ESF Update Plans via Kevmo

[maradine]

https://forums.station.sony.com/ps2/index.php?threads/current-esf-update-plans.138396/

"The following is a list of upcoming changes for ESF (Empire Specific Fighter) update.

Please remember everything listed here is just the current plan and everything is subject to change. Also note that some components may be split up into other updates, so they may not all be added at once.

Lock-On Adjustments

We’re making some adjustments to anti-air based lock-on weapons with the goal of making lock-on weapons less frustrating and more interesting for both those using them and those on the receiving end.

Mechanics Changes:


All anti-air lock on weapons will become maintained on lock. The shooter must keep the target locked for the duration.
The closer a lock-on target is, the faster it will acquire a lock.
Lock-on missiles will travel faster
Lock-on missile lifespan will be reduced to around 5 seconds (down from 8 or 10 seconds depending on the weapon)


The above changes are intended to create a more interesting risk vs reward dynamic for lock-on missiles. For example, at point blank range, the weapon may lock on instantly and the projectile be too fast to dodge, while at 300 meters it may take 2.5 seconds + maintaining the lock.

The shorter life span is also intended to remove some of the extra frustration when attempting to dodge a missile only to have it hit you seven seconds later.

Feedback Changes:

The following list are changes we are considering. Some may become standard UI feedback, some may get rolled into certifications:


Players who lock-on to you and fire, will be spotted for you
The lock-on display will show a number indicating how many different sources are locking on to you
The lock-on display will indicate what type of weapon is locking/locked-on
Missiles that are locked-on to you will display on the mini-map
Lock-on indicator will display in third person camera


Other Changes:


We are fixing some lock-on missile bugs and making improvements for lock-on missiles being represented more accurately to remote clients.
Flares: Based on how the above changes work, flares may be adjusted.
The bug with stealth certifications not always granting the lock-on reduction buff will be fixed


Experience Changes

Players will be awarded kills and assists for players that suicide or log out.
The kill will be awarded to the player who last inflicted damage, whether that damage was done to their vehicle or to the player themselves.

New ESF Weapons

Reminder, all the below weapons are works in progress and subject to change.
The weapons below are designed to be air combat options for the secondary (wing mounted) slots. They are intended to supplement the nose cannons.

NS-50 Mass Drivers

Current Description: "Mass Drivers are capable of launching two 50mm rounds accurately and at a high speed. The Mass Driver must reload after each shot."

The intent of the mass driver is to create a long range air to air weapon. Although a single shot is high damage, by itself its damage over time is low compared to a nose cannon. It will have limited usefulness against ground targets.

Coyote Missiles

Current Description: "Coyote Missiles are compact, short range missiles that lock-on to enemy aircraft and inflict light damage. Coyote Missiles can lock-on to targets quickly, but have a short lock-on range and lose established locks quickly."

Coyote Missiles cannot damage as quickly as a nose cannon as it takes several seconds to unload a full volley of missiles.

Locust Cannons

Current Description: "Locust cannons are high velocity machine guns that boast a high bullet spread and increased magazine size, allowing it to engage targets with less accuracy but still score hits. The fire rate ramps up for a short period when it begins firing."

The Locust inflicts comparable damage to a nose cannon and can sustain fire for a longer period. The spin up time is intended to limit its usefulness in a high speed dogfight.

External Fuel Tank Certification Line

We want to make the fuel tanks a more competitive option for the wing mount slot. A certification line is being added that increases the top speed of the vehicle. This stacks with the high speed racer chassis.

Existing Balance Changes

A tuning pass is being done on the default and rotary nose cannons.

Default Cannons


Normalizing Cone of Fire to be the same across each empire
TTK (against other ESFs) between the empires has been brought closer together
Clip Sizes have increased to allow for longer sustained fire
Fall off damage has been added starting at 200 meters


Rotary Cannons


All Rotaries, regardless of empire, can now kill an ESF in a single clip without having to get magazine size upgrades
TTK (against other ESFs) between the empires has been brought closer together
Fall off damage was added starting at 150 meters


On top of that, we’re adjusting the empire distinctions.


Scythe weapons used to just be in between the Reaver and Mosquito weapons and have a slower projectile. Instead, they will have the quickest projectile (instead of slowest) and will reload faster.
Reaver weapons retain a higher damage and faster TTK. They also suffer less from the added fall off damage.
Mosquito weapons retain the quickest fire rate but also receive a larger clip size increase for longer sustained fire/fewer reloads.


Stealth Certifications

We’re planning, for all vehicles, to adjust each rank of stealth so that the final rank removes you from the mini-map while the previous ranks lower the range.
We’re also fixing the bug where stealth would not always slow lock-on times.
Lowering the engine audio is still planned, but not as part of the ESF update.

Fire Suppression Certifications

We’re planning, for all vehicles, to adjust fire suppression so that when activated it will apply a small heal over time for the vehicle. This works at anytime and not just when critically damaged. When activated while in critical damage, it will now set your health to above critical, instead of adding a flat amount to your current health pool

Galaxy Repair & Ammo Supply Certifications

We’re considering Galaxy repair and ammo supply certifications. Giving ESFs and Liberators more locations to re-arm from and more objectives to attack/defend in the sky."

[Hamma]

Some great stuff in here. Going to spend some time and digest it a bit.

[ChipMHazard]

Hope you don't mind me adding the notes to your post, Maradine:p

I like the proposed feedback changes, the Galaxy rearm ability and bringing all the rotatries in line. Not sure about the lock-on changes, but they look good enough on paper. I'm also dubious as to what would limit the mass driver against ground targets, at least when it comes to infantry. I can already forsee sniping ESFs.

[Lonehunter]

I just wet my pants




and it wasn't urine

I LOVE those weapon ideas

Missiles that are locked-on to you will display on the mini-map
HUGE
Lock-on indicator will display in third person camera
Only thing I'm not a fan of. Situational awareness of 3rd person should sacrifice something

Edit:
All Rotaries, regardless of empire, can now kill an ESF in a single clip without having to get magazine size upgrades
Ok I don't really like this either. They're adding all these AA tools plus buffing the ones we have?

[maradine]

Hope you don't mind me adding the notes to your post, Maradine:p

Not at all. I'll remove my color comment and replace it here -

Surprisingly, I'm on-board with most/all of this.

