Quick suggestion for A2A lock-on missiles.

[wasdie]

I'm watching the May 4th Squad Beacon on youtube right now and Higby was talking about making A2A dogfighting between ESFs more skill based and fun for a larger amount of players.

We'll ignore ground based threats for the sake of discussion. Right now you're either great with the main cannon or you're dead. Great for skillful players and I'm 100% supportive of that kind of gameplay. However the A2A lock-on missiles have become pretty much irrelevant since flares have become near mandatory for ESF survivability thanks to the abundant amount of lock-on weaponry.

What I was thinking of adding to the selection of A2A weaponry, or changing what we currently have, is lifted from a gameplay mechanic in Ace Combat. Certain kinds of specialty weaponry in Ace Combat are lock-on missiles that only locks on if the player can keep their target within a circular area on their HUD. The missile is a near guaranteed hit if the player could do that, as long as the target wasn't flying straight at the missile and would dodge at the last second.

I believe a mechanic like that would add a great layer of depth to the pretty lackluster A2A combat and give pilots who aren't as great at A2A combat with the front cannon another option. The missiles fired would be high velocity and have a decent range, but would only track targets within that radius. It would be up to the player to make sure their target stays within the radius on their hud. It's kind of like a wire guided missile only you're just maintaining a lock.

The kicker is that these missiles will ignore flares (as they are going to be radar guided). The only way to escape is to evade the missile by getting out of the radius on the enemy's hud so the missile loses track and just flies straight out of radar guidance range.

That may sound OP but hear me out. This actually works if the missile is high velocity enough. A pilot would not be able to use these missiles in a turning battle, they would need to boom and zoom their enemies bringing a whole new subset of tactics into the fight. A turn fight would still require the pilots to use their nose cannon. The missiles are higher velocity which means there is only a bit of time to guide them to their target. Evasions and afterburners would be a great way to counter such a threat as would be getting in nice and close. The missiles would also also need a small warm-up period for them to reach maximum maneuverability, thus making them useless in a turn battle. You would have to have some distance between you and your target.

These weapons would be great for catching pilots who like retreat from any fight the second they take a bit of damage and it would bring a nice set of tactics into the A2A game.

I've thought about these kind of missiles since the whole problem with the fire-and-forget A2A missiles were introduced to the game causing all sorts of problems. Right now they are just too shallow and most of the time just absolutely useless. Nobody likes being chased down by something that isn't actually guided by a player and takes no real skill (this is also why I hate lock-on launchers). This would require much more active player input and would encourage the use of new tactics during dogfights hopefully giving them some depth.

Feel free to poke all the holes in the world into this idea. I'm just throwing it out there.

I don't even pilot, I just know this is a gameplay mechanic that I enjoy in other games that seems to have some merit here.

[Shogun]

or devide the lock on missiles and make them use different methods of lockon!

so the esf user has to choose if he puts chaff or flares on his craft!

one only helps against ground 2 air missiles, the other helps only versus a2a missiles.

this way most esf will still keep their immunity against the many g2a weapons, but will get vulnerable to air attacks. and dedicated dogfighters may choose to go for the a2a protection, but should not fly too low or mess with groundunits.

another thing i thought of, could change the lock mechanics from auto to semiauto, to actually use some skill.
not sure how to do this exactly, but we all agree, that just waiting 5 seconds for the missile to lock on doesn´t need much skill. maybe heatseeker missiles, that only lock on when you approach from behind and have a clear direct line to the engines, or when aiming at an esf, you get two parts of a reticule and by rotating your craft to one or the other side (barrel roll) these parts change position much like in many movies. but it would not autoadjust after 5 seconds, you have to steer right to get a lock, maybe putting your craft to the same yaw as the enemy if that makes sense. so if you do it right, you can lock on without having to wait 5 seconds.
for joystick control i would suggest using the little digital crosshat to manually lock on targets while flying with the rest of the stick by steering a second reticule over a third jumping one that follows the enemy , but joysticks are not supported and i don´t know how to do this with keyboard mouse.(don´t know how to fly at all with this weird controls in ps2)

[Whiteagle]

Well me and Chip have started to discuss ESF Loadout Changes here (http://www.planetside-universe.com/showthread.php?t=54887), and one of the things I brought up was possible changes to Secondary Weapons...

We haven't gotten into Air-to-Air Secondaries yet, but you're welcome to chime in.

While your current idea seems nice, I kind of have a few issues with it...

One is whether or not it's actually feasible for missiles to have this kind of tracking in the game.
Ace Combat can afford to have all sorts of mechanics like that because it's an instance based Air Combat game, but Planetside 2 is an MMO.
Not only would this have to monitor player input (I.E. their Camera View), but it would also have to correlate that with the other players position...
...If you've been on the Sony Forums recently, you'll notice quite a few complaints about sporadic and jumpy vehicle movement since the last update, which those who actually know a thing or two about online game design are suggesting is the result of SOE changing the "interpolative netcode smoothing" to update player positions faster in order to combat infantry exploiting quick side to side movements to mess with hit registration.
This apparently results in Laggy Vehicle Players jumping all over the place like they are possessed.

