Tank rear armour versus Pods

[Mietz]

People, don't forget that an ESF has -two- weapons available to one person.

I think I explained this before in the many many ESF threads pre-launch and people use it quite frequently.

Pods can indeed have a TTK of 3-7 seconds depending on faction, however the missiles have also travel time, they do not move as fast as shells for example.
How this works is this:

You unload a complete volley of missiles in your approach and then you switch to your main gun while the first missiles start to impact and the last missiles are in flight. This works on ranges around +200m.
The reaction of the driver starts with the first missile impact, not with your first missile fired. Even if you manage to magburn on the 1/3 clip point (~1 second), the ESF can -still- blow you up by using its main gun.

If you watch pilot vids you will notice that almost all of them swtich to primary after they fired their last missile.
You are able to deliver simultaneous damage from both primary and pods in the last third of your pod-clip (this doesn't work that good with the Photonpods because of their fire-mechanism).

This is what makes the TTK shorter than it should be.
If as an MBT I had the ability to switch to my primary turret without losing control over my tank, I would certainly have a better TTK. Imagine Prowler unloads his two shells, goes into reload, and while that is happening I unload with the Halberd/Gatling (all the while controlling my movement and attack vector), etc.
But even then it wouldn't be the same thing as shells travel far faster and the driver has the duration of my reload-time to react to the second volley. Just imagine lightnings having a forward Basilisk or sth.

ESF pods are "continuous" when they are unloaded, they do not provide enough time in-between impacts to react and so you eat more than half the clip before you can go into evasive.

Now a second gunner in your MBT can help you to scare off the ESF a bit and give you forewarning, but with all the available attack-vectors on an MBT in this game its almost impossible to actually make this consistent. Also the question remains, what about Lightnings?
Everything and your mother can kill or severely damage an MBT/Lightning (HA missiles, Mines, C4, Turrets, other tanks/lightnings, sunderers, even flashes, liberators and finally ESF).

The argument that this is a combined arms game works both ways.
If you say that we should have this and that support, you have to understand that the enemy ESF -has its own support- in the form of ground troops that will also try to kill the MBT.
Yes its combined arms, and the combined arms means its not ESF vs MBT 1v1, but it also doesn't mean ESF vs MBT + AA sup. because the ESF has its own friends.
In the end the balance -must be- considered in 1v1 because the game is combined arms, which means that the arms are combined, always, and hence the situation is always "with X support" FOR BOTH UNITS.

Its unreasonable to state that an MBT got killed because it didn't have AA support just like its unreasonable to state an ESF got killed because it didn't have ground support.
Justifying your argument by saying "you should have had X support" is implying the ESF didn't need X to succeed but the other side did.
In effect that would imply that the ESF is imbalanced as it can operate without X in a combined arms game.
Is that what you are saying?
Think again.

[Kirotan]

Originally Posted by Rolfski

This guy is one of the better flyers out there on Miller and even he thinks A2G is out of balance:

The ESLR update didn't do much for G2A because of the time it tales to lock/fly to target. Decent pilots just won't give you that time.

Much like this guy, Assist also posted earlier that rocket pods were a little too easy.

Here's the problem: While their opinions are highly respected, it's probably not wise to balance things based on the skills of very good players.

You wouldn't nerf MBTs because 1% of the player base can snipe infantry and shoot aircraft out of the sky from 300+ meters, and you shouldn't nerf liberators because 1% of the players can farm and destroy anything that comes their way.

The ESF is the single most powerful tool in the game, because it enables a single player to effectively combat ANY other threat in the game. It is an undeniably powerful vehicle, so of course it needs constant tweaking to balance its relationship to other factors in this game. And where did you get those numbers? They're completely arbitrary.

It is ONLY the single most powerful tool in the game as long as the player has the skill to use it. Its lethality depends more on the pilots ability than any other vehicle in the game does.

[igster]

The biggest issue is that the ESF is in complete control of their situation 100% of the time. Give me a situation where the ESF cannot either compete against their opponent in a dog fight or avoid a situation which threatens their aircraft.

A2A ESF - dogfight it or run away.
Skyguard/Burster - run away or take it out... your call depending upon your assessment of the situation. They are a threat but can very easily be avoided.
Ground vehicles/Turrets - Free Kill
Infantry - Free Kill

Any other vehicle or infantry does not have these options. No matter how skilled a player you are - there are many situations where you have no option but to be killed. Vehicles get caught out in the map and do not have the mobility to escape or evade - they are not fast enough.

Same goes for infantry - vehicles and aircraft have much higher mobility so they are the most rooted to their location with the fewest options.

Ground Vehicles have a better chance to escape and evade infantry and an even chance against other vehicles.