Only thing I'm not a fan of. Situational awareness of 3rd person is equivalent should sacrifice something

Concur, but then again, I'm also in favor of removing 3rd person all together, increasing the flight envelope to hypersonic, and mandating joystick control. :D

[Calista]

Concur, but then again, I'm also in favor of removing 3rd person all together, increasing the flight envelope to hypersonic, and mandating joystick control. :D

Brings up a point. Would be nice to see joystick support evolve into 21st century supported capabilities.

[Edfishy]

Brings up a point. Would be nice to see joystick support evolve into 21st century supported capabilities.

World of Warplanes having an exceptional model to base this off of.

[Hmr85]

Digging the adjustments to the galaxy. Does this mean we can do inflight reloads and repairs if we have two gals flying next to each other? If so Oh my gawd the possibility's. This is like a dream come true for fighter pilots.

[Rolfski]

My fear with this update: BR 100 ace pilots will completely rape everything that moves in the air, while easily dodging everything that's thrown at them. Effectively chasing the majority of the player base out of their ESF's. Being a mediocre pilot will make you farming material more than ever.

I was expecting specialized A2G weapons as well in this update. G2A nerfs aside, A2G didn't seem to get much attention.

[maradine]

My fear with this update: BR 100 ace pilots will completely rape everything that moves in the air, while easily dodging everything that's thrown at them. Effectively chasing the majority of the player base out of their ESF's. Being a mediocre pilot will make you farming material more than ever.


Perhaps, but isn't that the very model of a high-skillcap specialty? Besides, you can always drag them back into an umbrella. Flak is the benevolent and great equalizer.

[camycamera]

this is excellent news! :D

[Lonehunter]

The Galaxy repair is a long time dream of mine, as long as it's active while airborne

[snafus]

Dog fighters rejoice! The A2AM plague will hopefull be brought to an end and things will be back to enjoyable flight game. Well done so far SOE, really liked the gal updates to. Just need to see some love for our other friend in the sky the Liberator. Those poor bastards still take a beating from everyone in the game.

[SternLX]

https://forums.station.sony.com/ps2/index.php?threads/current-esf-update-plans.138396/

Experience Changes
Players will be awarded kills and assists for players that suicide or log out.
The kill will be awarded to the player who last inflicted damage, whether that damage was done to their vehicle or to the player themselves.

^^^THIS I have a HUGE problem with. Amount of damage needs to be taken into consideration before anything is awarded.

How this reads to me is if say for example I Dual Burster it up and hit an ESF 1 time and 1 time only then say that pilot gets a little careless immediately after down near the deck and eats an OP Tree or Mtn side(it happens all the time). I get a full kill point and the pilot still gets a message I killed him when it's clear he ran into something? No, that's not right and should not be this way.
Or swing this the other way. I work over an ESF really good with some kind of AA and that pilot flys away and then an Infantryman hits it with his Primary, pilot suicides. That little Primary user gets the kill, and me, the guy that did all the work gets what? Nothing other than vehicle kill assist exp as it should be.
Kills should be worked for, not given away for minimal effort. Don't fall into the trappings of catering to the :cry: kids who only got vehicle kill xp and not a pilot kill point. This will artificially inflate kill counts imho.

Alternate suggestions:
Combine the separate Vehicle Kill count with Regular Kill count. So if you do kill a vehicle with someone in it you get 2 Kill points. 1 for the driver, one for the vehicle.

Digging all the other listed changes however.

[Rolfski]

Perhaps, but isn't that the very model of a high-skillcap specialty? Besides, you can always drag them back into an umbrella. Flak is the benevolent and great equalizer.

The problem is that this update is intended to lower the skill floor for players to get into the air and as it looks now, there is a severe danger that the complete opposite will happen:

Top gun players will use the extended clip size to effectively degenerate Liberators into flying coffins for every one that does not know how to manoeuvre these vehicles in A2A. The added fall off damage on the guns will favour skilled players even more. Same goes for the better ways to deal with G2A: Mediocre players will still get owned by multiple lock-ons, where top pilots will easily out-manoeuvre them all with their maxed out uber stealth and afterburners.

On paper, these changes might seem to buff newer players. In reality however, I wouldn't be surprised that they buff top pilots even more to a level that it becomes down right even more frustrating to be in the air as a mediocre pilot.

[typhaon]

Are you planning to make it significantly easier to maintain a lock?

All things being equal - no changes to flight mechanics, no changes to anything else -and just adding the changes you listed - I can't fathom a situation where someone would ever see the missiles as an effective choice.

I just tested my rotary canon and I unloaded the whole thing in less than 3 seconds.... with 5 rounds added.

At some extreme range? OK, maybe... but then we're back to the firing a pixel at a pixel and trying to keep your reticle on the target pixel. Just between you and me... that's a crummy mechanic that isn't much fun...

Missiles sure need a change - but I'm not sure this is it.

Maybe if ESF's had a 2nd seat and that guy was in charge of maintaining a laser lock after the missile was fired... also got to run some other countermeasures/put out fires or whatever (no I'm not talking about the ridiculous Harasser repairer).... that could be fun. Leave gun-only/dumbfire ESFs as still an option for solo warriors... but allow a configuration that is more dangerous and durable for teams.

At the very least it would get rid of the silly mechanic of chasing your missile to the target - WHEN YOU COULD JUST BE SHOOTING THEM INSTEAD.

Keep working. I have faith.

[SternLX]

At the very least it would get rid of the silly mechanic of chasing your missile to the target - WHEN YOU COULD JUST BE SHOOTING THEM INSTEAD.

Keep working. I have faith.
Wait what? did I miss something? Are the current Fire and forget A2A missles going away? I often fire away a missile and follow it in with rotory blazing up the target. And sometimes its the missile that finishes off the target after all my bullets riddled the target.

If this mechanic is going away then Cert Refunds can't come soon enough. I will never fly a Scythe again.

[Mordelicius]

They have to fix the base AA turret bug where it won't register hits at all, no matter how you point at an aircraft. It's as if the sights have been moved but it's still visually firing where it should.

This bug has been around since GU6 or 7. I thought they broke the AA on one of my old GU feedback thread. The turret will revert once it is destroyed and repaired again. I don't know how the bug is triggered but once it hits, that turret will be useless and players will simply abandon them.

