Proposed ESF nerf: Why? Will it improve revenue?

[pixelshader]

If you can't use the mechanic behind 'the reverse manoeuvre' in your sleep it'd be essentially impossible to truly understand why this change is moronic, to be blunt. Because you can not have thoroughly experienced what ps2 air combat has to give. The esf air game is a gem that apparently soe still doesn't realise they have after what, nearly a year?

The dogfighting in this game transcends traditional simulators with their ancient gameplay of 'being able to get a firing solution that isn't a headon equals victory'. Instead you fight by pitching your own combination of simultaneous aiming and avoiding being aimed at against that of the enemy. In a fair fight at least. You still have your common gameplay of things like choosing good engagements, surprising people, etc.

Don't get me wrong, I have a history of playing traditional air combat sims and I personally understand, from experience, that they have a virtually limitless complexity which arises from the simple problem of shooting down the enemy in the 'planes go forward through air' situation. All I'm saying is that anyone who has extensive experience with the dogfighting in ps2 understands that this game's dogfighting has its own version of infinite skillcap air combat gameplay, a version that isn't seen anywhere else and is probably some kind of fluke genius. It's thoroughly refreshing.

When I read the changes on the pts I was literally shocked at the sheer lack of knowledge they represented. I thought maybe going from 8 to 2 in a unit I had no understanding of might not actually be a big change, but I tried it out and it most definitely is. It's a crippling nerf to the thing primarily responsible for elevating ps2's air above some combination of 'heliturrets' and 'babies first flight model', for the hovering and forward flight modes of esf respectively. It's not even possible for it to have a positive effect, at least while you still believe in good games. The nerf could be fine if it were light, but it is the opposite.

I take strength in the knowledge that such a stupid change probably can't make it to live intact. I hope.

[exohkay]

I don't see it going live. It'll fucking cripple the airgame.

Has it ever once been raised as a problem? No!

I think air is very difficult to begin flying, especially when you're a new player, but that's common among any game. BF3 was fucking notoriously difficult and boring if you're a new player. Utter shit.

[ChipMHazard]

Originally Posted by snafus

It seems Rak from NUC was able to snag a convo with higby and kovmo on some of the matters relating to the possible vertical thrust nerf.

Though I still very much so disagree with them tampering with a great system. At least we have some feed back on the purpose and situation of the changes.

SOE really should know by now that you have to make such changes clear to the community and not require said community to find out "why?" themselves. But yes, at least we know have some feedback concerning the changes... If not actually an explanation as to why.

Just to be clear on my stance on this subject. I don't object to people not wanting nor liking this change. Only some of the arguments presented. This change alone might certainly weaken the current flight mechanics and as such probably won't be a good change on its own. As always I want SOE to pick something and stick with it instead of trying to incorporate too many conflicting features into one mechanic, if that makes any sense. (The Prowler is an example of this way of thinking)

I would still prefer it if they made the ESF more about fighting aircraft and less about attacking ground targets, this can of course be done by other means. I'm also not a fan of how dog fighting works in PS2, as I've stated before, although I have nothing against this kind of manuvering since I've always enjoyed it in space sims like Independence War. But I just don't like how it's been done in PS2. Many others do and that's completely fine.

Now SOE is going to have to make choice as to whether or not they want to keep the current flight model as is or make serious changes that might alienate their current flying playerbase. At least they've understood that it would be a good idea to have a discussion with said playerbase.

[PredatorFour]

Funny people are really moaning about this like its some game breaker. Soe already nerfed ESF's for me when they introduced the new nose gun changes making it far easier to kill other ESF's in flight. That change was definately not needed, i'd of taken this reverse change over that anyday.

Why ??? Cos then people might have to fly smart and 'hide' in the air using scenery as cover, rather than fly along in view of everyone only to hit the brakes and fly away in the opposite direction when fired upon cos your 'leet'.

If most people actually understood how to take down reverse flyers (which can be fairly easy) then there wouldn't be as much outcry as there is now and it is definitely not game breaking limiting it's ability as alot of diehard pilots testify.

