Your Thoughts on Air vs Ground Balance. - Page 4

Whiteagle · 2013-05-09, 01:53 AM

Originally Posted by CrankyTRex

At the same time, you really don't need to kill aircraft unless you're concerned about XP and K/D more than the tactical value. Driving it off to repair is effectively same as an infantry death, since it's probably about as long to fly away, repair, and come back as it is for infantry to respawn and get back where they are.

Well no actually, we AA guys need an Aircraft kill at least every so often...
Admittedly the Experiance Bonus for causing Damage has helped a bit, but if we don't down a bird or two we get pretty damned pissed off about spending our money/certs on a "Deterrent..."

Originally Posted by CrankyTRex

I am for this.

I just don't expect it any time soon.

Indeed, they don't even have the Warpgates working properly yet, so I don't know how they are expecting to handle inter-map vehicle transfer...

...Amphibious BFRs would rock though...

Moddakk · 2013-05-09, 02:21 AM

O hi solleks
-Valraan

Gatekeeper · 2013-05-09, 04:33 AM

Originally Posted by Whiteagle

Thing is, probably BOTH MAXes and ESFs are going to get hit with the Nerf Bat before its over, Bursters getting a Range Nerf while Rocket Pods get a Direct Damage nerf.
Hopefully they'll buff Rocket Pod Splash and Skyguard Range to compensate, but you never know.

I'd be all in favour of the Burster/Skyguard changes - but why would you nerf direct damage on rocket pods and buff their splash? Do we really need to make them even better at spawn-camping?

Personally I'd nerf their splash to make them weaker against infantry and force them into a specialised AV role. I see no reason for rocket pods to be as versatile as they are now, and I'd much prefer to see ESFs in a dynamic tank-hunter role than as hover-spamming spawn-campers.

Whiteagle · 2013-05-09, 04:37 AM

Originally Posted by Gatekeeper

I'd be all in favour of the Burster/Skyguard changes - but why would you nerf direct damage on rocket pods and buff their splash? Do we really need to make them even better at spawn-camping?

Personally I'd nerf their splash to make them weaker against infantry and force them into a specialised AV role. I see no reason for rocket pods to be as versatile as they are now, and I'd much prefer to see ESFs in a dynamic tank-hunter role than as hover-spamming spawn-campers.

...For some reason they are making Rocket Pods Anti-Infantry...

No fucking clue WHY, considering they seem to insta-gib me when I'm on the Ground in Public Test, but apparently Tanker's whined harder...

Gatekeeper · 2013-05-09, 04:56 AM

Originally Posted by Whiteagle

...For some reason they are making Rocket Pods Anti-Infantry...

No fucking clue WHY, considering they seem to insta-gib me when I'm on the Ground in Public Test, but apparently Tanker's whined harder...

Buffing rocket pods versus infantry will just lead to yet another round of nerfs and buffs as 90% of the player-base finds themselves constantly farmed by rocket-spammers.

I would much rather see both A2G and G2A damage nerfed, make aircraft a bit more survivable but stop them from WTF insta-killing ground targets when they do manage to make it past all the AA.

Whiteagle · 2013-05-09, 10:14 AM

Originally Posted by Gatekeeper

Buffing rocket pods versus infantry will just lead to yet another round of nerfs and buffs as 90% of the player-base finds themselves constantly farmed by rocket-spammers.

I would much rather see both A2G and G2A damage nerfed, make aircraft a bit more survivable but stop them from WTF insta-killing ground targets when they do manage to make it past all the AA.

Well I realised I mis-worded what I figured good Anti-Infantry Buff would be, increasing the Splash Radius so it's more effective at AoE and not the Splash DAMAGE to make it better at gibbing.
So larger explosions, but not necessarily more powerful ones...

I do think new AT Secondaries give room for more Faction Specific Flavor though.

CrankyTRex · 2013-05-09, 02:01 PM

Originally Posted by Whiteagle

Well no actually, we AA guys need an Aircraft kill at least every so often...
Admittedly the Experiance Bonus for causing Damage has helped a bit, but if we don't down a bird or two we get pretty damned pissed off about spending our money/certs on a "Deterrent..."

