Higby on Air/AA balance.. Is it the fast track to Airside?

[Beerbeer]

Maybe just raising the cost to 400 would slightly help?

I know it's not much, but considering the force that can be brought to bear with one of these things, and how easy it is to run away, repair and quickly re-engage, I think it should cost more if nothing else changes.

[CasualCat]

Sure I have. These threads keep pooping up about how someone in a Sky guard lightning did not own the aircraft in less than a clip, Or that G2A Missiles with lock on did not one shot.

Its a complaint from the perspective of individualism, in a combined arms game.

And combined arms only applies one way right? :rolleyes: This has been beaten to death in this thread.

*ESF Jocks: "use teamwork & combined arms"
*Others: "ESF doesn't require combined arms to be effective and is multi-roled why should one trick pony require so much teamwork"
*ESF Jocks: "you're just whiners and want one hit kills" "you don't fly so you don't know"
rinse and repeat

*Occasional ESF pilot: "maybe something needs toned down/adjusted"
*Lib pilot: "why is my three person team oriented vehicle less effective at ground than three ESFs"
*crickets*

ETA:

I think AA works as a deterrence. The problem is that doesn't help people trying to level gain certs/XP. It isn't fun or rewarding so a lot of people won't do it.

I'll do that role because it is necessary sometimes. Doesn't mean I like it or that I'm not sacrificing certs to do so.

I think bursters are in the right spot damage wise, but they need to render further for aircraft. Right now you can't even see them or where the shots are coming from most times.

Perhaps the answer from the AA perspective is to give XP per hit against aircraft. Then deterrence at least has a pay out. Right now I don't see any of the AA (burster being the exception primarily because of render surprise) paying for themselves.

I don't think G2A missiles needs to do more damage.

Rockets/ESFs still need some other sort of adjustment though. I do think the AV/AI rocket pod variant might be viable. Keep the current rocket damage as the AV variant and remove splash. Make the AI variant have the current splash but much much less damage to vehicles.

Maybe even change ESF composite armor so it only impacts small arms fire and not flak.

[MrBloodworth]

And combined arms only applies one way right?

Nope.


*Lib pilot: "why is my three person team oriented vehicle less effective at ground than three ESFs"

Ridiculous.

[Rahabib]

make it so that 3 ESFs need to use "team work" and "skill" to kill one infantry.

[MrBloodworth]

make it so that 3 ESFs need to use "team work" and "skill" to kill one infantry.

Also, Ridiculous.

Everything is black and white to some of you isn't it?

[RobUK]

I do not believe I am, and have yet to be proven wrong.

It's not possible to "prove" that you're wrong though is it?

All anybody is doing is exchanging opinions. You have yours, others have theirs. It is not possible to prove or disprove whether people want to "one shot" aircraft.

I remember you from PS1. I thought you had more sense. Maybe my memory is failing me.

[CasualCat]

Also, Ridiculous.

Everything is black and white to some of you isn't it?

Just like this is really about ohk AA right? Pot meet kettle...

[MrBloodworth]

Every single one of thees threads are about people thinking the AA of choice should down an aircraft. Full stop. They are upset they are not getting the kill with the AA they picked up with no help from anyone else. They have it in their head that if they pick up an AA gun, it should kill the aircraft. Full stop.

Tell me I am wrong? Because anything other than that, is the way Planetside 2 plays right now in terms of non-air Anti-air.

Air is the main counter to air, Ground based AA is support and intended to be combined with other support fire. Don't be mad at me, because I cut to the chase.

[Chaff]

.....thread was a tiny bit more helpful when it had content......although "nah-nah-nah-nah-nah" ...., and sure....the; "I know more than you do" reparte is cetainly entertaining. It's also too damn expected here.

Being a solo Max against even one air vehicle does seem a little useless. It's not. Grab a bird and get up in the air more. AA flak from a max is a Deterrent. Yes, a Kill is ideal. Perspective is needed.

The other night I ran out of the top of a tower (with 4 air pads). There were 4 Maxes outside. Two with twin-Bursters, and two rookie Maxes with Burster/AI combos. I transported downstairs, put on my Engie overalls, came back up & fed them all ammo for 20 minutes. Those 4 guys had a field day. There was a min of 7 or 8 planes around the whole session, but as soon as one came too close, and all 4 maxes zeroed in...they were toast in seconds.

I got great satisfaction (and XP) from feeding them ammo & reparing their suits. That little strecth evenutally cleared ALL AIR from the area. They musta killed a dozen air (or more).

I hate to side with the profesional Air Jockeys on this subject, but the AA is probably pretty close to what it should be. Of course, not all parties can or will ever agree on what Balance is.
.

[Soothsayer]

If ground based AA is intended to be a deterrent there should be XP granted for every thirty second timeslice they are around where there are no enemy aircraft present in the sky.

[Dragonskin]

Perhaps the answer from the AA perspective is to give XP per hit against aircraft. Then deterrence at least has a pay out.

You do get exp for hitting the aircraft with a skyguard or burster if you do enough damage before it dies. The same with the AA rockets. If it doesn't die and repairs to full then dies later to someone else.. you don't get exp.

That is no different than a sniper shooting a person. That person runs off to heal or is healed to full by a medic and someone else comes along to kill the guy... the sniper won't get credit for the first hit because the dude either didn't die or he was healed to full before someone else killed him.

It happens a lot less when fighting infantry, but it's the same mechanic.

No one would be able to fly if 1 AA rocket killed something at full health. We saw that in Beta. Skyguard could possible stand to do more damage, but they still hit pretty hard and make you move unless you want to die. Bursters will straight out kill you if they surprise you while you are diving in to attack something else. Most ESF pilots will pop flares after a lock on... so lock on.. wait.. then fire if no flare because it's probably on cooldown.

I play both sides. I kill things with my Nemesis or at least damage them and get partial exp and I also fly a lot. There are tons of AA in the game to die to already. There are a lot of ESF that go A2A now. Lots of people have AA rockets. Everyone has access to 1 burster arm and a lot have 2 now. Skyguards exist, but they could probably be buffed.. I'm not going to lie.. if I know it's only a skyguard on me then it's not really a deterrent because I can usually move faster than they can track anyway. Dual bursters though.. they hit hard and fast.. way more effective than a skyguard.. so maybe that needs to be adjusted.

[MrBloodworth]

If ground based AA is intended to be a deterrent there should be XP granted for every thirty second timeslice they are around where there are no enemy aircraft present in the sky.


That's not exploitable at all. But I suppose we can all just ignore that assist, critical assist XP....

Because like, bicycles.

[CasualCat]

Every single one of thees threads are about people thinking the AA of choice should down an aircraft. Full stop. They are upset they are not getting the kill with the AA they picked up with no help from anyone else. They have it in their head that if they pick up an AA gun, it should kill the aircraft. Full stop.

Tell me I am wrong? Because anything other than that, is the way Planetside 2 plays right now in terms of non-air Anti-air.

Air is the main counter to air, Ground based AA is support and intended to be combined with other support fire. Don't be mad at me, because I cut to the chase.

Some are upset they aren't getting a kill. I don't think I've seen anyone suggest here and certainly not the majority (maybe on the official forums) that it should be a OHK. That is an exaggeration.

The big issue for many which is being ignored by some including you is there little to no payoff for being a deterrence. It doesn't even have to be a kill. If you're not even getting an assist though why shouldn't that person go do something else?

In the reverse the ESFs are very rewarding with lots of positive feedback and lots of power. Why are ESFs the only vehicle that get two weapon systems at their disposal for one seat? Everyone else has to make some sort of choice.

It is the one vehicle that the person drives and shoots with both guns and rockets/missiles at their disposal.

A person takes a skyguard and they're very vulnerable to everything including aircraft still.

A person takes a AP lightning and they're more vulnerable to infantry. HE other armor etc.

An ESF takes Rocketpods which are good at just about everything and they still have a gun at their disposable to protect themselves from aircraft too.

The ideal solution in my mind would be forcing ESFs just like everything else to make a choice. You want to be a rocketpod whore fine then you're going to be fodder for aircraft running guns.




You do get exp for hitting the aircraft with a skyguard or burster if you do enough damage before it dies. The same with the AA rockets. If it doesn't die and repairs to full then dies later to someone else.. you don't get exp.