The other... is whether such a Missile would actually be any use in Air-to-Air Combat...
Like you've said, this is for chasing down fleeing ESFs, but if you have to keep a circle HUD marker on them anyways why not just use the Nose Gun?

[Galron]

I haven't tried running an AA mossy since release, I'll try it this week and see how it holds up. Though I do think quite a few people run with flares. Would be nice to see a more defined role with radar guided missles as stated above.

[phungus]

I haven't tried running an AA mossy since release, I'll try it this week and see how it holds up. Though I do think quite a few people run with flares. Would be nice to see a more defined role with radar guided missles as stated above.

Your primary dps will still be your rotary - use the lock ons to manipulate pilot behavior or to chase down runners who are being evasive - do not use A2Am in cq combat, that'll just get you killed.

Accept now that there will be a 50% chance that the missiles you fire will do no damage.



Here's the thing with A2Am.

Do you find yourself often winning engagements but not able to finish off runners? Are you willing to sacrifice rocket pods in order to finish off more ESFs who run away? If so, A2Am are for you. If not, you'll probably find them useless.

[maradine]

Do you find yourself often winning engagements but not able to finish off runners? Are you willing to sacrifice rocket pods in order to finish off more ESFs who run away? If so, A2Am are for you. If not, you'll probably find them useless.

When doing pure air superiority, yeah, that's definitely a big deal. The problem is that the opportunity cost of not having the pods on is so utterly massive. I'm embarrassed to admit that even my A2A Scythe fitting is podded now for exactly that reason. Getting that one runner every dozen engagements or so simply isn't worth missing out on all the other targets of opportunity that present themselves between dogfights.

I'd still prefer a pair of Mk84s under the wings, personally.

[wasdie]

Like you've said, this is for chasing down fleeing ESFs, but if you have to keep a circle HUD marker on them anyways why not just use the Nose Gun?

This is why I said boom and zoom tactics. This is where you come in from high altitude, line up your target, and engage while moving quickly in pretty much a straight line, the whole while keeping your HUD centered on your target.

A nose cannon is really good at short range, this is more of a medium to long range weapon. You would engage as far away as you can with a lock while moving at a high speed. This means you need to have your attack run all lined up before you do it as you'll be unable to make really hard turns while moving at max speed. You end up engaging the enemy while moving at high speed so the missile velocity is even harder. 2 missiles will burn an ESF and then right before you pull up you get a burst with the nose cannon and destroy the target.

I get your criticism on how exactly the server would track such a lock. I would assume it would work like the current locks only the attacking player cannot initiate a lock from their client side without their hud lined up correctly. That's all client side in my eyes. The client would only send the lock to the server if it's within the area. That's just how I thought of it, but jerky and laggy vehicles would be a pain to use this with.

So really these missiles would be useful but only by the players willing to adopt a playstyle that works with these missiles. Really fast hit-and-run tactics. Keep the current missiles how they are for current turning dogfights. If you're more of a turn and burn fighter then you'll want those, but people with flares will counter. If you want to counter these new missiles you would need to replace your flares with chaffs to disrupt the radar lock on.

Comparing this to WWII fighter planes you have the Messerschmitt Bf-109 vs. a Spitfire. The 109 has to use steep angles and line up their attacks while the Spitfire can corner at much lower velocities and is in general more maneuverable in turning fights. I know certain variants of the 109 changed its flight properties but in general you had the 2 schools of thought colliding with each other and making for some very interesting combat.

This gives pilots 2 distinct approaching to A2A. A guy using rocket pods would be a great target for a person using these new missiles as he'll be slow and hovering (usually, even attack runs are predictable in their direction and slower in speed). A good pilot with these new missiles will be able to lock on, fire 2 missiles, and strafe them with the nose cannon unless the rocketpodder had chafes, or was smart enough to do a roll. It could be a lot of fun for all involved really.

These missiles also have a greater range so you can hit liberators and galaxies from a safer distance away, only they won't do much damage and the lib/gal can pack chafes. Really a liberator or a galaxy shouldn't be relying solely on their on board armaments for escort anyways.

[WSNeo]

Haha wow. I just finished watching the Squad Beacon and thought the exact same thing when Higby mentioned fleshing out A2A gameplay.

The missile that you were referring to is the Semi-active Air-to-Air Missile (SAAM).

As a fellow Ace Combat fan there were also a few other suggestions that I would like to add as well:

Advanced Long-ranged Air-to-Air Missile (XLAA):

Locks onto up to four targets within a long range, the downside would be that that could be countered by flares and possibly have a slower base lockon timer (Requiring people to cert into reducing the lockon time)

Advanced Medium-ranged Air-to-Air Missile (XMAA):
Locks onto up to four targets within a medium range (The tradeoff could be a higher damage capacity)

Ace Combat list of weapons:
http://acecombat.wikia.com/wiki/List_of_Weapons

[Whiteagle]

This is why I said boom and zoom tactics. This is where you come in from high altitude, line up your target, and engage while moving quickly in pretty much a straight line, the whole while keeping your HUD centered on your target.