Well again, the only reason that would be is if you care about the kill XP or the K/D more than the tactical value of making that aircraft leave, or need the satisfaction of something going pop to use a weapon. If you know you're pulling it out as a deterrent, then there's no reason to be pissed off so long as it has the power to make that aircraft leave. You also don't necessarily need to spend anything to use AA, given the various free AA options available.

But as I said, I have no problem with it being strong enough to take out the stupid people acting stupidly. If somebody is going to hover in front of your base trying to farm it, they should be easily punished for that behavior. If somebody is going to be all alone in enemy territory with a ton of opposition on the ground, that's on them too. I just don't think that is something that can be done easily because the aircraft do not have the normal disadvantages of a hovering aircraft that will stop them from running away if they start taking damage.

Chaff · 2013-05-09, 02:32 PM

^
STOP.
What a pile of horse shit. You MUST be a pilot with that load of crap.

".....well, my Max should never really die ..... unless you pilots (or any opponent, actually) only care about XP or K/D ...... you get the tactical advantage (err, VALUE) of making me leave to repair......"

"...... if my shields get too low .... I have to run a few hundred (occasionally thousands) of meters, & then wait around for a damn engie .... there's no need or advantage to infantry, or ESFs, or any vehicle being able to kill a max .... unless you're just a selfish stat whore .... forcing me to retreat and repair should always be enough."
really ?

STFU

If you're going to try to Jedi MindTrick us with a 100% selfish and self-serving myopic statement, you'll have to do better. May the Farce be with you.
.

Whiteagle · 2013-05-09, 02:41 PM

Originally Posted by Chaff

^
STOP.
What a pile of horse shit. You MUST be a pilot with that load of crap.

Yeah man, people don't buy weapons just to look useful, they need to actual be able to KILL!
Do I need to post my old Comic again?

ThatGoatGuy · 2013-05-09, 02:42 PM

Originally Posted by JohnnyRicardo

so it's not like a battlerank 3 can just pull a max and blast a liberator straight to hell.

I don't think you understand balance my friend. A battle rank three, or battle rank 50 for that matter, should be able to merely waltz up to an infantry terminal, pull a burster max, and totally shred something in the air. One player should not have the ability to take on something that should be tactically stronger. That being said, I think that the burster maxes are OP right now, and believe that with the ESF health buff (hopefully) that it will raise the chances of an ESF versus a burster max. It should take coordination and team work to take on aircraft, not a single infantry terminal and a burster arm.

GeoGnome · 2013-05-09, 02:53 PM

I do not fly often. Most of the time I try to fly ESFs to clear ground targets, but I am not a great pilot by any means, it's one of those things I just need to work on. And when I use Liberators, I almost exclusively use them as a transport disposable vehicle, because ESFs are so weak there is no point.

So this is from the perspective of someone who is more often on the Receiving end of ESF fire.

Currently Rocketpods are a little too weak against infantry. Against tanks and whatnot I think they are fine. When it comes to ways to buff aircraft, I would say as a knee jerk reaction, that ESFs need to be buffed against infantry... BUT, that is a kneejerk reaction and it is straight wrong. As has been said numerous times now, ESFs are wildly bipolar. Either they are completely ineffective and die quickly, or they are grossly overpowered, depending exclusively on how much AA you have available. They have 1 standard loadout that varies only in how many certs you put into your ESF, and really need some kind of middle grounding all around. Buffing ESF vs. Infantry damage would only make the existing bipolar existance of ESFs, worse. Simply put, if you boost AI damage from ESFs using Rocketpods, they will dominate even more in those situations where less AA is around.

When it comes to AA, I don't see a huge problem, I think ESFs should be made more powerful before AA would be touched. The issue is, that if you range cap projectiles from AA, or do something to influence how good it is against long range air targets, you'll get Liberators sitting at the height ceiling raining death on everyone, with no adequate counter. Between bursters and Skyguards, I use both. Skyguards get to be very good after you have upgraded them, I think that rather than buffing damage or range, or even COF, you should simply give them some kind of tracking computer upgrade. I mean it's a TANK with a mounted AA battery, it should have an advantage over Bursters. Looking a burster max, those are fine.