[CrankyTRex]

Not a fan of losing the fire and forget A2A missile. What's the point of having them if you have to maintain the lock the whole time? You might as well just use rocket pods instead.

I can't see any reason to use A2A missiles in that instance unless they are extremely high speed, high damage. The whole advantage to having them was being able to lock on, fire it, and then switch back to guns to continue doing damage while it was in flight, or lock on a target fleeing into dangerous airspace for one last shot at finishing them before you had to turn back.

If that change happens, I want my certs back since that is a very different weapon from what I purchased.

Don't know about the mass driver either. You can already hit with the regular nose cannons from quite a significant distance so I can only see this thing becoming the absolute bane of a Lib pilot's existence. They're going to be getting hit from everywhere and having no way to escape it.

Love the additions to knowing what is locked on and having it on the minimap though.

Also I share the reservations about the sum total of the changes really widening the gap between newbs and aces.

[typhaon]

Sniper guns on ESFs sound hilariously bad for Lib pilots - I agree.

The overall changes to missiles and cannons seem designed to make the air game more inaccessible for the masses.

The XP change is an obviously good one.


You know... one of the best times in this game (for air fun) was the early beta when lock-ons had silly range... ESFs had a small timer and low resource costs... and ground AA wasn't this omnipotent shield.

Yes - everyone was blowing each other out of the sky with impunity - but damn were the skies full of aircraft.

I really wish someone at SOE would come in with a sledgehammer and just wipe out the current air game - it's really the weakest part of PS2's air/infantry/ground vehicle triangle.

[KesTro]

Dog fighters rejoice! The A2AM plague will hopefull be brought to an end and things will be back to enjoyable flight game. Well done so far SOE, really liked the gal updates to. Just need to see some love for our other friend in the sky the Liberator. Those poor bastards still take a beating from everyone in the game.

No way, I'll still come at you with my A2A missiles only now I can say I have skill! *Tears of self satisfaction*

[PredatorFour]

The problem is that this update is intended to lower the skill floor for players to get into the air and as it looks now, there is a severe danger that the complete opposite will happen:

Top gun players will use the extended clip size to effectively degenerate Liberators into flying coffins for every one that does not know how to manoeuvre these vehicles in A2A. The added fall off damage on the guns will favour skilled players even more. Same goes for the better ways to deal with G2A: Mediocre players will still get owned by multiple lock-ons, where top pilots will easily out-manoeuvre them all with their maxed out uber stealth and afterburners.

On paper, these changes might seem to buff newer players. In reality however, I wouldn't be surprised that they buff top pilots even more to a level that it becomes down right even more frustrating to be in the air as a mediocre pilot.

I understand your concerns but your wrong they will struggle more. The main defense in the air is to not get hit so you survive obviously. When your oponent can take you down in one clip it doesnt matter if your BR 100 or 20. The 'skill cap' is significantly reduced and i don't like this. A change like this is not needed imo.

[GeoGnome]

My only complaint is that I kind of wanted to see some kind of A2G Bombs... Ideally with laser designators attached to infantry that have to paint targets before said bombs will work.

I was kind of expecting that, after the statements made by Clegg about combinations that require multiple people to work.

But such is life I suppose.


As to the lockon changes, I am kind of glad "Fire and forget" is going to be going away. I am not a pilot, but the fact that we have something so obviously easy mode, is in and of itself sad. It's a zero skill weapon, a crutch. There exist such things in the game, and regardless of where they are, and who owns them, they should be removed. Personally, if they changed it so that that change is across all lockons for ground and air targets I'd be fine with that.

[Rolfski]

I understand your concerns but your wrong they will struggle more. The main defense in the air is to not get hit so you survive obviously. When your oponent can take you down in one clip it doesnt matter if your BR 100 or 20. The 'skill cap' is significantly reduced and i don't like this. A change like this is not needed imo.

The fact that you can take out an ESF with one clip doesn't mean anything if you don't land almost all of your shots on target, something the majority of pilots struggle with in the first place. Top ace pilots will insta-gib you now even more easily though, making the nose gun the new lol-shooter.

If there's anything devs should have learned by now is that insta-kill weapons are one of the most frustrating mechanics in the game. With the new ESF update it looks like they are bringing this mechanic to a whole new level.

[AThreatToYou]

If there's anything devs should have learned by now is that insta-kill weapons are one of the most frustrating mechanics in the game. With the new ESF update it looks like they are bringing this mechanic to a whole new level.

qft

lot of things to be said about the 1HK or near-instant death weapons

The TTK has to be more than .7 seconds for most players to even have a shot in the dark at reacting. And that's more or less not reacting successfully, just having a chance to.

[Valkar]

I like the changes but a few reservations, firslty the new weapons seem to indicate the Reaver will now be good at long range and up close with their buff to damage fall off and new long range weapon?

Second I was hoping to see the A2G fighters be the only ones able to hover and the new A2A fighters super fast without certs firstly and unable to hover (to remove reverse power thrusting dogfights)

This way A2G hover and are slower and wide open to A2A fighters whilst A2A fighters must dogfight in a more traditional way instead of the helicopter way we have now?

[Valkar]

qft

lot of things to be said about the 1HK or near-instant death weapons

The TTK has to be more than .7 seconds for most players to even have a shot in the dark at reacting. And that's more or less not reacting successfully, just having a chance to.

This is right, top pilots are almost impossible to hit anyway and virtually always get the jump on you so they will take you out even faster now. Trust me this change is bad, the only way this can be avoided is by making it impossible for A2A specced fighters to slow down and hover or reverse power thrust.

Make dogfighting high speed and this may help since ALL top pilots rely entirely on RPT to get slightly above you and unloading a clip into you.

[Valkar]

Also obviously the gauss is NC but I read somewhere that the Coyote was TR and Locust VS but can't find it, anyone know where this was confirmed?

[Gatekeeper]

Also obviously the gauss is NC but I read somewhere that the Coyote was TR and Locust VS but can't find it, anyone know where this was confirmed?

The name they give for the first weapon is the NS-50 Mass Driver. It seems odd to give it the prefix NS if it's an NC weapon (unless that's a typo). I assumed it was NS for Nanite Systems and hence a common pool weapon - in which case I'd expect the other two would be as well.

