A Wee Balance Scenario: AA vs Aircraft - Page 10 - PlanetSide Universe
PSU Social Facebook Twitter Twitter YouTube Steam TwitchTV
PlanetSide Universe
PSU: your weapons are locked here.
Home Forum Chat Wiki Social AGN PS2 Stats
Notices
Go Back   PlanetSide Universe > PlanetSide Discussions > PlanetSide 2 Discussion

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 2012-05-27, 05:43 PM   [Ignore Me] #136
Stardouser
Colonel
 
Re: A Wee Balance Scenario: AA vs Aircraft


First off, I have indeed tried Planetside 1. Obviously it's too late to go back and and spend 5 years playing it, and yes only played about 7 days worth, but I have tried it, so, if you would excuse me for saying nothing further on that.

With that said, it seems you have gotten the impression this is all for the purpose of creating a special operations mission. That isn’t true.
So:

1. This is for buffing AA at fixed main bases only. I am only saying this because you are referring to it as "buffing AA", which in my mind includes all AA. And I don't consider it a nerf of aircraft, but if you want to consider it a nerf of aircraft relative to 10% of the game area(the airspace over the main bases), fine, I concede that much.


2. The purpose of this is not just to create special operations missions. I threw that in as an extra benefit mention, and if that’s confusing, well, sorry. And I’m well aware that that already exists in Planetside 1. So, let me be clear: I know that exists in PS1, but it hardly seems to be highly important. I am suggesting it become even more important. Feel free to disagree with the value of making it more important.


3. So, now that we are clear that the “special ops” stuff was secondary, the outline of the main purpose of this is as follows:
  • a. It will create a situation where cooperation between air and ground matters more. Currently, there’s no reason why you cannot simply have all 300 people in your attack force spawn Reavers to sweep across a base and then bail as infantry to get the flags. I am not saying that that is an optimum strategy, but I am suggesting this in order to help it be even less optimum than it already is. You may disagree that it’s valuable to try and enforce this level of cooperation, that’s fine.

  • b. If defenders can keep their AA up, it will keep away constant bombardments. I did not play PS1 during the golden age, and there’s no way to do so now, but from what I did see, I never saw base defenses play a major role. And engineers doing repairs will be even more important.

  • c. This will encourage air outfits and squads to make a greater effort to intercept ground convoys in the transit areas between bases. Frankly, this is probably the most important of all the reasons. I only wish we could make the continents 15km X 15km for the same 2000 people, which would double or triple the transit times, making the chances of fighting between bases even more likely, but we can’t do that, at least not for Planetside 2, so there’s no point even asking.

  • d. And, pursuant to C, since ground attack aircraft will be making extra effort to patrol between bases, that gives players who want to do air to air dogfighting a chance to perform combat air patrol roles.

  • e. Furthermore, it will increase the value of feint attacks. That means, let’s assume that Main Base X is behind the lines and we are not going to attack it, we’re actually going to attack somewhere else. Since the AA is so valuable at a main base, sending in a team to blow it up will possibly cause the enemy empire to overallocate defenders while we attack elsewhere , in other words, adding urgency in the enemy’s mind for such a feint tactic.


  • f. Aircraft will still be able to attack either the AA directly, or other things inside a base, but they will need to use tactics such as flying over the base at maximum height and then dropping straight down in a dive attack. While I believe that the fact that base AA will be looking more horizontal than vertical should be more than enough to permit this, to bolster that, the firing arcs/blind spots can also be designed to make them slightly weaker to a dive attack from directly above, to ensure that this tactic has a chance. They could also fly low using terrain as cover from the base AA, and pop up to destroy targets.

  • g. It will make bases more defensible against Galaxy drops(forcing Galaxies to drop outside the base and make attackers walk in). Although my experience with Galaxies is limited, people have also said that when 20 come in hot, it's damn hard to shoot even 1 down. You may disagree that this is a valuable thing to cut down on, of course.


I think that, at the very least, the above is enough to demonstrate that I have not suggested this just for the sake of changing it. You may disagree that these changes would enhance the game, that’s fine. I am not actually sure that any strategies are lost, though certainly, haphazard, unorganized air attacks would become less wise. Though, if as hinted at in A, an all Reaver type attack is made a lot less likely to succeed, I won’t mourn the loss of that strategy.


Also, someone in IRC suggested that maybe the AA would only work like this if upgraded at heavy resource cost. There’s that, as well.