With ESFs, a small boost in health (Something akin to the boost they did to tanks) would make some sense. The issue isn't as much their health though, as much it is their Roll. ESFs contributing to AA thick areas is a tough one. Currently it means you let your ESF sulk around and sneak behind something, hitting it with a salvo of Rocketpods before it is shredded by the 45 things hidden around that hate all ESFs with a flaming passion. I would say that something like a bomb would be good, so that they could fly by quickly, drop ordinance and get out. I'd love to see ESFs utilized in some kind of painted Airstrike weapon.

They also need seperate loadouts and more specialized options. Maybe some AP torpedo like weapons for tanks/galaxies/sunderers/libs, maybe some AA rocket clusters that fire more missles in rapid succession, tracking for like 1s (Meaning they would steer to correct for a moment, and then fly straight) that only lock onto enemy aircraft (Striker of the air... but without full lockon), what about incindiary bombs for AI (Napalm) that are wide AOE but lower damage so they can't be abused, thermite bombs for AV, painting targets for airstrike using other classes to be carried out by ESFs.... etc. etc. etc.

Obstruction · 2013-05-09, 07:28 PM

i'm almost fine with the way it is.

you have to be a real scrub to die to 1 AA source
being ambushed by multiple AA units is still not 100% lethal
lethal AA requires coordination and resources not spent elsewhere
lethal AA dedicates units to stand by or risk being unprepared
despite extreme exposure, air units can rapidly engage and disengage

you have to be a real scrub to die repeatedly to the same air unit
ground units have faster and more readily available spawn sources including field rez
ground units have MANY ways to attack air, most of which are complimentary and incentivize teamwork via lucrative exp sources
air units very often cannot get support from friendly units, yet require support to scale survivability at the same rate as the size of the battle
air units risk the most extreme exposure and widest lack of cover, despite being able to rapidly disengage

the only real complaint i have is that all of you little ants pull your pussy max and sit behind the force field.

i would like to see at least one way forcefields for flak and rockets, so that cowards have to step out to shoot and can't just stack 4+ invincible AA sources.

i would also support fully one way spawn shields for all projectiles and infantry units. if the problem is cover and access to resupply and class change, then it should be addressed with some base design changes to reflect that without allowing the above to remain a viable playstyle.

someone in some thread i didn't read was talking about underground spawn rooms that feed you out into a small fortifiable building with roof access and some air cover and that sounds fair to me.

a max that makes effective use of doorways to supply and repair under cover is one thing. a pussy outfit that stacks AA where they can openly fire without risk is another.

JohnnyRicardo · 2013-05-09, 07:51 PM

Originally Posted by ThatGoatGuy

I don't think you understand balance my friend. A battle rank three, or battle rank 50 for that matter, should be able to merely waltz up to an infantry terminal, pull a burster max, and totally shred something in the air. One player should not have the ability to take on something that should be tactically stronger. That being said, I think that the burster maxes are OP right now, and believe that with the ESF health buff (hopefully) that it will raise the chances of an ESF versus a burster max. It should take coordination and team work to take on aircraft, not a single infantry terminal and a burster arm.

Haha. You make it sound like a single burster arm shred aircrafts to pieces in a matter of nanoseconds. Really? Even with two bursters and extended magazines its not like you shred things to pieces in seconds if the pilots have a decent set of skills. If that ESF is insanely naive and hover in front of you, well then he deserve to die.

"It should take coordination and team work to take on aircraft, not a single infantry terminal and a burster arm."

Really? So if two friends get together to have some fun they should just accept that they are the personal meatgrinder for pilots?

"One player should not have the ability to take on something that should be tactically stronger."