Air Vehicles are at the top of the food chain in terms of capacity to escape and evade any threats. It's definitely a skilled role but even an unskilled pilot is to a large extent in control of whether he exposes himself to losing the aircraft.

This is why the aircraft is the lone wolf option. It's the reason why the high k/d ratio players tend to be pilots. They can operate completely independently and dominate areas of the map without any significant risk of resistance. Anything comes into that area of the map they can normally kill it and if not, they have the mobility to escape and evade to a safe area or alternatively have a good chance of fighting their counter.

Of course squad play and formation of armored columns with protections changes all of this and gives you protection. However, around the fringes of the battle, the lone wolf aircraft are the top of the food chain. If a squad or faction do not have the appropriate protection in place then the ESFs will completely dominate.

It is extremely boring playing the Anti-aircraft role in this game, but very exciting playing the ESF role. This is the source of the imbalance. Most people don't want to be staring at the sky hoping for stupid lonewolf air crews to come into their area. This is why there are generally not enough AA crews.
The ground based Anti-Air crews are too rooted to an area. They are also very vulnerable to all threats and so need a lot of protection. They can't operate in lone wolf fashion because they are very fragile.

PS1 Reavers were very similar but the ground forces had better anti air options. With the rocket pod angles, they mostly had to expose themselves to being shot at to rocket spam vehicles and infantry. The TTK with the rockets meant that taking out any vehicle exposed them to some risk.
In PS2, there is no such risk. ESF pilots can attack ground forces at angles where there is no risk of retaliation. The TTK is very low even without the rear armor damage multiplier.

My solution - raise the max angle of the ground vehicle turrets by 5-10% and keep your 240% rear armor bonus damage.

Alternatively remove 240% rear armor damage from aircraft against ground vehicles.

[Binkley]

Originally Posted by Kirotan

Ok, so question time:

Tank drivers:

1. How many times per day do you get surprise rocket podded and lose your tank to it?

2. When you get surprise rocket podded, how often does this happen while you are in a group with air cover/AA presence?

3. What % of your tank deaths come from being rocket podded?

1. Never counted, but many times. I fare well in tank vs. tank and tank vs. infantry battles. ESFs are a primary source of death.

2. Almost never. With AA cover, lots of eye on the sky, and multiple targets for the ESF to choose from, it's very very rare that they get me. In a group, there are always going to be easier/juicier targets.

3. I estimate my tank dies to ESFs 40%, to infantry 40%, and to enemy armor + turrets 20%. ESF and surprise C4 attacks are my biggest fears.

I usually run my MBT with AP secondary, less often AI, AA never. An AA secondary is, at best, able to scare off ESFs, but will rarely get any kills. Thus nobody really wants to gun with that, and it seems a good ESF pilot can shrug off the AA gun and kill me anyway. I accept a certain amount of death from above when I run solo without an AA gun. It's the price to pay for being highly effective against enemy armor and infantry.

I think perhaps it should take an ESF more than one pass to kill me, but if it did take two or more passes, I would escape death by fleeing/repair often and that might unbalance things in the tanks' favor. I mean, I don't like lolpods the same way that I don't like pump shotguns, insta-death is never fun and doesn't feel "fair" when you are on the receiving end.

[Lonehunter]

Originally Posted by Gimpylung

...as rocketpodders are exploiting the weak rear armour mechanic ...

They're not exploiting anything... In the battlefields of PS2 waiting till the tank in your sights turns around or taking the time to position yourself correctly you've either A: Became an easier target to kill or B:Wasted time doing this and could have started searching for the next target.

I doubt people would actually wait for a tank to turn before firing rockets, because you're just focusing your attention without being offensive. So making yourself vulnerable without payoff. Most likely hovering, which is also horrible.

So if you take the time to fly around, which could be a giant half circle or more if the tank keeps moving with you, but even a quick flip is time wasted. You're doing even worse, making yourself a target and showing every enemy who can see you fly that you are a distracted easy target.

I'm not even gonna mention just flying up and the tank's ass happen to be facing you. To me that's a whole different argument about situational awareness more drivers need to have.

But My point is,
*It's a legitimate strategy that if a pilot chooses to follow he's likely making himself more vulnerable to do so.

*If you were "ganked" and instantly fired upon in that area as soon as he was in range, then you are not living up to your full potential as a driver. You need to know where threats are, where threats could be coming from and where is safe to retreat.

*You also seem to be forgetting about the different empire's benefits. The only vehicular manifestations of this are MBTs and ESFs. TR moves faster, VS has more maneuverability, and NC are supposed to pack the most in each punch and the most survivability (even though the Vanguard and Reaver have the same total health, and the reaver has no Shield like the vanguard.) Removing this factor in AvG only limits the game.