Lastly, I wanted to respond to the idea that this handicaps attackers. First of all, my goal is the reasons I listed, and I am not seeking to handicap attackers. Secondly I disagree, that this does handicap attackers, though certainly it does change the tactics required to attack. There are also two things that overpower defenders or handicap attackers that I don’t agree with:

1. Jump pads overpower defenders and relieve the defenders of any responsibility to deploy where they are needed. I am only mentioning this as respects defense vs offense, not trying to start a jump pad thread.

2. Drop pod squad spawning(instead of simply appearing on the ground by your squad leader): I am only mentioning this as it relates to offense vs defense, not trying to start a drop pod thread. But, as we know, drop pods will give away your location, as well as your squad leader if you drop by him. Since defenders will be able to spawn at all the spawn locations in their base,and therefore, be unlikely to use or need Squad Spawning, this is unlikely to affect a defensive force. It therefore handicaps attackers.

Also, I predict that Beta, when it hits, will reveal some other factors that handicap attackers/overpower defenders. For example, as I said, defenders will be unlikely to need squad spawning, so they will respawn at their own spawn tubes. However, I suspect that Squad Spawning, very important to attackers, will have a heavy respawn delay. Spawning at deployed Galaxies might have a delay relative to defender respawn timers as well.

Last edited by Stardouser; 2012-05-27 at 05:49 PM.
Stardouser is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 2012-05-27, 06:05 PM   [Ignore Me] #137
Purple
Sergeant Major
 
Re: A Wee Balance Scenario: AA vs Aircraft


i just want it so a solo air unit can survive AA and have fun by themslefs if they choose.
Purple is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 2012-05-27, 07:15 PM   [Ignore Me] #138
Raka Maru
Major
 
Raka Maru's Avatar
 


Aircraft should rightly be scared s***less when AA is around. Just like a foot soldier should take cover when an AI speced plane shows up and you are not speced for AA.

That being said, I like the powerful base AA idea a lot. I'm wondering if the hard point turrets are empire controlled or modified by engies. This would mean base turrets won't be useless annoyances any more, but a force to be reckoned with. Defenders should have the advantage when well dug in. CE, upgraded turrets, well positioned troops, etc...

If these base turrets are done right, no lone planes or tanks should stand a chance against an engie upgraded manned base turret.
__________________
Extreme Stealthing
Raka Maru is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 2012-05-27, 07:47 PM   [Ignore Me] #139
roguy
Sergeant
 
Re: A Wee Balance Scenario: AA vs Aircraft


Originally Posted by Stardouser View Post
1. This is for buffing AA at fixed main bases only. I am only saying this because you are referring to it as "buffing AA", which in my mind includes all AA. And I don't consider it a nerf of aircraft, but if you want to consider it a nerf of aircraft relative to 10% of the game area(the airspace over the main bases), fine, I concede that much.
I meant base AA turrets and "10% of the game area" is really selling it short, the majority of engagements happened around bases. Either because there was nothing to do other than ambush people travelling from base to base, either because you were encouraged to fight inside base SOIs (spheres of influence) for base capture XP (the only experience in-game that counted towards Command Rank) .

Originally Posted by Stardouser View Post
I know that exists in PS1, but it hardly seems to be highly important. I am suggesting it become even more important. Feel free to disagree with the value of making it more important.
I agree with making it more important, I don't agree with what I view is an expensive compromise.

Originally Posted by Stardouser View Post
[*]a. It will create a situation where cooperation between air and ground matters more. Currently, there’s no reason why you cannot simply have all 300 people in your attack force spawn Reavers to sweep across a base and then bail as infantry to get the flags. I am not saying that that is an optimum strategy, but I am suggesting this in order to help it be even less optimum than it already is. You may disagree that it’s valuable to try and enforce this level of cooperation, that’s fine.
That trick would work once, maybe twice until the other pulled AA maxes and aircraft of their own. But I see how some could view that as a problem. Max rushes, tank zergs and a flock of 10 galaxies were just as hard to counter, so it wasn't just limited to reaver spam.

Originally Posted by Stardouser View Post
[*] b. If defenders can keep their AA up, it will keep away constant bombardments. I did not play PS1 during the golden age, and there’s no way to do so now, but from what I did see, I never saw base defenses play a major role. And engineers doing repairs will be even more important.
Base turrets were crap, yes. Do base turrets need a bigger role? Ok, I'll agree with that. But the only difference here is that instead of engineers keeping the AA turrets up, they kept the AA maxes up.

