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

[Bags]

Yes I've seen so many ESF shot down or nearly destroyed by small arms fire.

Oh wait, I've not seen one of the above happens.

[Sturmhardt]

Oh god... tonight the ESFs were all over EVERYTHING. And there was nothing really to kill them. They are just annoying, you can drive some of them away but you never kill them and they keep coming back :/

[Graywolves]

I'm sorry but making something that can only be countered by itself is poor game design. It narrows diversity down and is basically saying "well if you want to be successful you NEED to have this." It's annoying enough that the only effective AA is stuff (which only deters) you either grind for or purchase.

It's pretty silly to call out on people for requiring teamwork to take down air when the aircraft is mostly 1man vehicles.

Being able to deter air sounds good on paper. Then you realize it's a massive game where the air numbers are only growing when those resources aren't being depleted or cooldowns becoming active.

Does it work right now? I would actually say it does. I can still play the game and enjoy it. But if a new player comes in and he has nothing to do against aircraft then he's pretty much toast. It's not like 1 reaver fly by destroys AA turrets too. When there's too much air I either pull air too or go somewhere else. But players shouldn't be forced into doing something they don't enjoy.

[Chewy]

Originally Posted by Dragonskin

MAXs are the hybrid unit in the game.. only class that is a vehicle meaning you can't change your weapon kits without despawning your MAX .

I just wanted to say that MAXes can change weapons and loadouts without buying a new one. I do it all the time if defending a sundy.

[Figment]

Rendering is an entirely different issue. Rendering is problematic in dense area's right now. I had people disappear 50m away from me.

Tbh I don't mind them and other infantry being rendered. I do mind them being given markers through everything. What I expect in a competitive game is sufficient time to react to a new threat. The one shot killing thing is going to cost a lot of players.

Not an issue in smaller games as travel time and amount of threats are lower, you don't need as much situational awareness an certainly not against so many armoured units. But it is silly to balance a MMO on this scale like a deathmatch game.


Ps1 lost a substantial number of infantry first players die to aircav whining and camping. Camping issues are far greater in PS2 and the air issue is returning... I don't mind the lock on missile to take three hits, but flak should be extremely effective when it is on dedicated units.

What I dislike is the sheer spam and accessibility of all these weapons, because it leads to extreme disparities, lacks unique player builds and is just so damn predictable an cookie cutting, while making every farmtool available freely to all.


I would be fine with them extended the trial system to certs. But players shouldn't have such a wide variety available... Then you don't have to fix these stupendous balance problems.

[Illtempered]

Originally Posted by Bags

Okay, I keep seeing that ESF require support.

And expensive? Uh, last I checked they were what, 150 or 200 air? That's dirt cheap.

I meant the rocket-pods are expensive.

[Chewy]

Originally Posted by Illtempered

I meant the rocket-pods are expensive.

Only in certs. If you treat PS2 as an another paid game and put maybe $20 ($10 on a 3x SC deal) you can have a decked out aircraft of your choice to rain hell on what ever is in front of you. Maybe even more than one vehicle if you don't go for the extra cosmetics.

True someone with AA in mind can do the same, but with being a mere distraction to aircraft they'll never get the same worth out of the same SC (or certs). Without getting kills or at least points for doing the role someone dedicates to there's not going to be people to fill that role until certs become a surplus. If Im on AA duty I have to give up something to do so.

Everything but aircraft have to pick a role and stick with that role. Troops have to choose a class, tanks have just one weapon unless they have a 2nd player, sundies need 3 players to man, same with libbies. Why should ESF be able to take on all comers alone when nothing else can?

[Wahooo]

Skyguard and a second arm for the burster are the first two SC purchases I made.

If true that Higby thinks that AA is only meant as to deter air and not kill it I want to exchange my SG for the station cash.

Situation is stupid at best.

[RobUK]

It's a slightly worrying situation and one where you can see SOE making the same mistakes as other game developers have done in the past. Including the developers of Planetside 1.