That is no different than a sniper shooting a person. That person runs off to heal or is healed to full by a medic and someone else comes along to kill the guy... the sniper won't get credit for the first hit because the dude either didn't die or he was healed to full before someone else killed him.

It happens a lot less when fighting infantry, but it's the same mechanic.

No one would be able to fly if 1 AA rocket killed something at full health. We saw that in Beta. Skyguard could possible stand to do more damage, but they still hit pretty hard and make you move unless you want to die. Bursters will straight out kill you if they surprise you while you are diving in to attack something else. Most ESF pilots will pop flares after a lock on... so lock on.. wait.. then fire if no flare because it's probably on cooldown.

I play both sides. I kill things with my Nemesis or at least damage them and get partial exp and I also fly a lot. There are tons of AA in the game to die to already. There are a lot of ESF that go A2A now. Lots of people have AA rockets. Everyone has access to 1 burster arm and a lot have 2 now. Skyguards exist, but they could probably be buffed.. I'm not going to lie.. if I know it's only a skyguard on me then it's not really a deterrent because I can usually move faster than they can track anyway. Dual bursters though.. they hit hard and fast.. way more effective than a skyguard.. so maybe that needs to be adjusted.


I don't want 1 AA rocket to kill a plane. I've said that already.

You're right it is a similar mechanic to infantry the point as you said though is the frequency of the outcomes for infantry versus air. When infantry gets hurt the chance of them dying in battle and you getting at least an assist is high.

When air gets hurt, they typically bug out and repair. The frequency is different enough to warrant a different mechanic. If people were getting tons of assist XP for ground AA I don't think there would be as much of an issue. Sure there'd be some still saying they wanted the kill but it'd be more background noise than what we have currently.

I agree bursters are deadly and said as much. I think bursters are fine outside of not rendering for aircraft to see.

[MrBloodworth]

My pay off is that there is no air in the area as my Platoon caps a base.

Also, assist ,Crit assist XP....

[RobUK]

Every single one of thees threads are about people thinking the AA of choice should down an aircraft. Full stop. They are upset they are not getting the kill with the AA they picked up with no help from anyone else. They have it in their head that if they pick up an AA gun, it should kill the aircraft. Full stop.

Tell me I am wrong? Because anything other than that, is the way Planetside 2 plays right now in terms of non-air Anti-air.

Air is the main counter to air, Ground based AA is support and intended to be combined with other support fire. Don't be mad at me, because I cut to the chase.

Why are you so excitable?

I can't speak for everybody, but I can't imagine anybody is mad at you.

This is just an internet forum. We are just exchanging opinions about a computer game. A few harmless words on a screen :D

[MrBloodworth]

Figure of speech. Clearly people do not like hearing the root of things in such a direct manner. I Can help put this to light right now. For those of you who support the idea that Ground AA should be The AA, and not Air.

How many shots should it take, considering you missed nothing, to down a ( stock )Reaver with a ( stock )Skyguard?

[Soothsayer]

That's not exploitable at all. But I suppose we can all just ignore that assist, critical assist XP....

Because like, bicycles.

I was just saying something ridiculous about something someone said that was ridiculous.

[Dragonskin]

My pay off is that there is no air in the area as my Platoon caps a base.

Also, assist ,Crit assist XP....

^This... I go with my Nemesis as infantry when needed to secure the captures.. which also nets me assists, aircraft kills and base capture exp.

[Dragonskin]

I don't want 1 AA rocket to kill a plane. I've said that already.

You're right it is a similar mechanic to infantry the point as you said though is the frequency of the outcomes for infantry versus air. When infantry gets hurt the chance of them dying in battle and you getting at least an assist is high.

When air gets hurt, they typically bug out and repair. The frequency is different enough to warrant a different mechanic. If people were getting tons of assist XP for ground AA I don't think there would be as much of an issue. Sure there'd be some still saying they wanted the kill but it'd be more background noise than what we have currently.

I agree bursters are deadly and said as much. I think bursters are fine outside of not rendering for aircraft to see.

Then others will complain that they don't get exp raining on them everytime they fart and cough too. If the target doesn't die then you shouldn't get assist exp.. it's the same for sunderers, MBTs, lightnings... if it doesn't die then you don't get exp... why should shooting ESF be different than everything else in the game?

[CasualCat]

Then others will complain that they don't get exp raining on them everytime they fart and cough too. If the target doesn't die then you shouldn't get assist exp.. it's the same for sunderers, MBTs, lightnings... if it doesn't die then you don't get exp... why should shooting ESF be different than everything else in the game?

Flying an ESF is different than everything else why not shooting it?

[RobUK]

Figure of speech. Clearly people do not like hearing the root of things in such a direct manner.

Maybe that's the problem?

The "root of things" is merely your opinion. It's not an opinion that everybody shares. But that doesn't matter. Higby isn't going to read this thread and think to himself "Yep those guys think AA needs to be stronger, so we'll buff it". He'll do whatever the bigger picture tells him to do.

You are passionate about your opinions. You won't be the only one. Others will be as passionate about theirs. Such is life.

There is no such thing as a "wrong opinion".

I think ground based AA will mostly be left alone for now. Higby did comment on balance a few days ago when he said "We have some minor discrepancies for some classes where time-to-kill vs. another class is a little longer than we want it to be, but for the most part, we are pretty much right where we want to be."

It could be that he was talking about AA vs Air, he could also have been talking about something else entirely.

Whatever changes they make, I don't think it will make any drastic difference to the current overall game balance. Things seem pretty good to me right now in terms of the whole game.

What we need more than 1v1 balancing is a decent meaningful meta-game and some proper command tools to try to quell some of the horrible zerging. I include the massive air zergs in that as well.

It would be good to bring all of that air into the game, instead of most of it playing its own furball up above the rest of the game. That won't happen by nerfing air or making AA overpowered again like it was at times in beta.

[MrBloodworth]

No, its not an opinion :)

I noticed no one has answered my question yet.

"wrong opinion", yes. Yes there is. When its wrong. If you have an opinion that is based on your skewed and/or otherwise warped personal experiences instead of one based on well thought out research, your opinion is invalid.

"Opinions" are not "Taste".

[SpottyGekko]

Figure of speech. Clearly people do not like hearing the root of things in such a direct manner. I Can help put this to light right now. For those of you who support the idea that Ground AA should be The AA, and not Air.

How many shots should it take, considering you missed nothing, to down a ( stock )Reaver with a ( stock )Skyguard?

As a Skyguard enthusiast I'd say 2 standard clips. But there's been very few opportunities lately for me to unload 2 clips into 1 ESF.

It seems the average pilot has learned to move better. The average pilot has certainly upgraded their ESF, because they seem to be getting harder to kill every day. They can cert-up to tank more of my damage, and to get away faster, which means that I have less time on target and the target can withstand more of the damage that is delivered in that window of opportunity.

My Skyguard certifications will never buy me a damage increase that will match the damage decrease gained from spending ESF certs. So the Skyguard becomes even less effective over time as the ESF's are upgraded.

But I'm OK with needing 2 or 3 Skyguards in a battery to pose a lethal threat to ESF's and Libs.

What I would dearly love though is for the Skyguard-equipped Lightning to have some more meaningful role to perform on the battlefield. If there's no air to scare off, that Skyguard is virtually useless, and dies quickly to just about anything that's hostile.

[Dragonskin]

Flying an ESF is different than everything else why not shooting it?

So you want different exp for shooting Lightnings, MBTs, Galaxies, Sunderers, Flashes, and liberators because they all drive/fly different?

Do you want exp for boarding sunderers, galaxies or any un-occopied seats in a vehicle? What exp for reloading your gun or maybe exp for switching weapons?

[Soothsayer]

I don't see this question you're asking, unless you are talking about how you say that every AA proponent in this thread wants to one-shot all aircraft and that they have to prove to you that that isn't what they're saying.

When a lightning equips anti armour rounds, it tear through tanks and sunderers.

When a lightning equips explosive rounds, it is really good against infantry.

When a lightning equips a skyguard, you are terrible against everything.

Specialization needs to be rewarded because you give up something at the expense of another.

When a ground unit specializes into anti air, it has picked what it is going to do. There is no downside to an ESF specializing into A2G because it remains effective at everything else. That cake you have is also being eaten.

