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

[Beerbeer]

The biggest problem, IMO, is air is a hard counter to almost everything. I can solo tanks, turrets and infantry. I kill whore like crazy with it.

There's really nothing on the ground that can do the same to air outside of a tank shell.

Personally, I think esfs should cost as much as sunderers (edit).

[MrBloodworth]

Originally Posted by Emperor Newt

If they fire at the same time all you need to do is use a flare. What you probably mean is them to coordinate their attack.
Yes, that's skill. Still I wonder by which argument it should take three highly organized players to take down one hovering lonewolf pilot?

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

[CasualCat]

Originally Posted by MrBloodworth

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

You're way off base if you truly think that is the complaint.

[Dragonskin]

Originally Posted by DDSHADE

Ground AA DOES work.. just Air AA is better. The reasoning for this, simply is they want to keep EVERYTHING in the game fun. It wouldn't be fun to fly if every time you fly an aircraft you get killed right away from Skyguards. There should also be more frequent and effective cover from aircraft available for vehicles and infantry. I DO believe that the Skyguard may be overpriced, even though it is effective, used properly. I prefer the AA max, and I have been taken out many times from the ground by lock on rockets..

Yea a lot of the people in this thread probably don't fly at all or just make false claims that they do.

On Mattherson all three factions make no fly zones.. lately NC has had a lot of air so we have had to use a lot of ground based AA to counter it. It works... skyguards need a little love, but full burster maxes and the AA rockets do their job well. Didn't take long for my outfit to make NC burn through their resources and hit cooldowns so they couldn't use air superiority anymore.

I am also very glad that none of the people on this forum outside of the Devs actually control balance. This game would be worse than it is now haha.

[Beerbeer]

I think rockets should be slightly changed, that and raise the resource requirements to 400.

[CasualCat]

Originally Posted by DDSHADE

Ground AA DOES work.. just Air AA is better. The reasoning for this, simply is they want to keep EVERYTHING in the game fun. It wouldn't be fun to fly if every time you fly an aircraft you get killed right away from Skyguards. There should also be more frequent and effective cover from aircraft available for vehicles and infantry. I DO believe that the Skyguard may be overpriced, even though it is effective, used properly. I prefer the AA max, and I have been taken out many times from the ground by lock on rockets..

However I must commend Wahooo for writing this:

lmao

I think that the lightning SHOULD be given a slot (maybe unlockable after X amount of kills with it) that allows a secondary weapon. Like in PS1. They would have a light tank cannon and a small chaingun. The Skyguard could fill the role of that small chaingun. Fair? I think so, if it's just a deterrant.

I think you've nailed part of the problem not the magnitude though. Air works significantly better than AA, not just better. The devs made it more fun to fly in exchange for making AA boring and unrewarding.

It is good that it is fun to fly. There were periods in beta where it wasn't. It is not fun or rewarding to be AA though most of the time. As a group you can shut down air, but you're forgoing fun/XP to do so.

The large discrepancy between fun/effectiveness/XP gain/SC&cert efficiency of an ESF versus ground AA is a problem. The devs don't appear to know how to fix it though.

I think they've recognized they don't know how to fix it too. They've said in the past the air/AA balance is tricky and I think them deciding that deterrence is the stopping point in the balance seesaw is them throwing their hands up admitting they don't know what to do.

[Juryrig]

I do fly, and I utterly suck at it.

Anyway, how about this:

Currently there are two secondary weapons for aircraft, guided AA missiles or dumbfire AG rockets.

And the dumbfire AG rockets sound like they're more effective against both ground AND air targets, esp big slow manouevring ones like libs and galaxies. Which just doesn't seem right.

How about split them as follows:

(1) Anti-vehicle missiles. Guided missiles with a shaped-charge warhead which lock onto air OR GROUND vehicle targets. Fire and forget, with the same acquisition/reload time as the current AA missiles. Effective against all armour, little to no splash damage. Can lock onto Maxes? Not sure about that....
(2) Anti personnel rockets. Unguided, dumbfire rockets loaded with flechettes. Short range with a fairly wide spread, effective splash damage against infantry but almost ineffective against armour.

Helpful, unhelpful, plain dumb stupid?

You can still spec the front cannon to give complementary AA or AG ability, or you can go fully AA or fully AG.....but rocket pods shouldn't be the single solution to everything, as they seem to be currently.

*disclaimer* whilst I am attempting to become a vaguely competent pilot, I suck. Totally. I also spent my SC on AA missiles, not rocket pods, so I have no actual experience of whether the pods are actually unbalanced (other than being on the receiving end of them)

[MrBloodworth]

Originally Posted by CasualCat

You're way off base if you truly think that is the complaint.

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

[CasualCat]

Originally Posted by MrBloodworth

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

You've yet to be proven right either wise guy.

[MrBloodworth]

Originally Posted by CasualCat

You've yet to be proven right either wise guy.

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

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

[Beerbeer]

Maybe just raising the cost to 400 would slightly help?

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

[CasualCat]

Originally Posted by MrBloodworth

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

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

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

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

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

ETA:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

[MrBloodworth]

Originally Posted by CasualCat

And combined arms only applies one way right?

Nope.

Originally Posted by CasualCat

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

Ridiculous.

[Rahabib]

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

[MrBloodworth]

Originally Posted by Rahabib

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

Also, Ridiculous.

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