[Valkar]

The name they give for the first weapon is the NS-50 Mass Driver. It seems odd to give it the prefix NS if it's an NC weapon (unless that's a typo). I assumed it was NS for Nanite Systems and hence a common pool weapon - in which case I'd expect the other two would be as well.

Well I did think that initially but if you read the title above it says

New ESF Weapons

Reminder, all the below weapons are works in progress and subject to change.
The weapons below are designed to be air combat options for the secondary (wing mounted) slots. They are intended to supplement the nose cannons.

So from new ESF (empire specific) and there being 3 I assume its one each :(

[NewSith]

I dislike. I predict the AA vs Air debate will again turn completely into Flak vs Air debate.

I just fail to see why people think fire and forget missiles are OP, considering 10000000 missiles can be distracted by just one set of flares. If anything flares are UP, rather than lock-ons are OP.

[Gatekeeper]

Well I did think that initially but if you read the title above it says

New ESF Weapons

Reminder, all the below weapons are works in progress and subject to change.
The weapons below are designed to be air combat options for the secondary (wing mounted) slots. They are intended to supplement the nose cannons.

So from new ESF (empire specific) and there being 3 I assume its one each :(

Could be, but I think it's a bit unclear TBH. The weapons seem to fill quite different roles, which might be interesting for faction variety, but seems like it could be tough to balance well. I guess we'll see.

Also, in terms of ES characteristics - both the Locust and the Coyote seem to be TR-style weapons - the Locust being a spin-up weapon with a high RoF like the MCG and the Coyote being a lock-on swarm-missile much like the Striker.

I'd expect there to be some kind of annoying-to-use charge-up weapon for the VS ;)

[Dragonskin]

I just fail to see why people think fire and forget missiles are OP, considering 10000000 missiles can be distracted by just one set of flares. If anything flares are UP, rather than lock-ons are OP.

Especially considering with this change you will see the lock-ons on your mini map before they get to you. So you can judge for yourself if the flare is worth using to drop the lock-ons or if you should just try to out manuever the lock-on.

Overall I am glad that ESFs will be getting some work done. I haven't flown my scythe in a long time because lock-ons are kinda broken at the moment.. the Striker in particular. I will have to brush up on my weak flying skills and try to get up to par.

[Rbstr]

I hope for a larger proportion of empire-specific guns. Especially when you're homogenizing the current ESF weapons to an even greater degree.

I'd expect there to be some kind of annoying-to-use charge-up weapon for the VS ;)

Sure, plop a couple powered up lancers on the wings....without the huge damage reduction the ground based gun has against aircraft.

I'd like a new-Sauron-esque burst fire sort of gun. Maybe that can be the new A2G weapon. I'd really like a pure anti-armor cannon or wing-weapon. Easier to balance than anti-everything pods.
I hope there are new A2G weapons. Something people seem to not want to recognize: There's no point to A2A planes if there aren't any A2G planes to shoot down.

Though I really like the sound of that mass driver.
Nice big "fuck you" to all the belly-up dalton libs that have more maneuverability than a scythe.

[Valkar]

I hope for a larger proportion of empire-specific guns. Especially when you're homogenizing the current ESF weapons to an even greater degree.



Sure, plop a couple powered up lancers on the wings....without the huge damage reduction the ground based gun has against aircraft.

I'd like a new-Sauron-esque burst fire sort of gun. Maybe that can be the new A2G weapon. I'd really like a pure anti-armor cannon or wing-weapon. Easier to balance than anti-everything pods.
I hope there are new A2G weapons. Something people seem to not want to recognize: There's no point to A2A planes if there aren't any A2G planes to shoot down.

Though I really like the sound of that mass driver.
Nice big "fuck you" to all the belly-up dalton libs that have more maneuverability than a scythe.

I also would have liked a bit more variety and as my fellow Vanu stated the Coyote and Locust sound like TR weapons to me. Give the VS a nice dual lancer wing gun or even better pulse cannons similar to star trek disruptors. Think Independence Day(you did not fire that green s**t at me)!

I really wish they had made the A2G fighters the only ones able to hover but about 25% slower in flighter without AB pods. The make the A2A ones fast but unable to hover to avoid the hover reverse power thrust dog fighter we get now.

I do like that the new lock on mechanic means you can avoid lock ons entirely if you fly low but then bursters and SGswill rip you. So if you fly high Flak cant get you but lock ons can keep a LOS for the lock much easier and for longer. Sounds like balance to me :)

[Cosmical]

How about we have fighters that handle like fighters.

If you have a flying system that requires you to look at peoples glitchy tutorials on youtube just to compete, by binding a bunch of keys that arnt there as a preset, you have a silly system.

Added to that the fact that dogfights are won the fastest person to slam on their breaks and turn around. Did anyone expect them to work like this?

I mean we have flying turrets, theyre called liberators. A jet should stall if it slows beyond a certain speed, to encourage fast paced chases and high g maneuvers. And hit and run tactics on the battlefield. Not swiveling stationary targets.

[Dragonskin]

How about we have fighters that handle like fighters.

If you have a flying system that requires you to look at peoples glitchy tutorials on youtube just to compete, by binding a bunch of keys that arnt there as a preset, you have a silly system.

Added to that the fact that dogfights are won the fastest person to slam on their breaks and turn around. Did anyone expect them to work like this?

I mean we have flying turrets, theyre called liberators. A jet should stall if it slows beyond a certain speed, to encourage fast paced chases and high g maneuvers. And hit and run tactics on the battlefield. Not swiveling stationary targets.

They would have to actually make jets if you want jet combat. What they did was make all the ESFs VTOLs.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/VTOL

If you had true jets you would need landing strips since you wouldn't be able to just fly to the ground and repair then immediately get back into the action.

[Rbstr]

Get rid of the after-burning and limit maneuverability while in hover mode.
Bam, no more hover-fest because it just won't work.

[OctavianAXFive]

How I'm reading this.

Locust:

This is a ground attack alternative to rocketpods. The current rocket pods can be adjusted to be more like vehicle AP rounds. Meanwhile the Locust can take over the role of infantry mauler. It could be like having a pair of wing mounted banshees, though maybe not quite as potent against armor.