You don't can't have both.

And Kevin Bacon was in Footloose.

[MrBloodworth]

As a Skyguard enthusiast I'd say 2 standard clips. But there's been very few opportunities lately for me to unload 2 clips into 1 ESF.

It seems the average pilot has learned to move better. The average pilot has certainly upgraded their ESF, because they seem to be getting harder to kill every day. They can cert-up to tank more of my damage, and to get away faster, which means that I have less time on target and the target can withstand more of the damage that is delivered in that window of opportunity.

My Skyguard certifications will never buy me a damage increase that will match the damage decrease gained from spending ESF certs. So the Skyguard becomes even less effective over time as the ESF's are upgraded.

But I'm OK with needing 2 or 3 Skyguards in a battery to pose a lethal threat to ESF's and Libs.

What I would dearly love though is for the Skyguard-equipped Lightning to have some more meaningful role to perform on the battlefield. If there's no air to scare off, that Skyguard is virtually useless, and dies quickly to just about anything that's hostile.

Yeah, clearly not talking to you :)

I think your last comment is more about the lightning in general. The original skyguard was a great AA and could down Inf with its secondary gun.

I never really liked that they took away the secondary gun on the lightning, and made it a skyguard to boot. Mixed platform roles that end up being..less overall.

But, are you ignoring the increase Clip, Ammo and reload speed? I think so.


EDIT: What does A2G rockets have to do with AA's effectiveness exactly?

[Miffy]

People also have to realize none of this has been beta tested because for some reason SOE never let us test it. It'll take months for people to unlock the best AA weapons and so if they buff AA now then it'll become OP very quickly and go the other way.

SOE really need to make minimal changes and be prepared to change it again if there is a negative impact on the game. You cannot make massive balance changes all at once, if SOE do then they haven't learnt anything and the game will fail.

[MrBloodworth]

It was tested, they gave everyone thousands of certs in alpha/beta, more than once. Intentionally or unintentionally.

[CasualCat]

So you want different exp for shooting Lightnings, MBTs, Galaxies, Sunderers, Flashes, and liberators because they all drive/fly different?

Do you want exp for boarding sunderers, galaxies or any un-occopied seats in a vehicle? What exp for reloading your gun or maybe exp for switching weapons?
I'm not talking about handling/driving characteristics. Go back and read above what I wrote about what makes an ESF unique versus any other vehicle in game.

The poster who posted immediately after you seems to get it.

[Miffy]

It was tested, they gave everyone thousands of certs in alpha/beta, more than once. Intentionally or unintentionally.

I never got that.... I always had the same amount and could never test anything.

[MrBloodworth]

I never got that.... I always had the same amount and could never test anything.

Well, it happened. :)

[CasualCat]

I never got that.... I always had the same amount and could never test anything.

A lot of people got 3000certs (cert costs were half what they are now too) across all the characters they had created.

I had characters with fully decked out ESFs. Another with a liberator. Each of the faction MBTs. etc etc.

[Dragonskin]

Specialization needs to be rewarded because you give up something at the expense of another.

When a ground unit specializes into anti air, it has picked what it is going to do. There is no downside to an ESF specializing into A2G because it remains effective at everything else. That cake you have is also being eaten.

You don't can't have both.

And Kevin Bacon was in Footloose.

You are rewarded if the target dies before it repairs. Just like everything else in the game. Tanks can get hit, repair and then take on more people but no one is complaining about that. Sunderers... galaxies.. liberators... insert vehicle type here... if it gets away and doesn't get killed, repairs and re-engages then no one gets exp. Why should ESF be treated different?

Now, if you pick A2G rockets on your ESF you are less effective against air targets. Sure you can hope to get the kill by dumbfiring your rockets or nailing them with your main gun. But a good pilot will get away... like insert vehicle type here.

If you are a MAX and your bursters aren't working you can switch to another weapon set, or you can do AI/AA/AV hybirds. Skyguards can damage other units with their guns, they are just not as effective.. like ESF having to dumbfire their rockets and pray they hit other air.

Heavy Assualts still have a main weapon so they can kill infantry like they are designed to do.

So the only issue is that people have a grudge against ESF and it should be treated differently because it can potentially (not always) get away to repair before it dies and Skyguards need a secondary weapon maybe? I guess that is what you are saying.

[Chewy]

Then others will complain that they don't get exp raining on them everytime they fart and cough too. If the target doesn't die then you shouldn't get assist exp.. it's the same for sunderers, MBTs, lightnings... if it doesn't die then you don't get exp... why should shooting ESF be different than everything else in the game?

What about that times when the target does end getting killed by some means and you don't even get assists?

Iv had mixed results with getting assists in PS2. It tends to work against troops but with armored and air if I don't put at least 40% damage into one of them then I'll often never see an assist. Can't tell you how many times I watched something get destroyed while hitting it with anything I could and not get anything for it.

With AA not being a killer as it is now. There needs to be something to make it worth using for how much it costs in not only certs/SC but with how weak it makes you to everything else. Why must a counter to something cost more and come with a higher risk than what it is built to be fighting against?

[Miffy]

A lot of people got 3000certs (cert costs were half what they are now too) across all the characters they had created.

I had characters with fully decked out ESFs. Another with a liberator. Each of the faction MBTs. etc etc.

They shudda just turned certs off to see how it would be once everyone had everything.

[Dragonskin]

With AA not being a killer as it is now. There needs to be something to make it worth using for how much it costs in not only certs/SC but with how weak it makes you to everything else. Why must a counter to something cost more and come with a higher risk than what it is built to be fighting against?

Skygaurds may not be killer.. other AA is. Skyguards come at a high cost (resource wise). Other AA is cheaper. So your arguement is really just for Skyguards in which case I have said... multiple times now... that they could stand to use a buff.

If you are talking SC/Cert cost for AA... well I spent $19 for SC (less, but only because of triple/double days) and hundreds of certs to be able to do what it does... how much did you spend on your AA? I don't even want to get into a SC/Cert arguement so I hope you aren't going there.

[SpottyGekko]

Yeah, clearly not talking to you :)

I think your last comment is more about the lightning in general. The original skyguard was a great AA and could down Inf with its secondary gun.

I never really liked that they took away the secondary gun on the lightning, and made it a skyguard to boot. Mixed platform roles that end up being..less overall.

But, are you ignoring the increase Clip, Ammo and reload speed? I think so.


EDIT: What does A2G rockets have to do with AA's effectiveness exactly?

Yes, I'm ignoring the increased Clip, Ammo and reload speed, because they are largely irrelevant in the engagement time.

ESF's generally move fast (and get faster with extra AB and performance upgrades). You don't have all day to empty ammo clips at them. They mostly stay still while spamming rockets, and that stationary period is reduced by certing faster rocket fire. That is the vulnerable moment.

Having a bigger clip is not going to help me when the average ESF is burning out of range before I can even empty my standard clip.

Spending certs on faster reload is hopeless. Have you ever calculated the benefit of spending literally 1000's of cert points to reduce your reload speed by 6% or 8% ? Reloading half a second faster will not change anything with respect to a single engagement.

Generally an ESF will fire 1 volley of rockets at me. If I saw him coming, I'll empty a full clip in his face during that time. He's usually at about half health after that, and I'm nearly dead (probably because he's got 2/3 composite and I haven't certed top armour, I think). He flies away before I can reload. Shaving a half second off my reload time will make no difference to that situation. If I could DOUBLE my clip size, he'd be dead by the time I ran out of rounds, but he'd have to be stupid enough to wait around twice as long.

Again, I actually don't mind where the Skyguard is at right now. Two or three working together are very effective.

In beta, before air was buffed and Skyguard damage was nerfed, I could reliably kill any ESF with a single clip or less. That was simply not a good situation.

What irks me most is that a Lightning with a Skyguard turret is just a very fragile ornament when there's no air around.

[RobUK]

No, its not an opinion :)

I
"wrong opinion", yes. Yes there is. When its wrong.

Saying AA needs a buff is not wrong. It's just a point of view.

Just the same as saying "air is not overpowered" is also a point of view.

Both are subjective and greatly influenced by our own personal preferences and experiences.

What you're doing is the virtual equivalent of sticking your fingers in your ears and saying "lalalalalalaaa I can't heeeeeeeeaaaaaaaaaarrrrrrrrrrrrr you".