The PS2 developers obviously spent a lot of time on the concept design and artistic aspect of the AA MAX and Skyguard. It's game content that should enhance gameplay and provide tools for the players to enrich their enjoyment of the game. It's perfectly possibly for something and its hard counter to be fun for both sides of the equation. We got there in the end with air and AA in PS1.

It's such a waste when you see developers nerf content into uselessness and/or make it prohibitively expensive to acquire in comparison to what you get for your currency. It's just a kludge to stop people using that content or to at least severely limit it.

It's a sign of lazy balancing, inexperience, desperation, or maybe even a bit of all three.

Instead of making AA useless, they really need to find an elegant way of making that content more attractive and rewarding for people to use whilst making it fit into the overall game. Nobody is going to spend money and/or certs on something that doesn't bring them personal reward and entertainment.

If a plane only ever netted the occasional kill and produced just a handful of XP points via assists, there wouldn't be the hordes of ESF's that we see in the game now.

[psijaka]

Well I've been holding off on spending SC on the Skyguard, which I believe was nerfed to the point of uselessness pre launch. Why bother giving up the ability to damage anything on the ground for the ability at best to be a deterrent against aircraft? The nerf pendulum swang too far.

Still enjoyed Max + dual Bursters pre launch, but Higby's comments are deterring me from buying SC and equipping this loadout.

[psijaka]

The solution to the AA balance problem is to restore AA damage to what it was pre nerf, AND to reduce the projectile speed somewhat, effectively limiting the range of AA.

It was the ability to shoot a Liberator out of the sky when it was on the horizon that was ridiculously OP, not being able to blast the pilot who was hover strafing right above you.

[Wahooo]

Bursters are mostly OK. They are still situation dependent and many times when they are needed they can't do their job, but at times they can wreck air... mostly due to the render thing it is hard to fight back against something you can't see. Air and a crafty pilot still have a major advantage there however.

Skyguard is a joke.

[KaskaMatej]

Originally Posted by Wahooo

Bursters are mostly OK. They are still situation dependent and many times when they are needed they can't do their job, but at times they can wreck air... mostly due to the render thing it is hard to fight back against something you can't see. Air and a crafty pilot still have a major advantage there however.

Skyguard is a joke.

True that, Bursters are mostly OK, still too accurate IMO, but the damage is fine. They should be a close-range anti air, which they are. They have the benefit of being invulnerable if not rendered, can hide indoors and have cheaper resource cost and cooldown.

Skyguard, on the other hand, is as expensive as an ESF (resource and cooldown wise) but cannot do what is specialized at, being a mobile anti-air platform, and is vulnerable to air, ground and infantry.

I see less and less Skyguards because they suck at "guarding the skies". Hell, every organized attack I've seen since launch wasn't tank+infantry+AA+air, it was tank+infantry+mass air.

Now, if we'd follow air directive, why isn't infantry only answer to infantry, tanks only answer to tanks, and air only answer to air? The latter is true, and Higby said it is that way by design. The mass tank was a problem in beta, and they fixed it by nerfing AA (which was OP due to combined damage, accuracy and range), yet now we are seeing mass ESF because there is nothing ground can do against it!

Excuse me, but I don't see ANY logic in that. Fuck the rock-paper-scissors, we have rock-paper-gods!

[Figment]

The mass of MBTs was only a problem because they insisted on soloable units and the "have everything by default" setup...

So they solve it by unbalancing other units?

Sounds legit.

[Lieken]

I'm fine with this. Air should be the counter to air. Tired of all this no skill "but my fire and forget weapon should KILL YOU :<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<< POINTSSSSSSS"

It's going to make me fly away so I can't kill you, and in that time you can get the points you wouldn't get if I had fucked your shit with my rocket pods. Flying over enemy controlled bases is already an impossibility if theres enough people there because every sunderer, tank turret and small arms can spray me down.