*You also seem to be forgetting THIS IS PLANETSIDE! It's a FPS MMO. No other game has a higher chance of random death then this. It's war, it's battles, it's bugs, it's lag, it's lack of attention span, it's unpredictable.

[igster]

You see 2 tanks fighting on the ground. You pass it by then come back knowing that the tanks on the ground will be facing each other and you know the direction they will be facing.
You can come in from any angle using any terrain including coming in from a very high angle of attack if theres any particular danger (and the occupants of the tank cant even see you because they have the most limited visibility in the game)

Is it really situational awareness that is the issue or is it that the fastest, most manoeverable vehicles in the game which also have the luxury of being able to use the z-axis also get given a 'free kill' card given the opportunity to hit a ground armoured unit in the rear?

There is a reason aircraft don't take additional damage from the rear - and it is because it is too easy for other aircraft to hit them from the rear.

So is it even harder to hit a vehicle that is stuck to the terrain from the rear? Not on the planet I live on.

The ESF crews get given all of the trump cards. And then they also get given the lowest TTK for any vehicle. Honestly - they kill tanks quicker than liberators which is so, so wrong.

[Varsam]

Originally Posted by Kirotan

Much like this guy, Assist also posted earlier that rocket pods were a little too easy.

Here's the problem: While their opinions are highly respected, it's probably not wise to balance things based on the skills of very good players.

You wouldn't nerf MBTs because 1% of the player base can snipe infantry and shoot aircraft out of the sky from 300+ meters, and you shouldn't nerf liberators because 1% of the players can farm and destroy anything that comes their way.

This is very true, you don't want to balance the game around highly skilled players and alienate the majority of the playerbase. But the argument here is that it doesn't take a particularly high degree of skill to take advantage of this mechanic, and the reward for doing so is disproportionately higher than the associated effort. It doesn't take an ace to know how to attack something from the rear - it's called flanking, and it's a fundamental tactic in these kinds of games. ALL players are more or less familiar with the concept. Give them the fastest platform in the game that's unencumbered by physical obstacles because it can fly over them, and you get a mechanic that is clearly more rewarding and easier to achieve than any other style of play.

Originally Posted by Kirotan

It is ONLY the single most powerful tool in the game as long as the player has the skill to use it. Its lethality depends more on the pilots ability than any other vehicle in the game does.

Not true. Put that same player in a tank or on the ground and he will simply be unable to do things that an ESF can do. He wouldn't be able to match the ubiquity and effectiveness of an ESF no matt how hard he tried, because the platform that he's using simply does not have the capability. There is no enemy that an ESF cannot effectively combat. In stark contrast, both tanks and infantry have clear disadvantages against certain threats.

[snafus]

Originally Posted by igster

You see 2 tanks fighting on the ground. You pass it by then come back knowing that the tanks on the ground will be facing each other and you know the direction they will be facing.
You can come in from any angle using any terrain including coming in from a very high angle of attack if theres any particular danger (and the occupants of the tank cant even see you because they have the most limited visibility in the game)

Is it really situational awareness that is the issue or is it that the fastest, most manoeverable vehicles in the game which also have the luxury of being able to use the z-axis also get given a 'free kill' card given the opportunity to hit a ground armoured unit in the rear?

There is a reason aircraft don't take additional damage from the rear - and it is because it is too easy for other aircraft to hit them from the rear.

So is it even harder to hit a vehicle that is stuck to the terrain from the rear? Not on the planet I live on.

The ESF crews get given all of the trump cards. And then they also get given the lowest TTK for any vehicle. Honestly - they kill tanks quicker than liberators which is so, so wrong.

Have you ever shot a tank in the ass with a tank buster? It is actually a faster kill then the rocket pods even when people abused the 4 rocket bug.

[Kirotan]

Originally Posted by Varsam

Not true. Put that same player in a tank or on the ground and he will simply be unable to do things that an ESF can do. He wouldn't be able to match the ubiquity and effectiveness of an ESF no matt how hard he tried, because the platform that he's using simply does not have the capability. There is no enemy that an ESF cannot effectively combat. In stark contrast, both tanks and infantry have clear disadvantages against certain threats.

That's not what I mean. What I'm trying to say is the ESF is the deadliest vehicle in the game as long as it is in the right hands.

Now, a highly skilled player will excel with both, but will fare even better with the ESF. However, the average skilled player tends to do better with the MBT compared to piloting the ESF.

[Varsam]

Originally Posted by Kirotan

That's not what I mean. What I'm trying to say is the ESF is the deadliest vehicle in the game as long as it is in the right hands.

Now, a highly skilled player will excel with both, but will fare even better with the ESF. However, the average skilled player tends to do better with the MBT compared to piloting the ESF.

The average player also doesn't own rocket pods, whereas the HEAT cannon comes stock on MBTs. That's not the kind of play we're talking about.