The only people who will actually know who is "right" or who is "wrong" are the developers, and they're never ever going to do anything other than keep silent about it because they'll be ripped to shreds whatever they say.

If they do decide to buff AA slighly, will they be "wrong" too? Of course not, in their minds they will be right. Just the same as they will feel they are right if they do nothing to AA vs Air.

I hope they leave it alone apart for a non direct damage related buff to the Skyguard.

Whatever they do though, either side of the debate will say "the whiners won".

Such is life on the internets :D

[Helwyr]

I noticed no one has answered my question yet.

What's this great question of yours that no one has answered?

I seriously hope it's nothing to do with you rambling on about "Combined Arms" a few pages back as that would be very underwhelming given that and the related "Teamwork" argument has been debunked and laughed at as Aircav hypocrisy many times before.

[Rahabib]

Also, Ridiculous.

Everything is black and white to some of you isn't it?

Just trying to apply the same LOGIC that the flying farmers have been using this whole time.

[Whiteagle]

Figure of speech. Clearly people do not like hearing the root of things in such a direct manner. I Can help put this to light right now. For those of you who support the idea that Ground AA should be The AA, and not Air.

How many shots should it take, considering you missed nothing, to down a ( stock )Reaver with a ( stock )Skyguard?
Preferably under two clips' worth...

I would say one entire clip's worth, but I know how much you flyboys hate getting the paint scratched.

Of course, why should a turret designed to take on Aircraft ACTUALLY stand a chance at killing them?

[Figment]

The thing about G2A rockets is that, unlike other ground based AA, the unit as a whole is not fully dedicated to the anti-air trade-off. It is for instance capable of cutting through other infantry without any compromise on HA weapons. In fact, it can be used well against tanks.

In that sense, G2A HA rockets are more of a support AA than flak and that's fine, since there should be ample reason to cert flak. In fact, G2A AA is better at medium to long range (fire and forget) and flak better at short to medium range. Sounds like a good complementary package.

But that's more a trade-off balancing discussion between which niche G2A units fill and how they are used.

[Graywolves]

If ground AA hits the air at the right spot you can blind the pilot and hope he crashes.

[JesNC]

Making ESF the only effective air counter is just wrong.

I've seen dozens of air zergs by now, most notably by Miller TR (no offence guys, it's highly effective :D ), and there's just no way ground troops can fight off a swarm of 10 mossies and a handful of liberators. In a situation like that AA isn't even a deterrant, it's just a mild annoyance and free points.

I just don't see the fun gameplay in a platoon of ground troops being farmed by a squad of aircraft.

[Whiteagle]

Making ESF the only effective air counter is just wrong.

I've seen dozens of air zergs by now, most notably by Miller TR (no offence guys, it's highly effective :D ), and there's just no way ground troops can fight off a swarm of 10 mossies and a handful of liberators. In a situation like that AA isn't even a deterrant, it's just a mild annoyance and free points.

I just don't see the fun gameplay in a platoon of ground troops being farmed by a squad of aircraft.
Indeed, this is why the Skyguard needs to get its bite back against air, and AA Turrets should get some kind of a buff...

...It's bad when I'm able to shoot down Scythes with a Spear Phalanx...
AT guns should not be better at Anti-air then the AA guns!

[Wahooo]

Figure of speech. Clearly people do not like hearing the root of things in such a direct manner. I Can help put this to light right now. For those of you who support the idea that Ground AA should be The AA, and not Air.

How many shots should it take, considering you missed nothing, to down a ( stock )Reaver with a ( stock )Skyguard?

I think TTK for an SG should be scaled just like everything else from PS1 to PS2.

[Snipefrag]

It does need tweaking, the one thing i would say is that the burster isn't as good at range as it should be.. Here's a clip from the other night of Archangels showing you can be effective, but it does take teamwork:

http://www.twitch.tv/wondervex/c/1757864

[Suitepee]

I just don't see the fun gameplay in a platoon of ground troops being farmed by a squad of aircraft.

Me neither.

The apparent mentality of Air being the only hard counter to Air needs to change immediately.

[Deadeye]

Me neither.

The apparent mentality of Air being the only hard counter to Air needs to change immediately.

Yeah. This whole thread makes any sane, logical person just shake their head.

I mean does noone on the development team ever heard of the concept of hard counters or heard of the term "Rock-Paper-Scissors"? These aren't new concepts in gaming, they've been around since the NES (Even the old game "Desert Commander" had AA as a hard counter to Aircraft).

And if Higby himself is on board with with the insane idea that dedicated AA, even the Skyguard itself, should just be a "deterance", then I question his ability to think rationally about the balance of platforms in this game. The buck stops with you, Buddy.

I mean, come on, Higby, Heavy tanks kill light tanks, Skyguard Lightnings kill Fighters and Fighters kill enemy heavy tanks; is that a hard thing to balance? And if so, how? Even Lightnings aren't hard to kill, a Heavy Assault can almost do it single handedly let alone a Fighter armed with Air-to-ground rockets (what a brilliant concept! I must be the first one to ever think of using A2G weapons on the AA tank).

That this whole conversation is even happening just shows what a bad design decision it was to make Skyguards impotent. I can understand Infantry and maybe MAXes not being a huge threat but the dedicated AA tank who's only a threat to Infantry and Flashes on the ground can't kill a low flying fighter unless the fighter just hovers there (Not to mention virtually worthless against a Liberator)? I wonder what other dumb decisions have been made in this game...but then again, I play NC, the blue-headed stepchild, it seems, in this game.

[Whiteagle]

I comic I made to respond to a comic about the issue:
http://i77.photobucket.com/albums/j65/Whiteagle/AAcomic.jpg

[Lanz]

I have found that Air is dominating this game far too much, it is really putting me off. I really feel for the treadheads out there. There is no point at all in playing tanks in this game when air can just kill you in one pass and there is nothing you can do about it.

Airside will indeed be the new name soon.

[Deadeye]

I comic I made to respond to a comic about the issue:
http://i77.photobucket.com/albums/j65/Whiteagle/AAcomic.jpg



Ladies, Gentlemen and Devs, I think we have a winner!

I have found that Air is dominating this game far too much, it is really putting me off. I really feel for the treadheads out there. There is no point at all in playing tanks in this game when air can just kill you in one pass and there is nothing you can do about it.

Airside will indeed be the new name soon.

Or we can just call it Planetside and drop the "2" because at that point it'll be exactly like the original game: little, if any, point to driving anything besides an aircraft. But at least AA was dangerous in PS1 rather than laughable.

[Beerbeer]

Personally, I think vehicles can be spammed too easily. I know if they nerf it too much, FTP may get one or two vehicles per play session (maybe that's enough?). But as a subscriber, who isn't continent locked, resources rarely become an issue. I can spam tank/esf/tank/esf to my heart's content.

What's ironic, is that I do it to farm certs for infantry, yet I rarely play infantry because it's so easy farming infantry and other vehicles in vehicles.

The infantry part if this game is severely lacking. Needs a boost IMO. Base redesign, resource nerf, I dunno, something.

Personally, if they nerfed vehicles to the ground, or made AA/AV much stronger, I wouldn't shed a tear.

[SGOniell]

I tried out the...Hawk I think it was for the NC. (AA launcher for HA) I actually picked up a scythe kill, a mosquito kill and a couple assists on liberators. I do see them being more of a niusance, but you just need to work together. I mean, the air power does seem a bit much at times, but if you can keep the turrets on bases up, get some guys with the AA launcher and a few MAX or Skyguard you can handle it well enough. Or at the very least you'll scare the pilots way the hell away from the important areas

[Suitepee]

I comic I made to respond to a comic about the issue:

This made me smile. Good job. :D

Does that mean if anti-vehicle turrets can take out air units, then anti-air turrets are good against vehicles?

[Figment]

This made me smile. Good job. :D

Does that mean if anti-vehicle turrets can take out air units, then anti-air turrets are good against vehicles?

Mebbe if vehicles flew, cause Anti-Air turrets can't aim down. >.>

[Whiteagle]

Ladies, Gentlemen and Devs, I think we have a winner!
Thank you!

Speaking of Devs, does anyone have any idea how I might contact them in private?