Coyote Missiles:

I'm not sure the current description is much to go off of. I assume these are more like striker rounds; they tickle you to death. I think these are meant to be the "low-skill" weapon against better pilots.

If this is true, then I think it's safe to say that this weapon will have the same kind of drawbacks/advantages as the shoulder mounted terror. Though obviously they only lock-on to air and have much shorter ranges/times.

Assuming my assumptions about the Coyote are correct, I'm already doing this: :no:

Even with a handful of drawbacks this is a nasty weapon that is distinctly easier to use than a nose cannon. Just stick with the current A2A missiles with the new lock-on mechanic.

NS-50 Mass Driver:
We'll see how this plays out because again, the description is very vague.

Some of the more general changes seem fine. No more bailers:D

I'd really like to see more distinction between ground attack and air attack however. This hybrid stuff just seems unnecessarily hard to balance. I think it takes away from other air vehicles when the little solo vehicle can fight ground and air effectively at the same time.

My personal proposal would be change how the chassis work.

Default: Racer Chassis:
Available Upgrades:
Nose: Default gun
Secondary: afterburner tanks.
This ESF variant is basically like the stock ESF you get now except it defaults to having the racer chassis. (+Top Speed)

Certable: Dogfighting Chassis:
Available Upgrades:
Nose: Rotary
Secondary: afterburner tanks, A2A missiles, Mass Drivers.
This ESF variant is highly maneuverable and designed to dominate the skies. (+Pitch, roll, brakes) (-top speed, hover)

Certable: Stability Chassis:
Available Upgrades:
Nose: ES A2G
Secondary: Rocket Pods, Locust, afterburner tanks.
This ESF variant is designed specifically for ground attack. Primary and secondary weapons can be fired simultaneously. (+Yaw, ascend/descend speed, hover) (-top speed, roll, pitch)

This should give flying an ESF more flavor, though I'd imagine a lot of pilots wouldn't be happy about giving up their ground attack powers for air superiority.

I'm not sure they'd ever go for dividing up ground and air attack. It would make it harder for pilots to provide tangible support to ground offensives if they are stuck with just one attack mode.

My counter to that line of thinking is that a single lone wolf should not be an aerial jack of all trades unless they are willing to make extreme sacrifices; in this case they would have to use the racer chassis.

This should add a combined arms element to the air warfare. The superiority ESFs need to protect the ground pounders. Outfits shouldn't have a problem divvying up tasks and it should make things far more interesting.

As a part of this proposal, I think vehicle users REALLY REALLY SHOULD be able to go to a vehicle terminal and adjust their equipment. Obviously pulling a new vehicle should cost something but changing the loadout of your current vehicle should either be free or cost way less.

[maradine]

Plus one vote for the loadout tab to open when you stop on a reload pad / ammo tower. I feel like that's been sorely missed this whole time.

[Valkar]

They would have to actually make jets if you want jet combat. What they did was make all the ESFs VTOLs.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/VTOL

If you had true jets you would need landing strips since you wouldn't be able to just fly to the ground and repair then immediately get back into the action.

I understand what you're saying and I appreciate that this is the route the dev team took to basically give us helicopters and jets all rolled into one because making two aircraft just wasn't possible at the time. But i promise you there is not a single VTOL aircraft in the world capable of flying full speed then slowing to a hover mid flight in combat, turning around and shooting at another aircraft chasing.

I think the point of what many of us is saying is that its time dogfighting came down to skill in flying where right now it is about keybinding to pull off a quick brake, reverse thrust and then hovering in a single position as you unload a clip.

Whilst many pilots will say this is skillful and many who do it are certainly excellent pilots and I have a lot of respect for them, I can tell you now that if they removed this, you would see a lot more pilots winning fights and the top gun list would change over night.

Why add joystick support when you just need to press space bar, shift and S right?

[maradine]

I think it's pretty clear at this point that they either:


have the ESF experience they wanted.
are too entrenched to change it.
are ignorant to how rockin' a good flight model can be.


I've been pushing for tiny, no-CPU things like slip since tech test. I don't think we're going to get there.

So, while I agree 100% with everything you've just said, I'm afraid we need to be enthusiastic for the things that actually can change. Namely - creation of new things that go into slots that accept SC, vs. ripping out core code on a polarizing issue. Cynical perhaps, but also realistic.

[PredatorFour]

I will wager that the new 'wing' weapons will be a total fragfest against infantry...better than lolpods are now and the nose gun possibly.

[Dragonskin]

I understand what you're saying and I appreciate that this is the route the dev team took to basically give us helicopters and jets all rolled into one because making two aircraft just wasn't possible at the time. But i promise you there is not a single VTOL aircraft in the world capable of flying full speed then slowing to a hover mid flight in combat, turning around and shooting at another aircraft chasing.

I think the point of what many of us is saying is that its time dogfighting came down to skill in flying where right now it is about keybinding to pull off a quick brake, reverse thrust and then hovering in a single position as you unload a clip.

Whilst many pilots will say this is skillful and many who do it are certainly excellent pilots and I have a lot of respect for them, I can tell you now that if they removed this, you would see a lot more pilots winning fights and the top gun list would change over night.

Why add joystick support when you just need to press space bar, shift and S right?

Hmm.. the game isn't based on true to life realism. It's sci-fi after all. They just based the design on VTOLs. I don't see how they can reduce the hover dog fight game without reducing the skill cap for pilots. I'm not a huge pilot in this game, but it seems like the reverse maneuver is one of the things that helps separate the skillful from the less skilled.

As for the joystick. What do you plan to use your free hand for while you are using your joystick hand? It's been years since I have used a joystick.. since Battlefield 2 days... but I remember using the joystick in my mouse hand and using my left hand to press keys if needed like normal. You would still get the higher precision of the joystick AND be able to use your free hand to press keys. I guess I don't get your question.

[SolLeks]

Get rid of the after-burning and limit maneuverability while in hover mode.
Bam, no more hover-fest because it just won't work.

Then we just have a Turn-fest, how boring is that? At least with the 'Hover-fest' we can do some cool things to dodge enemy fire and fight back, instead of just taping the pitch up key to start and end all of your fights.

I understand what you're saying and I appreciate that this is the route the dev team took to basically give us helicopters and jets all rolled into one because making two aircraft just wasn't possible at the time. But i promise you there is not a single VTOL aircraft in the world capable of flying full speed then slowing to a hover mid flight in combat, turning around and shooting at another aircraft chasing.