When I get bored of running around as infantry I usually spawn a prowler. A prowler can be taken out by one single heavy assault, light assault with c4, mines, AV turrets and the brand new AV gun for the max(oh noes). Well, when one of these buggers outsmart me and kill me i honestly believe i deserve to die. If i dont find cover and repair myself once i get hit by a phoenix will most likely die very fast. If i just stay still at the same place for a while and don't pay attention I deserve to die of that sneaky light assault blowing me up with c4. I deserve to die of that new AV weapon for the max.(Oh dear lord, they can obtain them at every terminal.) Since you obviously mean that one player shouldnt be able to take on something tactically stronger I guess you don't just mean that this is for the pilots? Should we buff the prowlers, magriders, vanguards, harassers and lightnings as well or maybe remove some of their ability to take out heavy vehicles? If not, you are not really objective. I however think the balance is fine. When I drive around like a moron I say salut to the enemy. XP well deserved!

"I don't think you understand balance my friend."
Maybe we just have very different opinions on what balance should be, but nevertheless that is one condescending statement.

Let me offer one to you also : With that KD ratio you obtain I guess you should have a liberator/esf with 100% health regen in two seconds after taking damage and the ability to drop nukes in order to take out that dreadful anti air max you hate so much.

CrankyTRex · 2013-05-09, 08:29 PM

Originally Posted by Chaff

^
STOP.
What a pile of horse shit. You MUST be a pilot with that load of crap.

".....well, my Max should never really die ..... unless you pilots (or any opponent, actually) only care about XP or K/D ...... you get the tactical advantage (err, VALUE) of making me leave to repair......"

"...... if my shields get too low .... I have to run a few hundred (occasionally thousands) of meters, & then wait around for a damn engie .... there's no need or advantage to infantry, or ESFs, or any vehicle being able to kill a max .... unless you're just a selfish stat whore .... forcing me to retreat and repair should always be enough."
really ?

STFU

If you're going to try to Jedi MindTrick us with a 100% selfish and self-serving myopic statement, you'll have to do better. May the Farce be with you.
.

Originally Posted by Whiteagle

Yeah man, people don't buy weapons just to look useful, they need to actual be able to KILL!
Do I need to post my old Comic again?

Missed the whole second paragraph, and the point, I see.

EDIT (didn't have a chance to fully elaborate on this response yesterday):

As an A2A pilot when I'm actually in the sky, my entire purpose in the game is to protect infantry from the very planes they complain about. So I have no interest in being an invincible aircraft that can farm ground people at will, and I'm perfectly happy to have AA assisting me in taking out enemy aircraft.

As I said, I do not think aircraft should be invincible. They just happen to occupy a unique space in the game where they are the only unit that can be effectively taken out of a battle for a time without actually killing them. There is no forcing a Max or an infantry player to retreat completely out of a battle to repair like that. They're not fast enough to escape, the terrain impedes them, and they can be healed or rezzed on the spot so there isn't any incentive to do so in the first place. An aircraft can and will run completely out of the area to fix itself, and will be gone for a similar time period to a dead infantry member. This is just as true for me shooting at it as a pilot as you shooting at it from the ground.

They added XP for damaging aircraft because it reflects this very thing. Now not only is your AA doing its job tactically, you're getting XP for it, so there's little reason to be pissed if you're not getting the finisher most of the time so long as you are driving the aircraft away.

The focus on getting the kill has led to giving infantry AA, particularly bursters, some absurd ranges because it's the only way you can keep hitting the target long enough to kill it before it escapes. That has resulted in some really wild swings wherein it only takes a couple of people to go from mild harassment to a complete lock down of a huge section of the sky. In addition, it marginalizes A2A pilots and encourages them to play A2G instead, which leads to more spam, and more calls for AA, leading to more issues, etc.

So long as we are stuck with this particular flight model combined with a few other factors like base design, it is incredibly difficult to have it both so that AA is going to reliably kill aircraft that aren't complete idiots and not end up with the scaling issues and the marginalization of A2A, specifically because the ESF's ability to hover and run at no penalty to itself does not permit it.

SolLeks · 2013-05-10, 02:49 PM

I thank everyone for their opinions in this thread even though I only agree with about half yall.

I still don't understand why people are opposed to bursters / G2AM only being able to harass air out to infantry render distance, thus doing their job of protecting infantry and letting A2A pilots have some much needed breathing room but that is just me.

So many things have changed in this game since launch, I don't think it will ever go back to how it was then even with a burster nerf.