Watching Angry Joe's review of Planetside 2 reminded me of an Event idea I had back before I started the Beta.
This made me smile. Good job. :D
Thanks, it took me all morning!


...I have no life...

Does that mean if anti-vehicle turrets can take out air units, then anti-air turrets are good against vehicles?
No, the only thing I think an AA Turret can modderatly damage is Infantry, and even then it's wildly inaccurate...

...So it's pretty much a slightly worse pre-Beta buffed AI Turret.:lol:

[Dragonskin]

As an outfit we have a pretty set way to deal with air now. For instance we were going to attack a Bio Lab, now I was in our air team in my scythe and we fly over with a few scythes and libs.. we see a ton of enemy air. Enough that our air team probably wouldn't kill much.

So we had the ground squads switch anti-air.. HA with AA rockets and people with dual burster MAXs. In less then 10 minutes the enemy air was destroyed.. for the most part. Our air team flew in and abused their ground units with ease.. our ground units rolled in to clean up and cap the Bio Lab.

Now... we do this a lot.. as a large scale game.. thinking outside of the 1v1 scenario everyone else likes to think about... I think that is exactly how this game should be played.

To add to that as a outfit we also tend to cover our heavy tank colums with our air team to prevent them from being killed.. kinda how you would think it should work. Most games air is a counter to armor and just like most games air and armor wreck infantry.

So again.. outside of Skyguards not being a huge threat and AA turrets being fairly useless (you can read that as I agree they need buffs considering it's now routine for me to light up AA turrets on towers with rocket pods and main guns knowing they can't really hurt me before I kill them).. burster MAXs and HAs with AA rockets are extremely effective in killing enemy air. I probably picked up 4-5 enemy air kills last night in 5 minutes with my AA rockets once my scythe was taken out by burster MAXs that were hidden behind a ridge.

[MrBloodworth]

^ IE: Combined arms.

[Whiteagle]

So again.. outside of Skyguards not being a huge threat and AA turrets being fairly useless (you can read that as I agree they need buffs considering it's now routine for me to light up AA turrets on towers with rocket pods and main guns knowing they can't really hurt me before I kill them).. burster MAXs and HAs with AA rockets are extremely effective in killing enemy air. I probably picked up 4-5 enemy air kills last night in 5 minutes with my AA rockets once my scythe was taken out by burster MAXs that were hidden behind a ridge.
True enough Dragonskin, MAX, HA, and ESF based AA are all in a good place right now...

But to quote myself from the offical forums:

...If anything, they are the only forms of AA that are actually WORKING!
The issue is that Anti-air Phalanx and Skyguard Turrets, which are suppose to be a HARD COUNTER to Air, are utterly, inexcusably, ineffective when compaired to Rocketpod ESFs and ANY other form of engaging them.

[MrBloodworth]

What?

You have a big disconnect there.

First, Ground based AA is not intended to be "HARD COUNTER" to Air. Its evident in game, and its been said many times by the developers that AIR is the counter to AIR.

But hold all Tea party like reactions that may compel you to say "Just remove them from the game", because ground based AA does indeed work to either kill, or deter Air from an area, if used correctly in an organized manner.

Second, Why are you bringing up rocket pods? We are discussing Anti-air and effectiveness. Rocket pods are not Anti-air.

[Whiteagle]

First, Ground based AA is not intended to be "HARD COUNTER" to Air. Its evident in game, and its been said many times by the developers that AIR is the counter to AIR.
Ok...
How are ANTI-AIRCRAFT Turrets NOT suppose to be a direct counter to Aircraft?

...THAT'S ALL THEY FUCKING SHOOT AT!!!

...That would be like playing Duck Hunt... only to fire off all three shots of the lightgun into your mouth so the Dog will laugh at you!
Second, Why are you bringing up rocket pods? We are discussing Anti-air and effectiveness. Rocket pods are not Anti-air.
They are more effective Anti-Air... THEN THE FUCKING ANTI-AIR TURRETS!!!

Hell, the SPEAR PHALANX CANNON is a better Anti-Air weapon then AA Phalanx or Skyguard Turrets... HENCE MY RAGE AND THIS COMIC:

http://i77.photobucket.com/albums/j65/Whiteagle/AAcomic.jpg

[Dragonskin]

I saw a tank shoot a ESF out of the sky last night.. probably more effective than AA turrets. The guy that got the kill screamed in excitement which was also hilarious.

[Whiteagle]

I saw a tank shoot a ESF out of the sky last night.. probably more effective than AA turrets. The guy that got the kill screamed in excitement which was also hilarious.
They ARE honestly... which is what pisses me off so much...

Not to mention how many shitty pilots such an environment breeds...

[MrBloodworth]

Whiteagle. Please look up What HARD COUNTER and SOFT COUNTER mean.

[Whiteagle]

Whiteagle. Please look up What HARD COUNTER and SOFT COUNTER mean.
MrBloodworth, please go fuck yourself...

Phalanx AA and Skyguard Turrets SHOULD be the Hard Counter to baseline/AA ESFs and Galaxies.

I will give you that they'd be a Soft Counter to A2G ESFs and Liberators, but that's because those are dedicated Ground Attack Aircraft.

[Dragonskin]

MrBloodworth, please go fuck yourself...

Phalanx AA and Skyguard Turrets SHOULD be the Hard Counter to baseline/AA ESFs and Galaxies.

I will give you that they'd be a Soft Counter to A2G ESFs and Liberators, but that's because those are dedicated Ground Attack Aircraft.

That doesn't make sense. Air is Air regardless of what it is designed to attack. If an AA turret is good for A2A ESF it should be equally as good for A2G ESF... vice versa.

Turrets in general are terrible though. AV turrets get 2 shot by tanks.. which they are designed to kill.. I would think.. Unless they are designed to kill sunderers, but that would be a pretty narrow design choice that doesn't make sense either. AV turrets also take 4 or more hits to kill a tank and have roughly the same fire rate as a tank.. so guess which one wins?

[Whiteagle]

That doesn't make sense. Air is Air regardless of what it is designed to attack. If an AA turret is good for A2A ESF it should be equally as good for A2G ESF... vice versa.
Well I actually did look up the difference between Hard Counter and Soft Counter.
Turns out it's whether or not something can overcome your Counter with enough skill.
Hence it would be easiest for an AA Turret to take out a pure A2A ESF as opposed to one packing an A2G option.
Turrets in general are terrible though. AV turrets get 2 shot by tanks.. which they are designed to kill.. I would think.. Unless they are designed to kill sunderers, but that would be a pretty narrow design choice that doesn't make sense either. AV turrets also take 4 or more hits to kill a tank and have roughly the same fire rate as a tank.. so guess which one wins?
Eh, I've done all right with AV Turrets...
Honestly, they don't need to be as strong as the AA ones, since Infantry can much more effectively engage ground vehicles.

[ShadetheDruid]

If they want Skyguards just to be deterrents who work in teams, they could at least do the decent thing and cut the cert cost in half and have the turret reduce the resource cost of the Lightning itself.

Skyguards (dedicated AA, useless against everything else) being the same cert/resource cost as an ESF with rocket pods (good against everything except other ESFs) makes absolutely no sense and is exactly why no one is willing to pay the cost to roll out in Skyguards.

I know i'm rehashing old points, but it's sad that I should have to.

[Dragonskin]

Well I actually did look up the difference between Hard Counter and Soft Counter.
Turns out it's whether or not something can overcome your Counter with enough skill.
Hence it would be easiest for an AA Turret to take out a pure A2A ESF as opposed to one packing an A2G option.

Eh, I've done all right with AV Turrets...
Honestly, they don't need to be as strong as the AA ones, since Infantry can much more effectively engage ground vehicles.

Trust me, I will blow up a AA turret with my main gun in my A2A scythe before it will get me to 50% health. I only use rocketpods to speed up the process and reduce damage taken.

Let me clarify this statement. The reason that this holds true is 1) my main gun has level 1 zoom optics so I don't have to be close to land hits 2) bullets have very little COF so most shots will hit target if the first one hits 3) I can accomplish this with 1 reload (without rocket pods).

[MrBloodworth]

MrBloodworth, please go fuck yourself...

Phalanx AA and Skyguard Turrets SHOULD be the Hard Counter to baseline/AA ESFs and Galaxies.