A nose cannon is really good at short range, this is more of a medium to long range weapon. You would engage as far away as you can with a lock while moving at a high speed.

...

Keep the current missiles how they are for current turning dogfights. If you're more of a turn and burn fighter then you'll want those, but people with flares will counter.

...

A guy using rocket pods would be a great target for a person using these new missiles as he'll be slow and hovering (usually, even attack runs are predictable in their direction and slower in speed). A good pilot with these new missiles will be able to lock on, fire 2 missiles, and strafe them with the nose cannon unless the rocketpodder had chafes, or was smart enough to do a roll. It could be a lot of fun for all involved really.

These missiles also have a greater range so you can hit liberators and galaxies from a safer distance away, only they won't do much damage and the lib/gal can pack chafes. Really a liberator or a galaxy shouldn't be relying solely on their on board armaments for escort anyways.
This is where you're lack of Dogfighting experience in THIS game:

I don't even pilot, I just know this is a gameplay mechanic that I enjoy in other games that seems to have some merit here.
...Shows.

Air-to-Air Lock-ons really only have a chance to kill IF your opponent flies in semi-straight lines, allowing you enough time to get multiple locks.
But since Nose Guns are far more useful for plinking a straight flying target anyways, most Air Battles turn into Cornering Matches and you're better off trying to land a hit with Dumb-fire Rocket Pods then wait for a Tone.

That's the problem, A2A Missiles right now are WORTHLESS for actually Dogfighting because once you start circling its very hard to maintain a Lock let alone fire one off.

The issue your idea faces is that Planetside 2 Air Engagements happen on a MUCH smaller Scale then Ace Combat, with most ESFs circling each other within 500 METERS!

[Boildown]

As someone who has played Aces High (WW2-era air and tank MMO), I don't think there's much hope for air combat in Planetside 2 while all the aircraft fly like helicopters and there's no concept of momentum and E states.

I mean hell this game is such a hack they actually vary the force of gravity on various projectiles, listed in the changes each patch notes. They have to do this because they didn't model drag, didn't model any aerodynamic effects, and didn't model kinetic energy. I'm not asking for a full blown simulation, but Quake 1 came out in 1995 and had better physics than PS2.

So no, there's little hope for an air game in PS2 that actually makes sense. I don't care what they hack together.

Here's what they should do, because I hate levying criticism without suggestions:

Make lolpods a primary weapon only. If you use it, you lose your nosegun. You specialize vs. the ground and you will probably lose to other ESFs, its a tradeoff. Then, they can nerf Ground to Air weapons back, and buff A2A missiles a bit, to give the lolpodders some hope of defending themselves, and bring Libs back to having a chance again.

The role of ESFs will be to clear the way for ground-specialist ESFs and Libs (and Gals). This will result in a lot hawt ESF vs ESF action without the constant running from flak and SAMs. No need to introduce new weapons or make massive changes.

[CrankyTRex]

I'm not sure guided missiles will be much better than what we have now. Dogfighting in this game seems to consist of half "shoot the other guy who has no idea you're there" and half "spin around each other in circles until somebody else picks one of you off (usually AA from the ground)".

I don't mind fire and forget so long as the pilot has options to evade it. Right now, if you don't have a flare or something to swing behind, the missile's pretty much going to hit no matter what you do. I've seen my missiles loop around a fighter and hit it in the cockpit even.

In addition, not having rocket pods (I don't) seems to be a huge disadvantage. The whole system is currently designed around the expectation that you will have them and flares, since the ground-based AA is buffed to deal with that scenario, making it a complete PIA if you're not basically zipping in, lighting up a ground target, and zipping away.

As someone who has played Aces High (WW2-era air and tank MMO), I don't think there's much hope for air combat in Planetside 2 while all the aircraft fly like helicopters and there's no concept of momentum and E states.

I mean hell this game is such a hack they actually vary the force of gravity on various projectiles, listed in the changes each patch notes. They have to do this because they didn't model drag, didn't model any aerodynamic effects, and didn't model kinetic energy. I'm not asking for a full blown simulation, but Quake 1 came out in 1995 and had better physics than PS2.



Yeah watching something as big as a Lib move like a dogfighter and just hold itself half inverted while the rear gunner picks off fighters really speaks to how weird the flight model in this game is.

[Galron]

I haven't tried running an AA mossy since release, I'll try it this week and see how it holds up. Though I do think quite a few people run with flares. Would be nice to see a more defined role with radar guided missles as stated above.

So I tried it, somewhere in between a month or so after release and now game update wise, their lock on range got at least halved. They fucking SUCK. The only way they were useful is that at long range you could lock someone on and get more dps on them compared to leading with the needler. I am suprised more people havent complained, but then again im not because everyone obviously stopped using them.