen the newer ones in the TB video, and that phoenix rocket could barely hit those scythes. I understand where your coming from having all aircraft balanced but it would seem useless to have them on aircraft that already have the ability to dodge missiles.

I don't remember much from the video but you would only be shooting other aircraft at close range, so they shouldn't beable to out run at close range, but thats why adding flares should decrease speed, so you are choosing longer fight times or slower flight times.

[Mechzz]

I don't remember much from the video but you would only be shooting other aircraft at close range, so they shouldn't beable to out run at close range, but thats why adding flares should decrease speed, so you are choosing longer fight times or slower flight times.

My bold. Lol. In PS1 most times I was a grunt and got killed by an aircraft the range was less than 20 metres. Feckin' hover spammers :)

It'll be nice to have a weapon available to me to have some chance of discouraging that behaviour in pilots, flares or no flares.

[Timealude]

I don't remember much from the video but you would only be shooting other aircraft at close range, so they shouldn't beable to out run at close range, but thats why adding flares should decrease speed, so you are choosing longer fight times or slower flight times.

All aircraft vehicles in PS have afterburners (and from TB video it seems they will be in PS2 as well) and all you would have to do is if you had a lock warning (Which again i am just assuming) all you have to do is when you hear it you just have to punch the afterburners and it would run out of firing range. As a matter of fact, I can kinda see how flare could be abused by fighters as well. Take for instance, You are in a fighter and you go in for a ground strike run. You can fly in at top speed launch your flares while your launching missiles at your target(or chain guns) and then fly off without a starch. I know you could have it remove afterburners if you have flares but at the end of the day, I think people would rather after burns to get the hell out of there rather then having flares that would prevent only a certain number of rockets from hitting you.

[Mechzz]

One of the options Higby mentioned a while back was that missiles would have video-homing. So unless the flares include the ability to project a huge jug of beer onto my sights to distract me, the Reaver/Mossy will still need its afterburners to get away from me :)

http://i.imgur.com/NJtyo.jpg

[SixShooter]

I'm not sure this is a good idea given how easy it is to resupply an aircraft

I could just keep spamming flares during my attack run and never be harmed by missiles, the only downside being that I would need to fly back to an air tower/Sunderer more often

This is why I love that the lightning and MBT's will be able to spec with AA flak guns. I don't like using lock in weapons for that exact reason. It's too easy to loose a lock due to flares or just loosing line of sight or whatever. The skyguard was one of favorite vehicle to gun when we were running armor columns.

[Hypevosa]

So why not have heat seaking (countered by flares) and radar guided (countered by chaff) and put it on the pilot to switch between them. This way groups of soldiers are rewarded for coordinating different launcher types, and pilots running with at least 1 other partner are also rewarded.

Adding a laser guided option to allow the skill of the infantry man to determine the outcome by forcing them to keep painting the target would also be an option.

[Bromaxulon]

The current system is just like every generic flare system, recharging ones. (AFAIK)

If you got to choose between flares that recharge at the rate of which an AA missile is reloaded or a limited amount of rapid fire flares, which one would you prefer?

In TBs. vid it showed flares and a number indicating remaining uses. I assume you can run out of flares and would then need to go resupply, BF used a recharging system, but PS has increased scale and actual logistics rolls for people to fill so recharging flares don't seem like a good fit, while resupply at bus's or air terms seems to fit more with the oa style.

[Novacane]

If radar guided anti-aircraft missiles are going to be used along side IR guided ones, you need a detector so you know what type of missile is being launched at you.

http://www.scribd.com/doc/69703675/10/A-10-Radar-Warning-Receiver

This thread is probably getting a bit out of the realm of what PS can do haha

[Hypevosa]

It really wouldn't be THAT hard. Any basic bird in future should have the same basic systems we have now, if not more, for detecting missile locks, and for deploying counter measures (Flares and chaff). You just let the pilot know what kind of lock it is based on what lights up in their HUD or console, and then they need to deploy the right counter measure to shake it. You shouldn't have infinite stores of the stuff, but a decent number of flares and chaff none the less. Reward working as a team by having squads of mixed heat and radar missile launchers have a higher chance of success, and by having fighter pilots who aren't lone wolves also benefit from eachother's counter measures. Deploying a flare will divert all heat seeking missiles within X meters, and deploying a chaff will divert all radar guided missiles within X meters.

[Mechzz]

Flares, chaff, pah! I'll still be coming after the air jockeys with my side-graded video-homing warheads.

[Hypevosa]

Flares, chaff, pah! I'll still be coming after the air jockeys with my side-graded video-homing warheads.

Do those have a distance limit on them then? Or are they really high speed making misses mean a big turn around?

[Mechzz]

Do those have a distance limit on them then? Or are they really high speed making misses mean a big turn around?

I assume it'll be the same range and speed as the other missiles. Just unjammable is all. No second chances after a miss, etc.

[Mechzz]

Any mention of air to ground missiles? Not the dumb unguided rockets but something like a Hellfire? I mean if they are talking about having ground vehicles with an entire array of surface to air options, seems a balance needs to be made and have those in the other direction as well.

I haven't seen air to ground mentioned at all in this regard. Seems a reasonable request though. I had certainly assumed that air to air missiles would be lock on of some sort.