I will give you that they'd be a Soft Counter to A2G ESFs and Liberators, but that's because those are dedicated Ground Attack Aircraft.

Rage.

Not sure why you think Air is not Air and that rocket pods somehow make them different.

Allow me to cut to the chase again.

You dislike Rocket pods, and believe all AA that is not aircraft should stop them cold from ever firing. Alone.

Any other suggestion is how the ground based AA currently works. Combined arms.

I'm also quite sure you have never thought about the other side of this, people who like to fly, or whos draw to the game is flight and air combat.

I shall leave you with this (http://penny-arcade.com/patv/episode/counter-play), that, because the world is not black and white, can support and not support your argument. It becomes a situation, in the solution, of relative shades of grey, something that the term "HARD COUNTER" does not allow for. That you keep arguing for.

PS: My apologies, PA is the only site that has this video hosted that's not locked behind a Developer community site wall. Enjoy. I'v had the pleasure of hearing Tom Cadwell's ideas before in different forums ( I do not mean internet ).

Good day sir.

EDIT: I understand why this keeps coming up in this generation. For the past number of years, every game, especially the big three have told you that you, you alone, even in multiplayer are the hero. Planetside, and Planetside 2 ( including games like Brink, ET:QW , WWIIO and games of that type ) require you to shed this idea that you, and you alone are a savior. You are simply a cog in the machine, you are not the savior. You will not down an F-16 with a machine gun. You will not jump out of a plane going mach 5, shoot a bazooka and land safely, unscathed in your jet again. You are not the savior, you are a cog. The sooner you realize this, the better off you will be.

[Beerbeer]

Combined arms is nice, but I can solo pod anything just fine, regardless if the poor saps are alone, in an organized squad or part of a gigantic platoon/Zerg.

Actually, I prefer podding a huge, combined attack. More targets.

[MrBloodworth]

Combined arms is nice, but I can solo pod anything just fine, regardless if the poor saps are alone, in an organized squad or part of a gigantic platoon/Zerg.

Actually, I prefer podding a huge, combined attack. More targets.

This is like a libertarian saying they should not pay taxes, but still use public services.

Somehow, the lack of AA or aircraft in a highly contested area, is because of your awesome solo skills.

[Beerbeer]

I've never said I had awesome skills, in fact on the contrary.

I'm just saying that has a pilot, it's faily easy to fly in alone and pick off targets regardless of their disposition, at least that's been my experience.

Look at it this way. When the Zerg arrives and kills off everyone, a few people, such as myself, will fly back and take out stuff. No ground forces of the same size can achieve what we do. Does it make a difference? Probably not, but it's a farming method that can easily be done in the air, alone.

[Whiteagle]

You dislike Rocket pods, and believe all AA that is not aircraft should stop them cold from ever firing. Alone.

...Did I ever actually MAKE this claim?

No.


In fact, noticed that I said "A2G" ESFs and Liberators, as in ether craft having A dedicated ground attack option.
It doesn't have to be Rocketpods, a Zepher, or a Dalton...

Still, they have something that should easy a bit of the edge a dedicated Anti-air platform by all rights SHOULD have on them.

EDIT: I understand why this keeps coming up in this generation. For the past number of years, every game, especially the big three have told you that you, you alone, even in multiplayer are the hero. Planetside, and Planetside 2 ( including games like Brink, ET:QW , WWIIO and games of that type ) require you to shed this idea that you, and you alone are a savior. You are simply a cog in the machine, you are not the savior. You will not down an F-16 with a machine gun. You will not jump out of a plane going mach 5, shoot a bazooka and land safely, unscathed in your jet again. You are not the savior, you are a cog. The sooner you realize this, the better off you will be.
:huh:Teh fuck...

...J...Just... just how are you getting that out of MY Argument?
I'm the guy who's spending time trying to shoot the fucking aircraft down... with the fucking systems designed... TO SHOOT THE FUCKING AIRCRAFT DOWN!!!

Problem is... THEY'VE BEEN NERFED INTO THE GROUND SO THEY CANNOT SHOOT THE FUCKING AIRCRAFT DOWN!!!

Meanwhile, YOU ASSHOLES buzz around in your solopwnmobiles, NUKING THE FUCK OUT OF EVERYTHING, and poopoo us for having the AUDACITY to be able to scratch your fucking paintjobs with our ANTI-AIR FLAK!!!

I've never said I had awesome skills, in fact on the contrary.

I'm just saying that has a pilot, it's faily easy to fly in alone and pick off targets regardless of their disposition, at least that's been my experience.

Look at it this way. When the Zerg arrives and kills off everyone, a few people, such as myself, will fly back and take out stuff. No ground forces of the same size can achieve what we do. Does it make a difference? Probably not, but it's a farming method that can easily be done in the air, alone.

...just wanted to shoot down the fucking aircraft with my Skyguard...


...mommy... why won't they let me shoot down the fucking aircraft...

[MrBloodworth]

...Did I ever actually MAKE this claim?

Yes. Every time you post.

...just wanted to shoot down the fucking aircraft with my Skyguard...


...mommy... why won't they let me shoot down the fucking aircraft...


Also, why do you think every part of a post, is directed at you exactly?


Lastly, I'm not a pilot. I have no rocket pods. I am in an outfit that knows when air shows up, we get our air up, or our AA out. Or we get out of areas being bombarded. Its not hard. We do not, one by one try to rambo the aircraft with carbines :)

[Dragonskin]

I've never said I had awesome skills, in fact on the contrary.

I'm just saying that has a pilot, it's faily easy to fly in alone and pick off targets regardless of their disposition, at least that's been my experience.

Look at it this way. When the Zerg arrives and kills off everyone, a few people, such as myself, will fly back and take out stuff. No ground forces of the same size can achieve what we do. Does it make a difference? Probably not, but it's a farming method that can easily be done in the air, alone.

Hitting the zerg might generate nice kills, but it's a zerg.. zergs are typically defined as a large group of relatively mindless people all just following other people to kill things.. so a zerg is much less likely to carry a bunch of AA than an actual outfit with people fulfilling specific roles in the squad.

Try doing that to an outfit working with coordination and you will be blown to pieces fairly quickly.

You can kill tons of people with a MBT in a zerg too.. because again it's unlikely that most of them will have lock-on rockets.. it will probably be a lot of F2P users trying to dumbfire you as you strafe them..if they are even heavies to begin with. I took on a whole squad with a piddly lightning last night and all they did was dumbfire at me and the few people with lock-ons hit my front armor so it was easy enough to back off, repair and re-engage.

[Beerbeer]

I like it when it's a coordinated outfit. Reason why? Tons of tanks all bunched up. They had AA and it didn't matter much.

[Whiteagle]

Yes. Every time you post.
cAN"t TAlK.,. miNd BRoKen.;.


Also, why do you think every part of a post, is directed at you exactly?

Lastly, I'm not a pilot. I have no rocket pods. I am in an outfit that knows when air shows up, we get our air up, or our AA out. Or we get out of areas being bombarded. Its not hard. We do not, one by one try to rambo the aircraft with carbines :)

irony irony... flys so high...

WHY CAN'T I SHOOT YOU DOWN WITH MY FUCKING SKYGUARD?!?!

[MrBloodworth]

You keep saying that.

You didn't watch the video did you? Not that its an answer to your purely individual perspective.

Also, look up irony, please.

[Beerbeer]

Lol, I like killing skyguards. If I see them, I'll blow those up first.

Same goes for burster maxes. Those can surprise me, but I'll retreat, repair and sneak up on them and give them a volley.

Killing AA isn't hard at all for me and I think that's the point.

[MrBloodworth]

Killing Air isn't hard for others, that's also the point. Especially other air.

[Beerbeer]

I can understand both perspectives, but bottom line, air is op or AA is underpowered IMO. If nothing happens, it really won't affect me because I'll just continue on with what I'm doing. If they change it, cool, back to tank farming.

This is just my opinion, nothing more.

[Whiteagle]

You keep saying that.

You didn't watch the video did you? Not that its an answer to your purely individual perspective.
I'm sorry, I did realise I was discussing this with someone who is apparently more socially inept then me and, therefore, cannot understand the concept of sarcasm.

...And that you apparently didn't even watch your own link...

So I will state this simply...