[SolLeks]

Originally Posted by ChipMHazard

I would still prefer it if they made the ESF more about fighting aircraft and less about attacking ground targets, this can of course be done by other means.

I would like to note that the current proposed change will do nothing in this regard. It only hurts Air vs Air fighting and will have little or no effect on air vs ground.

[Chefkoch]

First off i dont fly at all.

My fix for all this would be to implent a 2nd Aircraft for all factions where that moves like the current one but cant use rocketpods.

[Boildown]

Originally Posted by pixelshader

The dogfighting in this game transcends traditional simulators with their ancient gameplay of 'being able to get a firing solution that isn't a headon equals victory'. Instead you fight by pitching your own combination of simultaneous aiming and avoiding being aimed at against that of the enemy. In a fair fight at least. You still have your common gameplay of things like choosing good engagements, surprising people, etc.

Don't get me wrong, I have a history of playing traditional air combat sims and I personally understand, from experience, that they have a virtually limitless complexity which arises from the simple problem of shooting down the enemy in the 'planes go forward through air' situation. All I'm saying is that anyone who has extensive experience with the dogfighting in ps2 understands that this game's dogfighting has its own version of infinite skillcap air combat gameplay, a version that isn't seen anywhere else and is probably some kind of fluke genius. It's thoroughly refreshing.

As someone else that has played a high fidelity flight model air combat sim (Aces High), this is the only argument against this change that speaks to me. Given that the PS2 devs are completely incompetent at making a flight model with any degree of resemblance to real physics (air resistance takes six semesters of calculus for an aeronautical engineer to learn how to calculate, E states would be a couple semesters easier at least, but they have neither), and also given that they've stumbled upon something at least different than what every other low-fidelity flight model game has, I can see the argument of not removing it.

Its kind of like the feign death pull in classic Everquest. Not intended, eventually they decided to leave it in and it became a core gameplay mechanic.

Unlike feign pulling, I'm not in favor of leaving this one in. I still say hover-fights are an abomination and lead to unsolvable balance problems between air and ground. And that's what it comes down to. No one really cares about what goes on in the skies until it affects the ground. ESFs should be clearing the way for friendly gals and libs, not doing the killing of ground targets themselves unless completely ignored by the enemy.

Right now surface to air weapons are ridiculously overpowered, and they have to be, because of lolpods. Just get rid of lolpods and they can leave everything as is after a lockon and skyguard nerf, and everyone will be happy. They don't really need to mess with the hover modes if they just do this. But failing that, they need to make the hover mode change.

[SolLeks]

Originally Posted by Boildown

As someone else that has played a high fidelity flight model air combat sim (Aces High), this is the only argument against this change that speaks to me. Given that the PS2 devs are completely incompetent at making a flight model with any degree of resemblance to real physics (air resistance takes six semesters of calculus for an aeronautical engineer to learn how to calculate, E states would be a couple semesters easier at least, but they have neither), and also given that they've stumbled upon something at least different than what every other low-fidelity flight model game has, I can see the argument of not removing it.

Its kind of like the feign death pull in classic Everquest. Not intended, eventually they decided to leave it in and it became a core gameplay mechanic.

Yea, basicly.

Originally Posted by Boildown

Unlike feign pulling, I'm not in favor of leaving this one in. I still say hover-fights are an abomination and lead to unsolvable balance problems between air and ground. And that's what it comes down to. No one really cares about what goes on in the skies until it affects the ground. ESFs should be clearing the way for friendly gals and libs, not doing the killing of ground targets themselves unless completely ignored by the enemy.

Ok, hold on right here. Hover fights have NOTHING, I repet NOTHING AT ALL to do with air to ground. NOTHING, NOTHING NOTHING NOTHING.

How do I put this... NOTHING!

They are not getting rid of the ability to hover. They are not getting rid of the ability to 'chopper around' by hovering and holding space.

They ARE getting rid of the ability to use your after burners to push your aircraft around.

Again, NOTHING TO DO WITH AIR TO GROUND!