I think the point of what many of us is saying is that its time dogfighting came down to skill in flying where right now it is about keybinding to pull off a quick brake, reverse thrust and then hovering in a single position as you unload a clip.

Whilst many pilots will say this is skillful and many who do it are certainly excellent pilots and I have a lot of respect for them, I can tell you now that if they removed this, you would see a lot more pilots winning fights and the top gun list would change over night.

Why add joystick support when you just need to press space bar, shift and S right?

There are plenty of games with 'normal' jet type combat, Planetside is the only game that has this unique Vtol style combat.

No there are no real aircraft that can pull off the moves we do in this game, and yes it would probably kill the pilot if attempted in real life, but this is a arcade shooter, not a sim. We don't need to change the flight model, they would have to re work everything since there is no energy management and the maps are tiny with a very low flight ceiling. I honestly don't think the list of aces would change over night even if this change was made, other then the fact more than half of them would quit on the spot. The aircraft are VTOL because thats what they made in PS1, also, VTOL makes more seance 900 years from now anyway. Why would we still be using the same jets then?

as for skill, there is no more skill involved in normal jet fighting than in PS2 Vtol jets. this is just like the short TTK vs long TTK discussion, they both have their ups and downs. your version of a dogfight in this game is very wrong when comparing agenced good pilots, sure doing a barrel roll turn will work on bad pilots, but a good pilot will kill you mid turn if you tried to do the same. Maybe instead of calling this style of flight skill less, you should try learning it and fighting good pilots instead of farming noobs.

Also, who needs joystick support when you just need to hold pitch up and tap S ever so often, right?

[WSNeo]

I really don't get the reasoning behind nerfing FAF missiles. Yes they have a low cap to use but they have always been difficult to hit with, ESPECIALLY versus a good ESF pilot that know how to stay out of your lock-on view and quickly get behind you.

If anything the flares cooldowns should be shortened overall, and new options for countermeasures should be considered and making flares actually work like flares (Missiles actually tracking and following the flares), and change the name of the current flares to ECM (Electronic Countermeasures) as that's literally how they are working now.

So in short:

"Flares" should be renamed to ECM (Electronic Countermeasures) the primary role of this would be to provide wide area denial of lock ons for a set period of time and work to break missiles guided through this new "maintained lock" mechanic.
This would allow actual Flares to be introduced as an alternative. This could have a considerably lower cooldown or be able to be used in rapid succession (two or three flares in a burst) before going on cooldown. The main role that this would have would be to fend off multiple missile locks in a short period of time.


That being said I actually enjoy FAF missiles. I don't have any gripes against them other than possibly their life duration, which I honestly hardly have a problem with as I tend to outrun them from time to time whenever my flares are on CD (I guess that my playstyle is getting an unneeded buff).

I also feel that the maintained locks are going to make it a nightmare fighting top pilots as I can rarely get out of their sights currently. I use the Racer 2 or 3 frame and it feels next to pointless trying to dogfight them rather than do hit and run strikes with FAF missiles on each pass.

[maradine]

Also, who needs joystick support when you just need to hold pitch up and tap S ever so often, right?

Analog proportional control is a wonderful thing.

[typhaon]

How about we have fighters that handle like fighters.

If you have a flying system that requires you to look at peoples glitchy tutorials on youtube just to compete, by binding a bunch of keys that arnt there as a preset, you have a silly system.

Added to that the fact that dogfights are won the fastest person to slam on their breaks and turn around. Did anyone expect them to work like this?

I mean we have flying turrets, theyre called liberators. A jet should stall if it slows beyond a certain speed, to encourage fast paced chases and high g maneuvers. And hit and run tactics on the battlefield. Not swiveling stationary targets.

I'd really like to see this sentiment picked up and run with by the community... I hate the way ESFs fly - it's corny!

Notice whenever a dogfight is shown in an SOE promo video... they don't show THAT. It would draw lols - so instead you see what looks like traditional style air combat... which isn't what really happens.

I remember hearing these "skill" arguments when ADAD and bunnyhoppying were in a worse state. I don't hear a lot of complaining now that they have been muzzled.

It seems to me all the flight characteristics are already in the game. It isn't a matter of ripping out the code and starting over, it's just a matter of tweaking values. Make it so they can't stop on a dime as fast... rotate as quickly while hovering... and can't accelerate from a dead stop, as fast.

[Cosmical]

I'd really like to see this sentiment picked up and run with by the community... I hate the way ESFs fly - it's corny!

Notice whenever a dogfight is shown in an SOE promo video... they don't show THAT. It would draw lols - so instead you see what looks like traditional style air combat... which isn't what really happens.

I mean i understand that there isn't enough guaranteed ground area for a jet type vehicle to land. But the VTOL jet in battlefield 3 does a pretty good job of feeling like a jet with hover ability, but the hover is generally quite crippling, and would never be used in a dogfight with another plane.

Its just used for landing, and the very rare situation your fighting 1 guy with just a rifle and can afford to be cocky.

[maradine]

If there was a "let's improve the air model without scaring away the hovertank enthusiasts" session, I'd be on a flight to San Diego tomorrow.

[Cosmical]

If there was a "let's improve the air model without scaring away the hovertank enthusiasts" session, I'd be on a flight to San Diego tomorrow.

I think the way they could make air combat more interesting is by making your after burners been integral. i.e. turning them on allows you to ridiculous maneuvers, high g turns whatever. But also, slamming on your air brakes costs afterburner fuel, as does pulsing your upwards thrust.

Therefore air combat would not only be about risky fun flying, but it would also be about maintaining or correctly using your afterburner fuel supply (maintaining within normal flying speeds douesnt drain anything). And if you try too much, you will find yourself trying to hover with no supply, and will drop like a brick.

Also this would encourage people who are amazing pilots to take the afterburner fuel increase slot, allowing them to out fly people.

[Redshift]

Hmm a lot of these changes seem to detrimental to air combat, surely fun air combat comes from using guns and dog fighting, instant close range missiles, faf missles and spray and prey machine guns with the same ttk as the rotary surely just lowers the skill to pathetic?