Anti-Air kills Aircraft.
It is the one thing it is suppose to DO.
Skyguards and AA Phalanxes... PURE Anti-air Platforms... currently CANNOT do this.
This is a Problem.

My Skyguard feels about as effective at engaging Aircraft as taking out my sidearm and shooting at them ala Patton.

Yes, firing on them WITH YOUR CARBINE would actually come across as a better use of your time.

Lol, I like killing skyguards. If I see them, I'll blow those up first.

Same goes for burster maxes. Those can surprise me, but I'll retreat, repair and sneak up on them and give them a volley.

Killing AA isn't hard at all for me and I think that's the point.
EXACTLY!

We duck hunters have no bird-shot or slugs in our guns, just nerf pelts that make throwing STONES looks like a better option.

Killing Air isn't hard for others, that's also the point. Especially other air.
I don't know how good of an Aircraft spotter you'd be Blood, you apparently can't hear the issue whooshing over your head.

[MrBloodworth]

Insert faceplam here.

[Whiteagle]

Insert faceplam here.
Sorry, beat you to it at the top of page 21... (http://www.planetside-universe.com/showthread.php?t=50733&page=21)

[Graywolves]

Ground AA is a dominated strategy that only dominates the reckless, the greedy, and the bad. Which in those scenarios it is sometimes better to use dumbfire rockets.


27minutes and 34 seconds. This is really basic.
1. Introduction: five first lessons - YouTube

[maradine]

You dislike Rocket pods, and believe all AA that is not aircraft should stop them cold from ever firing. Alone.

Comments like this make me giggle, because they demonstrate the implicit double standard used in the ESF-as-rambo argument.

Combined arms isn't exactly encouraged when one class of vehicle is capable of dealing with all classes of threats in a single loadout. And fastest, to boot? Is this literally not visible to you?

If we're not going to be intellectually honest about this, let's just remove the SG and make the problem go away. Even that's better than current state, in my opinion.

[Helwyr]

Comments like this make me giggle, because they demonstrate the implicit double standard used in the ESF-as-rambo argument.

Combined arms isn't exactly encouraged when one class of vehicle is capable of dealing with all classes of threats in a single loadout. And fastest, to boot? Is this literally not visible to you?

The guy has no real arguments, his posts in this thread are mostly trolling, he even makes political troll comments. Perhaps it's an attempt to get the thread locked because his point of view on Air/AA balance has been made to look ridiculous for 23 pages.

[Wahooo]

@mrbloodworth

Your answer in this thread to the general complaints that the Skyguard and Turrets which have one specialized roll and are ineffective at that roll, is "combined arms".

But what does this mean? Combined arms should mean weapons like the SG that are good at killing aircraft protecting tanks and troops that are good at killing tanks and troops. The biggest threat to an SG should be other tanks and troops, of which it will need to rely on combined arms... ie tanks and troops meant to kill tanks and troops for that protection.
The game is designed that way right? Tanks come default with HEAT rounds that are good for everything but don't excel in any specific role. Same with Heavy Infantry rockets good all around rocket that does not specialize. Same for aircraft and their nose guns and liberators guns. All default weapons are generalists but then we can pick-up and cert into weapons to specialize.
In general all of the weapons designed to specialize against a target are effective against that target and DO fall short vs the default counterpart against other targets. HE vs AP vs default tank round for example, and the different rocket launchers for Heavy Assault. Liberator guns/bombs etc...

There are two main and very BIG discrepancies in this model.
The Skyguard and Rocketpods.
The Skyguard is a specialized weapon meant for shooting ONLY air. A platform that requires help from other tanks and troops for protection from ground elements. A weapon that is meant to protect OTHER ground elements from air vehicles. It cannot do this job. It is simply too ineffective against air to even protect itself let alone other vehicles. Period. It is worthless in the ONE SPECIALIZED ROLL it has. Used "right" or otherwise. It isn't about everyone pick up anti-air when air is around. Your beloved combined arms is about having all weapons on the battlefield doing their part, NOT the entire army switching to one specific task and then switching back. BTW when you do that what happens when more air comes back and your AA is all on timers? Or should you have dedicated AA that has a period of time they just sit there waiting for more planes? Then when the planes come they scare them away again without getting kills/XP/Certs?

The other is Rocketpods. I personally don't have much of an issue with rocket pods other than their primary target and effectiveness against them happens to be what SHOULD be their biggest ground based threat.
In the world of "combined arms" the rocket pods do it all. They are super effective against Gals and Liberators and good pilots can down a lib faster with rocket pods than with A2A rockets. In a game where every other weapon specialization leaves you MORE vulnerable to some other element rocket pods have no such downside, or at least very little. That is why it is being brought up in this thread constantly.

The overall super effectiveness of rocket pods HIGHLIGHTS the overall crap performance of AA turrets and the Skyguard.

What confuses me most is that every time you answer: "because combined arms" Why you are using this answer to argue against helping out the gimped yet specialized AA and for the powerful, generalized platform that goes AGAINST the need for combined arms of the rocket pods?

[Graywolves]

Balance changes are coming

http://forums.station.sony.com/ps2/index.php?threads/upcoming-adjustments-to-air-vs-ground-balance.60507/

They're small and maintain the deterrent philosophy but it might actually allow unorganized bombing and flybys within a certain airspace to be less effective than they are now when an AA net is established.

[Rodel]

If I might direct your memories back to the beta. During the beta, AA was powered up and the result was not fun for people who play this game to fly. They were pretty useless then. Now they can fight over the front line and still get away once they encounter AA. That said AA still makes it so enemy air can't just hover and is forced to retreat. But if you want air superiority you need to send your own birds up. In Beta air superiority was one skyguard.

My point is that if AA gets over powered then, trust me, the game is not as fun as if air gets the upperhand. What I'd think is OP are the rocket pods. You might have a case there.

[Soothsayer]

Ringo's got it!

[Dragonskin]

Balance changes are coming

http://forums.station.sony.com/ps2/index.php?threads/upcoming-adjustments-to-air-vs-ground-balance.60507/

They're small and maintain the deterrent philosophy but it might actually allow unorganized bombing and flybys within a certain airspace to be less effective than they are now when an AA net is established.

Right, but these guys are fighting for changes to Skyguards specifically.. which no change was made... assuming all rockets hit their target the Skyguard will die just as fast as before the patch. Meanwhile the AA rocket launcher can't even fire unless you get a lock-on first.. so ESFs charging at you have to be locked on before you can even fire. I used to dumbfire Libs that were out of lock-on range but stationary enough to still get hit... :(

[Wahooo]

Right, but these guys are fighting for changes to Skyguards specifically.. which no change was made... assuming all rockets hit their target the Skyguard will die just as fast as before the patch. Meanwhile the AA rocket launcher can't even fire unless you get a lock-on first.. so ESFs charging at you have to be locked on before you can even fire. I used to dumbfire Libs that were out of lock-on range but stationary enough to still get hit... :(

uh...
Flak:
- Minor damage increase
- Projectile speed increase

Still not clear if this change is specific to SG and Turrets or across the board and includes burster. Also not clear on how much. Higby responded with changes are a 'nudge' so we'll see.

I still think projetile speed from the SG needed a shove not a nudge and that damage would need to wait and see what the speed change did. But meh...

[Dragonskin]

uh...
Flak:
- Minor damage increase
- Projectile speed increase

Still not clear if this change is specific to SG and Turrets or across the board and includes burster. Also not clear on how much. Higby responded with changes are a 'nudge' so we'll see.

I still think projetile speed from the SG needed a shove not a nudge and that damage would need to wait and see what the speed change did. But meh...

We will have to see.. but going to go ahead and say that SG tread heads will probably not be happy because they still want ground to deter air.. not straight 1 shot it like the people in these forums would like.

Turrets didn't suffer from a lack of damage.. if you could actually hit a target with a turret it did work. The issue with turrets is they have low armor/hp and have a horrible COF making it impossible to reliably hit air while air can perfectly hit the turrets.

[Whiteagle]

If I might direct your memories back to the beta. During the beta, AA was powered up and the result was not fun for people who play this game to fly. They were pretty useless then. Now they can fight over the front line and still get away once they encounter AA. That said AA still makes it so enemy air can't just hover and is forced to retreat. But if you want air superiority you need to send your own birds up. In Beta air superiority was one skyguard.