Originally Posted by Boildown

Right now surface to air weapons are ridiculously overpowered, and they have to be, because of lolpods. Just get rid of lolpods and they can leave everything as is after a lockon and skyguard nerf, and everyone will be happy. They don't really need to mess with the hover modes if they just do this. But failing that, they need to make the hover mode change.

Really? after all the rocket pod nerfs to the point where it now takes an entire magazine of rockets to the rear section of a tank is OP? You have no idea.

[Timealude]

Originally Posted by SolLeks

Really? after all the rocket pod nerfs to the point where it now takes an entire magazine of rockets to the rear section of a tank is OP? You have no idea.

i think its more or less people using the rotaries to kill people now rather then the rocket pods.

[maradine]

I think rotaries are definitely better for AI work than the rockets these days. Speaking from the Vanu perspective, the PPA is better still for groups, but it's worthless in a dogfight and giving up the utility to defend yourself when you get bounced is a really hard sell. I'd have to check the stats to know the last time I pulled a Scythe that didn't have a Hailstorm sticking off the front.

[KesTro]

Originally Posted by SolLeks

I would like to note that the current proposed change will do nothing in this regard. It only hurts Air vs Air fighting and will have little or no effect on air vs ground.

I actually see it helping air vs air fighting. Will it hurt an individual pilot? Yes. But when an air wing meets an air wing I think the air game will be a lot more fun.

We already know from past experiences that you can't balance anything for a 1v1 scenario or you end up with things like the original Annihilator.

Originally Posted by maradine

I think rotaries are definitely better for AI work than the rockets these days. Speaking from the Vanu perspective, the PPA is better still for groups, but it's worthless in a dogfight and giving up the utility to defend yourself when you get bounced is a really hard sell. I'd have to check the stats to know the last time I pulled a Scythe that didn't have a Hailstorm sticking off the front.

Maybe I'm just a 'bade' but this has becoming increasingly hard to do with the Reaver's nosegun, pretty inaccurate.

No womprats for me today. :|

[SolLeks]

Originally Posted by KesTro

I actually see it helping air vs air fighting. Will it hurt an individual pilot? Yes. But when an air wing meets an air wing I think the air game will be a lot more fun.

We already know from past experiences that you can't balance anything for a 1v1 scenario or you end up with things like the original Annihilator.

True you can not balance somthing for a 1v1 scenario, but I don't think this will change much in air wing vs air wing fights any way. Once you get above a handful of aircraft in the sky, you no longer can rely on reverse flight as you will likely fly into a friendly or enemy aircraft. You can still use some of the quick turns, but not all the fancy stuff. in 10+ vs 10+ battles, it is already mostly how people want, forward flight with a hint of RM on the outskirts.

Really, what this change boils down to is this.

You can no longer turn and face your enemy in a fight.

that is all.

[maradine]

Originally Posted by SolLeks

You can no longer turn and face your enemy in a fight.

that is all.

Personally, I find it far more entertaining to scrape them off in the canyons - especially when they're not stealthed and you can see the exact moment they make the wrong turn around the butte.

That requires canyons or southwest Indar treelines, though.

Also, doesn't the RM still work, just not grant you as much extension laterally as it did before? You're still facing the inbound baddie. I haven't checked out PTS yet on an NC alt, so I'm just guessing.

Originally Posted by KesTro

Maybe I'm just a 'bade' but this has becoming increasingly hard to do with the Reaver's nosegun, pretty inaccurate.

No womprats for me today. :|

Which gun, out of curiosity?

[KesTro]

Originally Posted by maradine

Which gun, out of curiosity?

Vortek Rotary.

[SolLeks]

Originally Posted by maradine

Personally, I find it far more entertaining to scrape them off in the canyons - especially when they're not stealthed and you can see the exact moment they make the wrong turn around the butte.

That requires canyons or southwest Indar treelines, though.

Also, doesn't the RM still work, just not grant you as much extension laterally as it did before? You're still facing the inbound baddie. I haven't checked out PTS yet on an NC alt, so I'm just guessing.

The RM does not still work, hitting the after burners after doing the flip portion of it makes you move slower than holding space.

I guess it 'works' in the sense you can still turn and face your opponent, if you like being a non moving, hovering duck.