[PredatorFour]

Hmm a lot of these changes seem to detrimental to air combat, surely fun air combat comes from using guns and dog fighting, instant close range missiles, faf missles and spray and prey machine guns with the same ttk as the rotary surely just lowers the skill to pathetic?

Yes it does. That was what i was trying to say earlier when i said the skill level would be lowered so 'not so good' pilots can kill 'good' ones easier.

[bpostal]

As a mainly infantry player, I wasn't really paying attention to this thread...my mistake. If there's a chance we can see something akin to Lodestar's in the game then I'm going to get excited. I can't fly and I don't really drive so the potential addition of a support role like this is amazing.
Also, imagine the XP that can roll off of that thing!

[OctavianAXFive]

The farther this thread goes, the more it seems to be that the folks here at PSU aren't really interested in adding new guns and the like to ESFs.

The focus seems mostly to be on countermeasures and the mechanics of flight.

I quite like the flight mechanics though I have to admit they aren't intuitive. I realize that while realism isn't always a good goal, it has some great benefits.

People coming from other games with aerial combat are going to be at a loss in PS2. I know I was super frustrated in the beta with ESFs. I understand basic dogfighting principals, but those basics don't apply to PS2. I had to relearn the hard way how to fly backwards and shoot, something that is a bit mind bending to new pilots and not at all intuitive when the average person thinks about a dogfight.

This is good and bad. It's good because ESF fights definitely have a unique flavor. It's bad because it's not intuitive.

I think the ESF flight mechanic should be something on the list of things SoE should examine and reevaluate over the long term. Their versatility is a boon for now but as the game ages and the developers want to add new vehicles or freshen-up some of the mechanics, having an aircraft that does it all can really get in the way.

It's for that reason that I really want to see them divide out the ESF's role in the combined arms effort.

[maradine]

The farther this thread goes, the more it seems to be that the folks here at PSU aren't really interested in adding new guns and the like to ESFs.

Quite interested. Everything listed sounds exciting. It just won't scratch what some consider to be an underlying itch.

[Lonehunter]

The guns are a huge deal to me, I hope there's a station cash sale before they come out so I can buy them all.

They keep adding infantry weapons and have even added, and expanded choices of ground vehicle weapons. Air vechs haven't got anything yet, it's about time.

[Artalion]

The key to reducing the ace pilot problem is giving newbies a means of taking them at significantly longer ranges. It is very telling that most of the ace pilots prefer using close range cannons to longer range AA missiles.

It's not really that difficult to figure out why either. Using AA missiles to lock on will tell your opponent that you are out there, which makes it difficult to sneak up on him. AA missiles take a long time to lock on, more than enough time for a pilot to begin taking evasive maneuvers. Finally, if you do manage to get a lock, he can break the lock easily by deploying flares.

When newbies are trying to take out an enemy pilot, they use AA missiles, but the enemy pilot knows how to get out of this. The enemy then maneuvers his plane into a close quarter dog fight, gets behind the newbie and blasts them with his cannon.

So, it naturally follows that the devs would tweak missiles so that they could be fired from further away and take less time to lock on, right?

Nope. Instead, they give us missiles that require us to keep the target in sight, not just for the lock on, but for the entire duration of the flight. Also, the moment you lock on and fire, you announce your presence, not just to the target, but to every hostile in the vicinity, thanks to the auto-spot mechanic.

At that range, it would be better just to use the cannons. There is no warning to the enemy until you decide to fire, and when you do fire, you won't activate a magic "I'm here! Shoot me!" option. We don't have this kind of thing for infantry or tanks, and it is for the same reason that we shouldn't put it on air targets: it punishes stealth.

At the end of the day, the Ace pilots would still be beasts at the close range game and have the advantage of being able to see their targets more clearly. The addition of close range lock on missiles will not work, because Ace pilots don't use them, nor do they need them to take out their targets. Other pilots do.


*******************


Something that really needs a balance pass is the flare launcher. Pilots love that it can break missile locks, but they hate the recharge time. Missile people hate them because they can break the lock and fly out of range before they can reacquire.

I have a way of making both players happy. Here is how I would change it:

1. Make flare launchers be ammo based. Each ESF has a certain number of flares. They can be fired at any time, but if you run out, then you will have to resupply them at the nearest ammo center.

2. Flares are no longer 100% effective, how much less effective is negotiable. For the sake of argument, let's say it is 50% effective. This means that if two missiles are chasing you, a flare might fool one of them.

Both of these combined would remove a key frustration to both pilots and missile folks. The pilots would be able to use their flares as frequently as they were locked, without having to wait for that ability to recharge. The downside is that they run the risk of running out at an inconvenient time or using one and still getting hit.

The missile folks would be happy because their targets wouldn't be guaranteed escape, and even if they did, the missile folks would know that it would have cost them a couple of flares. Furthermore, there would be the hope that they would run across a fighter which had run out of flares.

There is also a financial advantage to making the second change. Currently, missile players (read: SAM's) are not very good at killing aircraft because flares give fighters de facto missile invulnerability. If you need AA defense, you pull a MAX, which has a free burster.

But limit that effectiveness and SAM's become a lot more viable, particularly since MAX's now cost significantly more infantry resources. If you want a SAM, you're going to need certs or station cash, and people will pony up the latter if they think the weapon will give them an edge over MAX flak.

I wrote this from the perspective of someone who bought a Hawk, only to find that it was effectively useless in an environment where every pilot equips flares. But it also applies to players that use lock on missiles on their ESF.

The updated flare launcher would also be good for pilots. Rather than just hitting a flare and running for cover, you could a couple flares, which is more dramatic (and realistic, if that sort of thing matters to you.) It also isn't vulnerable to cool down times (reloading is another matter, but a clip would still give you some flexibility.)

Until this mechanic is updated, missile weapons, any kind of missile weapons, will be at a disadvantage when compared to their projectile counterparts (flak, cannons, etc).

[PredatorFour]

2. Flares are no longer 100% effective, how much less effective is negotiable. For the sake of argument, let's say it is 50% effective. This means that if two missiles are chasing you, a flare might fool one of them.



Some interesting ideas but i would argue that this is already ingame with the striker as it stands. Also adding in this change would make going anywhere near a TR striker nest suicide for sure.