My point is that if AA gets over powered then, trust me, the game is not as fun as if air gets the upperhand. What I'd think is OP are the rocket pods. You might have a case there.
I don't really remember that period...

I remember when Libs ruled the skies with Default Zephers after the wipe removed all AA other then Turrets... and when Reavers ruled the skies when the NC farmed Esamir for Rocket Pod Auraxium just after its release plus another wipe remove all AA but the turrets and a single Burster arm...

Should a single Skyguard control the skies?
No...
Should a single Skyguard make enemy aircraft in the area weary?
Hell's yes!

We will have to see.. but going to go ahead and say that SG tread heads will probably not be happy because they still want ground to deter air.. not straight 1 shot it like the people in these forums would like.
Again, I don't want the Skyguard to insta-own... I just want to be able to kill people with it!

It was fine somewhere near the end of Beta... I could kill a decent amount of aircraft, but a GOOD Rocketpodder would own my ass.

Turrets didn't suffer from a lack of damage.. if you could actually hit a target with a turret it did work. The issue with turrets is they have low armor/hp and have a horrible COF making it impossible to reliably hit air while air can perfectly hit the turrets.
Yeah, I guess so...

Thing is, they've always had that erratic firing pattern, so I'm guessing something in the actual damage equation that was what they had stealth nerfed from Beta...

I don't know if it was the actual damage, or the effective DPS of Flak Burst being reduced due to the same bug that's gimping the Skyguard.

[MrBloodworth]

EDIT:
Comments like this make me giggle, because they demonstrate the implicit double standard used in the ESF-as-rambo argument.

Not sure why it would, because this is not my position, but that of those in this thread, and especially on the OF and other sources. They just pussyfoot around saying it.


The guy has no real arguments, his posts in this thread are mostly trolling, he even makes political troll comments.

Hardly.

Balance changes are coming

http://forums.station.sony.com/ps2/i...balance.60507/

They're small and maintain the deterrent philosophy but it might actually allow unorganized bombing and flybys within a certain airspace to be less effective than they are now when an AA net is established.

Great changes that illustrate exactly what I was talking about. Many players have a mentality ( because I can't say the proper term, apparently ) that if its not perfect, it should be torn down. IE: Ground AA should one shot Air.

But the changes proposed respect the original philosophy and not not swing the pendulum right back to the other side. Thankfully, the PS2 team understands the concept of counter play. This maintains Air to Air combat, as well as augments and gives new opportunities to ground based units.

I look forward to see how the changes pan out in practice. I do, personally feel removing the dumb fire ability of the standard launchers may have been to much, but i understand the need to create a role for the decimater.


You guys have a good day. :)

[KaskaMatej]

Great changes that illustrate exactly what I was talking about. Many players have a mentality ( because I can't say the proper term, apparently ) that if its not perfect, it should be torn down. IE: Ground AA should one shot Air.

Keep fooling yourself thinking AA is worth using. With the patch, AA might be even good, we don't know yet but as of now AA is bad at what it should and can do.

[Dragonskin]

Keep fooling yourself thinking AA is worth using. With the patch, AA might be even good, we don't know yet but as of now AA is bad at what it should and can do.

I still disagree. Last night with a couple dual burster MAXs and a couple HA's with Nemesis rockets we effectively held down an objective outside of NC's warpgate for over 30 minutes while continious air spawned from their warpgate.

They eventually overpowered us with Vanguards and Lightnings.

AA is not currently underpowered as a whole. Just Skyguards and base mounted AA turrets. Regardless a patch is coming so we will have to see how the balance of power plays out with the updates. I have a feeling AA will over power air again.. and I think the balance will seesaw back and forth for awhile to come.

[Whiteagle]

Great changes that illustrate exactly what I was talking about. Many players have a mentality ( because I can't say the proper term, apparently ) that if its not perfect, it should be torn down. IE: Ground AA should one shot Air.

...How do you not understand this?

Ground AA in it's current state IS NO THREAT TO AIRCRAFT!!!
It takes at least three AA turrets for most pilots to realise they are being SHOT AT!
You can not have a "Deterrent" without some kind of threat to actually back it up.

Right now you need MASSIVE amounts of concentrated ground AA to down a SINGLE AIRCRAFT!
Why do pilots need to fear us if WE CANNOT SHOOT THEM DOWN!

Keep fooling yourself thinking AA is worth using. With the patch, AA might be even good, we don't know yet but as of now AA is bad at what it should and can do.
Let us hope...

AA is not currently underpowered as a whole. Just Skyguards and base mounted AA turrets. Regardless a patch is coming so we will have to see how the balance of power plays out with the updates. I have a feeling AA will over power air again.. and I think the balance will seesaw back and forth for awhile to come.
Yeah, I agreed with the same over at the offical forums, and hope they will look at buffing Flak individually by weapon instead of just across the board.

[MrBloodworth]

Ground AA in it's current state IS NO THREAT TO AIRCRAFT!!!

You are wrong.

[Whiteagle]

You are wrong.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=Yvd5qXO-A6A

...AM I?!?!

Have you actually BOTHERED to pull a Skyguard?

[MrBloodworth]

Yep, we run many. You are wrong. You should stop making definitive statements.

[Whiteagle]

Yep, we run many. You are wrong. You should stop making definitive statements.
HOW many?!?!

Because I find it rather bullshit that my Anti-Air Tank apparently needs to run in packs of four, supported by a SQUAD OF AA MAXES, just to seem "Effective"...

[maradine]

How about we all just play the changes for a week and start this fresh next Tuesday, yeah? :D

[Whiteagle]

How about we all just play the changes for a week and start this fresh next Tuesday, yeah? :D
...Did they put the changes in today, or was that next Tuesday?

[maradine]

Dunno. All I'm saying is, the state of the world is changing, let's put it through its paces and argue anew another day.

[MrBloodworth]

How about we all just play the changes for a week and start this fresh next Tuesday, yeah? :D

Indeed.

[ShadetheDruid]

I think the changes/additions are next thursday, today is just new carbines and sniper rifles.

[redzone]

Great changes that illustrate exactly what I was talking about. Many players have a mentality ( because I can't say the proper term, apparently ) that if its not perfect, it should be torn down. IE: Ground AA should one shot Air.

When did anyone in this thread ever write that Ground AA should one shot aircraft?


This thread is filled with people who think 1 infantry should be able to kill an air unit super quick

strawman

[Brusi]

This will equalize when folks realize that the 1 sec radar lock missile kills are sooper easy xp. So before we rush out with pitchforks and torches lets let the game ballance itself out we are just at the beginning.

Even more XP when you can find a guy who tries to juke and escape, instead of just flying directly at the ground out of spite, leaving you only with assist XP. :doh:

[Ghoest9]

necro is bad

[redzone]

necro is bad

Hopefully it's given MrBloodworth plenty of time to cite all those examples of players arguing for instadeath AA.

Furthermore, even if there were many players with ridiculous expectations for ground AA, I fail to see how that invalidates more moderate suggestions.

Here is the real complaint. You can't one shot aircraft.

What I am seeing is a lot of ad hominem & strawmen.

[Helwyr]

necro is bad

Actually this forum encourages you to post in existing threads rather than create new ones, and the issues of this thread have still not been addressed in game.

[Ghoest9]

Actually this forum encourages you to post in existing threads rather than create new ones, and the issues of this thread have still not been addressed in game.

In this case its obviously bad.

To bump a thread that has been dead for a month about Higby sharing new info the day before he is supposed to share new info is just being obnoxious.

[Helwyr]

In this case its obviously bad.

To bump a thread that has been dead for a month about Higby sharing new info the day before he is supposed to share new info is just being obnoxious.

Hardly, Higby has yet to properly address the Air and AA balance, and on the main forums remains a major if not 'the' major issue brought up by players. The topic remains relevant, while your objections to Redzone bumping are not.

Perhaps Higby will properly address the Air imbalance in PS2 tonight and this thread and all others like it can finally rest in peace.

[FreeSpeech]

Are any of the patch changes going to balance the fighters in general, like I don't know making the Reaver actually worth a dam? It dies to small arms fire, can't manouvere for crap and it's guns even when upgraded are just WOEful against any target - the damage is pitiful.