Originally Posted by Stardouser View Post
[*] c. This will encourage air outfits and squads to make a greater effort to intercept ground convoys in the transit areas between bases. Frankly, this is probably the most important of all the reasons. I only wish we could make the continents 15km X 15km for the same 2000 people, which would double or triple the transit times, making the chances of fighting between bases even more likely, but we can’t do that, at least not for Planetside 2, so there’s no point even asking.
I'd like the 15kmx15km conts too. As i said previously, one of the main issues with fighting outside bases was missing out on capture/defense XP, remove the stupid SOIs (wich they did for PS2 thankfully) and IMHO/IME you're good to go.

Originally Posted by Stardouser View Post
[*] d. And, pursuant to C, since ground attack aircraft will be making extra effort to patrol between bases, that gives players who want to do air to air dogfighting a chance to perform combat air patrol roles.
Back in '04 I always had my hands full in my mosquito, so i don't think PS lacked dogfighting.

Originally Posted by Stardouser View Post
[*] e. Furthermore, it will increase the value of feint attacks. That means, let’s assume that Main Base X is behind the lines and we are not going to attack it, we’re actually going to attack somewhere else. Since the AA is so valuable at a main base, sending in a team to blow it up will possibly cause the enemy empire to overallocate defenders while we attack elsewhere , in other words, adding urgency in the enemy’s mind for such a feint tactic.
Well that's neat, I'd still rather have something other than buffing base AA to make it worth blowing up aside from the generator, because if the generator went down > no more spawning > no overallocation.

Originally Posted by Stardouser View Post
[*] f. Aircraft will still be able to attack either the AA directly, or other things inside a base, but they will need to use tactics such as flying over the base at maximum height and then dropping straight down in a dive attack. While I believe that the fact that base AA will be looking more horizontal than vertical should be more than enough to permit this, to bolster that, the firing arcs/blind spots can also be designed to make them slightly weaker to a dive attack from directly above, to ensure that this tactic has a chance. They could also fly low using terrain as cover from the base AA, and pop up to destroy targets.
I'm suddenly agree-ing more and more, but you don't need a flight ceiling for this.

Originally Posted by Stardouser View Post
[*] g. It will make bases more defensible against Galaxy drops(forcing Galaxies to drop outside the base and make attackers walk in). Although my experience with Galaxies is limited, people have also said that when 20 come in hot, it's damn hard to shoot even 1 down. You may disagree that this is a valuable thing to cut down on, of course.
100 maxes, 100 reavers, 50 tanks = different vehicles, same problem.

Last edited by roguy; 2012-05-27 at 07:48 PM.
roguy is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 2012-05-27, 08:01 PM   [Ignore Me] #140
Stardouser
Colonel
 
Re: A Wee Balance Scenario: AA vs Aircraft


Originally Posted by roguy View Post


I'm suddenly agree-ing more and more, but you don't need a flight ceiling for this.

I don't know what you mean by this? I wasn't saying that there should be a flight ceiling, because there already is one(in PS1, anyway, I can only assume there is one in PS2), but that, if the flight ceiling is too low, that it should be made high enough that aircraft can fly over the AA's reach, but that doing so would put them so high, that they would not be able to attack ground targets from that height. That is not an essential aspect of increasing the base AA power, but, I do think it would be more fair than aircraft having to be completely unable to fly over a base.

Ohhhhh....another thing that could be done with such a high flight ceiling is, there could be a layer of sporadic clouds(depending on dynamic weather). Dogfighting over the clouds or fleeing through clouds...

Also, another thought. What if the way the AA is powered up is not by making them have insanely powerful lock-on missiles, or extreme low TTK projectile cannons, or making them too hard to destroy, but have the same AA units as they have now, and put more of them in? For example...each one of those towers at Zurvan Amp Station, however many AA turrets they've got now, add 2 or 3 more per tower(which, if there 5 towers, means adding 10 or 15 more AA turrets). This would have the additional effect of making this change only work if people actually use the towers; and it would require more engineers to repair them.

Edit: I only saw 2 AA turrets on one of the towers, but there's plenty of room to add 3 more it seems. 5 turrets per tower, 25 total across all 5 towers, that means it would take a full 25 gunners, plus however many engineers, to actually make this happen.

Last edited by Stardouser; 2012-05-27 at 08:06 PM.
Stardouser is offline  
Reply With Quote
Reply
  PlanetSide Universe > PlanetSide Discussions > PlanetSide 2 Discussion

Bookmarks

Discord


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:33 PM.

Content © 2002-2013, PlanetSide-Universe.com, All rights reserved.
PlanetSide and the SOE logo are registered trademarks of Sony Online Entertainment Inc. © 2004 Sony Online Entertainment Inc. All rights reserved.
All other trademarks or tradenames are properties of their respective owners.
Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.