[Timealude]

Any mention of air to ground missiles? Not the dumb unguided rockets but something like a Hellfire? I mean if they are talking about having ground vehicles with an entire array of surface to air options, seems a balance needs to be made and have those in the other direction as well.

be careful what you say, haha if they give that sort of power to air all the peeps are gonna go back to the thread about weather aircraft are OP or not. :rolleyes:

[Novacane]

A couple guided air-to-ground missiles would be nice. Have them lock just like the ground based ones to. Would be based on the pilots skill to hold the craft steady on the target to acquire and hold the lock before launch but have them do a decent amount of damage on a good hit. Then if you wanted to have a counter, have an unlock to allow vehicles to get a degree of counter to the system, either from the missile tracking or the lock itself.

[Toppopia]

Any mention of air to ground missiles? Not the dumb unguided rockets but something like a Hellfire? I mean if they are talking about having ground vehicles with an entire array of surface to air options, seems a balance needs to be made and have those in the other direction as well.

I hope they add those, awesome times in BF3, flying my jet with faster locking missiles and anti ground missile, would disable the tanks or vehicles every time. Unless i had a good run up though i would never destroy them. But still denied the enemy a vehicle.

[Stew]

No arma stuff as possible on Planetside 2 ! Arma is a simulation game planetside 2 is not and i would like to avoid to have a BAD mixture of realisme and arcade gameplay Like what they did with Battlefield 3 !

BF3 is a good game but the mix of realisme and arcade gameplay make it furstrating and anoying in many situations !

To fix this very issue the aircraft VS flares u must have rocket klaunchers with NO cool down and flares with a certain amont of eithers amo and flares but been able to spam them isnt a good idea !

But the way to fix this is NO autoguided missiles so the flares will be almost useless and un use it fix the problem for me !

The rocket launcher from PS2 are suposed to be a MIX of a AT4 rocket and a javelin in fact the missile isnt autoguided you can lock the target but u actually have to aim constently at ur target to hit it !

[Pyreal]

This idea places those factions whos AA MAX units use lock on mechanic at a definite disadvantage, and solely favors the faction that uses flak.

[Zulthus]

This idea places those factions whos AA MAX units use lock on mechanic at a definite disadvantage, and solely favors the faction that uses flak.

It already is that way with the current recharging flares.

[Xyntech]

This idea places those factions whos AA MAX units use lock on mechanic at a definite disadvantage, and solely favors the faction that uses flak.

We don't even know what the NC and VS AA MAXes fire in PS2. Considering that the only VS anti-vehicle weapon we have thus far seen is a lock-on weapon, as opposed to the Lancers direct fire from the first game, I think it would be unwise to assume that the Starfire and Sparrow are the same as they were in the first game.

They may still be the same, but we don't really know one way or another as of yet.

[Duddy]

I'm pretty sure it's been stated, or at the very least implied, that all MAXes will use Flak provided by Nanite Systems. The only empire specific weapons will be AI/AV for MAXes. Furthermore I'm almost certain that all MAXes use both arms for mounting weapons, allowing for mixing the weapons.

Unfortunately I can't link you the source but, unless I am mistaken, it was said around the same time that the pictures of the MAX mounted flame-throwers were released.

[Kipper]

Flares shouldn't automatically break a lock, they should be used in conjunction with evasive action. Clever missile is clever, if it's locked onto a heat source, you don't just drop another heat source and make it change its mind while still heading in the same direction at the same speed, you should have to give it a choice and hope it picks the right/wrong one (depending on your point of view!).

Ground AA shouldn't be a guaranteed kill on an aircraft flown correctly, but it should be a guaranteed pain in the backside, and more often than not, put them off their aim or keep them out of an area. Of course, if you hover/linger/fly low & slow or any other bad things, you should expect death....

[Hypevosa]

flares should automatically break a lock, and I'll tell you why:

It means squads of soldiers coordinating their efforts will kill vehicles, not lone wolves.

If you have flares always break a lock, that means communication within the squad, such that they fire their rockets at different intervals, will give the group of players that are actually working as a team the satisfaction of taking down the aircraft. Otherwise you're just rewarding the guy randomly running around the field with his rocket launcher instead.

[Ale]

The only thing that matters in terms of aircraft countermeasures is that in a 1v1 dogfight, flares/chaff cancel out a2a missles by having a shorter cooldown than the missles refire rate, forcing the fight to be guns only.

But, a2a missles should have a shorter cooldown when locking on the rear of an enemy aircraft. This means pilots who chose to use them to would have to fly for position, then achieve lock.

The best countermeasure to triple A fire is masking with terrain or simply egressing. Giving pilots the power to shed locks for a sustained period and stay low and local is dangerous to your average footzerging pleeb.

[Ceska]

I'm pretty sure it's been stated, or at the very least implied, that all MAXes will use Flak provided by Nanite Systems.

I would really want to see that. I highly doubt it. AA TR Max already had Flak in PS1, and it was the only one (NC and VS had lock on weapons).

[Toppopia]

I would really want to see that. I highly doubt it. AA TR Max already had Flak in PS1, and it was the only one (NC and VS had lock on weapons).

It would be severly unbalanced if 1 faction had free fire AA weapons while everyone else was forced to have lock on, i think the devs have quite a few different weapons for different scenarios.

[Talek Krell]

You all recall that one of the first things said in the video was that the Scythe's maneuverability isn't balanced, right? Hell, missiles may not even deal damage yet and people are still making sweeping generalizations about the state of affairs in a game they've never touched.


I'm pretty sure it's been stated, or at the very least implied, that all MAXes will use Flak provided by Nanite Systems.I think it was part of one of the news releases on the PS2 site? Regardless, I remember the same thing. Empire specific AI and AV, common pool flak.


Little things like that that make your character not some mute who never talks.I prefer it when my character doesn't put words in my mouth. Especially when talking to himself. If I want to say something I'll say it, that's what macros and voice comms are for.