I think the flare mechanic is good as it is, altho with more lock ons coming in they could possibly reduce the flare ready timer.



What i would like to see is more variety with my scythe weapons. I would like my turbo laser to have a choice of anti-tank depleted uranium rounds or standard infantry rounds/aircraft. I'd like my pods to be either anti tank or infantry. All they would have to do is change the colour of the ammo to red or something when it comes out so you can see which ammo an ESF has.

[Rbstr]

I wrote this from the perspective of someone who bought a Hawk, only to find that it was effectively useless in an environment where every pilot equips flares. But it also applies to players that use lock on missiles on their ESF.

The thing is you need flares or there are missiles all over you, especially against TR. It's all locks all the time.

And missiles hurt. It's not just a little tap on the wrist.

[snafus]

So many people hating on the current flight mechanics on PSU. I personally love how PS2 is different then any other flight based game. There really is so few games that allow the kind of freedom and creativity you can have with PS2. This game is special and in a really good way. As it rewards fast thinking and twitch based skills while flying an ESF. And allows the user to ignore the laws of physics that hold back other flight sims. Simply put, adapt and enjoy the amazing flight aspect PS2 offers.

[maradine]

You see interaction with a real physics model as limiting and stifling to creativity. I see a guy who's never actually learned ACM (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Basic_fighter_maneuvers), and doesn't know the astounding breadth of virtuosity available when maneuvering in a fluid with energy and angle-of-attack constraints. Truly, my friend, I feel you're the one who's been held back.

PS2 flight is fun. But don't hate on those asking for a bit more. They know something you haven't had the opportunity to pick up yet.

[Rbstr]

You see interaction with a real physics model as limiting and stifling to creativity. I see a guy who's never actually learned ACM (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Basic_fighter_maneuvers), and doesn't know the astounding breadth of virtuosity available when maneuvering in a fluid with energy and angle-of-attack constraints. Truly, my friend, I feel you're the one who's been held back.

Meh, you can take your pretension back to Il2.

"breadth of virtuosity?" seriously? :rofl:

[maradine]

Quite serious. More notes, better composers. But not everyone likes classical, so whatever.

And I'll take my pretension back to WT, thank you very much. ;) IL-2 was too early to capture a ton of MP share, sadly.

[snafus]

You see interaction with a real physics model as limiting and stifling to creativity. I see a guy who's never actually learned ACM (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Basic_fighter_maneuvers), and doesn't know the astounding breadth of virtuosity available when maneuvering in a fluid with energy and angle-of-attack constraints. Truly, my friend, I feel you're the one who's been held back.

PS2 flight is fun. But don't hate on those asking for a bit more. They know something you haven't had the opportunity to pick up yet.

Hah the limitation that mimicking real flight physics makes for another cookie cutter and boring flight sim. By simply ignoring the restraints that are usually bound on players you give more freedom to the player base. So instead of copying 60 year old dog fighting tactics we can actually come up with some new fresh and in my opinion much better experience. So adapt to the freedom that PS2 gives you and enjoy it or go back to the Flight manual sims you all seem to adore.

[maradine]

I enjoy it a great deal. I just wouldn't call it "freedom". "AB reverse, pivot, shoot" is the black and white television of dogfighting. Maybe that's more interesting for people who grew up in the age of WASD. Maybe change is frightful. Who knows?

The point is, there are things that can be done to bring both sides of aerial combat to the table without diminishing either. I'm having difficulty understanding how someone could be against that - especially in a forum culture where "Easy Mode" is used as a pejorative.

[Hobnail]

Plus one vote for the loadout tab to open when you stop on a reload pad / ammo tower. I feel like that's been sorely missed this whole time.

Just allow vehicles to "b-deploy" on appropriate pads to allow them to re-arm.

[CrankyTRex]

I enjoy it a great deal. I just wouldn't call it "freedom". "AB reverse, pivot, shoot" is the black and white television of dogfighting. Maybe that's more interesting for people who grew up in the age of WASD. Maybe change is frightful. Who knows?

The point is, there are things that can be done to bring both sides of aerial combat to the table without diminishing either. I'm having difficulty understanding how someone could be against that - especially in a forum culture where "Easy Mode" is used as a pejorative.

I'd agree. I find the dogfighting extremely restrictive because stopping to hover really eliminates the effectiveness of a lot of evasive maneuvers. It's just so much easier for a pursuer to simply come to a hover and blast the crap out of the poor shmuck that is doing all manner of aerial acrobatics thinking he's actually being followed.

[SternLX]

I'd agree. I find the dogfighting extremely restrictive because stopping to hover really eliminates the effectiveness of a lot of evasive maneuvers. It's just so much easier for a pursuer to simply come to a hover and blast the crap out of the poor shmuck that is doing all manner of aerial acrobatics thinking he's actually being followed.

That only works in open air. If your like me and do a lot of flying on Amerish your always hiding in the mountains and have many means to escape. Try hovering shooting there and you'll quickly loose sight of your target.

[PredatorFour]

I enjoy chasing down reavers/mossies that are backwards thrusting whilst shooting at me as it is more of a challenge but can yield better results than normal dogfights.

Just aim behind them, chase them.. get them! Thing is they have to come to a stop mid air which is dangerous! If you get a good amount of bullets into them as they are reversing...theyre dead meat when they finally run out of AB fuel and just hang there.

However the changes to ESF armour is a game changer. I want to know if seeing a nose gun clip can take down an ESF in the update, does that mean we will kill infantry quicker with the nose gun too??? Or ESF armour will be weaker in general??? I don't understand that maths of this yet.

[CrankyTRex]

That only works in open air. If your like me and do a lot of flying on Amerish your always hiding in the mountains and have many means to escape. Try hovering shooting there and you'll quickly loose sight of your target.

Sometimes. You have to be actually near the mountain to do that, and it's pretty easy just to fly high and aim down.

[Hamma]

So many people hating on the current flight mechanics on PSU. I personally love how PS2 is different then any other flight based game. There really is so few games that allow the kind of freedom and creativity you can have with PS2. This game is special and in a really good way. As it rewards fast thinking and twitch based skills while flying an ESF. And allows the user to ignore the laws of physics that hold back other flight sims. Simply put, adapt and enjoy the amazing flight aspect PS2 offers.

Quoted because it's totally worth being mentioned again.