ESF Air to Air Feedback for Devs - Page 16

Shogun · 2013-06-07, 10:08 AM

ps1´s flight model was easier to learn.
but maybe it´s just the stupid mouse and keybinding ps2 has in place.

for a proper flight model ps2 hasn´t enough space.
how many seconds does it take to fly from out of bounds to out of bounds with afterburner right now?
any mechanic that doesn´t rely on hoovering about will not work on that small continents.

planitsider · 2013-06-07, 10:13 AM

Air Game Balance
Right now, as it is, the problem with air combat in Planetside 2 is that a single ESF is much too effective as a multiple role combat craft. It excels at engaging infantry and armored targets on the ground, as well as all air targets. The role of the ESF has been previously stated as being an air superiority craft. The problem (and one main reason for the rise of rocket podding) is that not enough is happening in the air. The air battle is only important, because air has the potential to suppress ground. Beyond that, there's no reason to be in the air. You cannot take hexes from the air. If the ESF is going to be made into a more effective air combat craft, while reducing its utility as an air-to-ground attack craft, then more care must be given to developing a rich and engaging aerial arena. This post contains a proposal for doing so.

Galaxy
Bring back the deployable Galaxy, but instead of making it a spawn point, make it only deployable in midair. Deployable galaxies with different certification lines would provide major objectives for the air war, along with a dynamic, ever-changing battlefield. Deployable Galaxies would need a few basic upgrades to make them usable when stationary:

1. Autopilot/zero hover mode. When a Galaxy is deployed midair, it no longer needs a pilot, and will remain in place for 20 minutes (like a Sunderer). Deployment should take 10 seconds.

2. Aegis shield. The Aegis shield was developed to protect Galaxies from ground-to-air fire. It creates an impenetrable barrier against all types of weaponry. However, due to energy constraints and the needs of zero hover, this shield will only protect the bottom 40% of the Galaxy, and it can only be deployed when stationary. Even then, the shield takes a full 30 seconds (after the Galaxy has been deployed) to load, arm, and harden.

3. Reduced capacity. The extra equipment necessary for the deployable Galaxy should reduce the overall carrying capacity to six. This preserves the utility of the original Galaxy's design as a troop transport.

These three basic functions of a "deployed" Galaxy mean that they are not sitting ducks for skyguards, burster maxes, anything on the ground. However, limiting the Aegis shield to the bottom 40% means Galaxies cannot deploy at 100 meters either, as anything above that 40% plane will be able to damage it. This should make deployed Galaxies objectives that only enemy aircraft can take out (unless a pilot is feeling risky). In order to prevent the Aegis from being exploited at max ceiling, the maximum deployable altitude should be 900 meters.

New Certification Lines
Galaxy pilots could choose from three different certification lines in the utility category: aerial fortress, sensor array, or orbital command.

1. The aerial fortress is the air war support vehicle. This version of the galaxy, when deployed, allows allied aircraft to resupply on top of its single ammo pad. However, the aerial fortress can only resupply primary weapons for small craft (ESFs and Intruders, more on them later). This means that ESFs using missiles of any kind will need to return to real ammo vehicle pads in order to resupply secondary weapon systems. A second level aerial fortess also offers auto-repair to nearby aircraft. A third level aerial fortress broadcasts a missile blanket, which effectively kills all lock-on missile tracking within a 200 meter distance. This both makes the aerial fortress immune to lock-on missiles (only when deployed), but also provides refuge from them for any aircraft nearby.

2. The sensor array is the all seeing eye in the sky, which can support forward strikes through advanced, long range spotting, or cover allies as they retreat, jamming enemy radar through electronic warfare. The sensor array replaces each wing gun with a left and right observation deck. Enemy units spotted from an observation deck will remain in a "visible" state for twice as long as they normally would (the spotter will also be granted twice the XP). In deployed mode, the observation decks also passively reveal all stealth units within a certain range. Each observation deck contains a powerful microwave transmitter, which the observer can use to aim at various targets with different results. Spawn beacons being attacked by this weapon will be disrupted, only allowing intermittent spawning. When enemy vehicles are targeted, their systems can go haywire, and while under the fire of this transmitter, there's a chance that their secondary ability being randomly triggered. At the third level, the sensor array warns of enemy drop pods (displaying land points for allies), as well as scheduled enemy orbital strikes.

3. The orbital command is the key piece of the puzzle any commander needs to call down an orbital strike. The comsat uplink and targeting systems it carries grants the resolution necessary for reliable delivery of ordnance from space. With an orbital command in place, orbital strikes can be called down from the heavens within a certain distance of the deployed Galaxy. In addition, the orbital command provides a firing platform for the Icarus missile, a recon weapon designed for scouting and the disruption of enemy systems. The Icarus missile is a non-lethal, camera guided weapon, which will not damage targets upon impact. However, the remote pilot can 'detonate' it near enemy vehicles with varied effects. A detonated Icarus missile near a sunderer will disable its spawn unit for a certain amount of time. A detonated Icarus near an ESF will kill its flight controls for a short period.

These different types of Galaxies will interact with each other when their influence fields overlap. They each have a primary ability* which can never be effected. Abilities:
1. Aerial fortress - ammunition pad*, proximity auto-repair for vehicles, missile blanket
2. Sensor array - observation decks*, drop pod warnings, spawn disruption
3. Orbital command - icarus missile*, squad spawn, orbital strike
However, their secondary abilities can be disabled or mitigated by the presence of nearby enemy galaxies with alternative upgrades. Please see the chart below for a rough idea of how each loadout would affect the others.

Liberator
The current problem with the Liberator is two fold. First, ESF primary weapons are too strong against them. Second, there is little to no reason for Liberator crews to ever go 3/3, when they can operate 2/3 and have the bombardier switch to the tailgun in the scant few times it's a better choice (very rare). I believe that both of these problems can be fixed with a single change. It would be easy, from a balance standpoint, to simply increase the health of the Liberator or to provide it additional protection against machine gun fire. This is not the way to go.

The Liberator tailgun should be given a secondary ability (usable by pressing the ability key while in the tailgun position), which deploys a temporary nanite shield (much like the NC max riot shield). However, this shield, which I am calling the Active Defense Matrix (ADM), should follow the direction the tailgun is pointing, meaning you have to actually actively defend incoming fire, by 'catching' bullets. In addition, this ability should take between 5-10 seconds to 'arm' whenever a gunner jumps into this seat. This would mean that fleeing Liberators have a much greater chance of survival against enemy pursuers, but only if the tailgunner is active, smart, and skilled. A small XP bonus (like surface-to-air damage?) could be granted for successful damage prevented. The shield should have a short duration and a medium recharge, meaning it cannot be spammed, but should be used tactically.

And finally, the tailgunner should share XP with the bombardier just as the pilot does. This is a simple and easy fix that makes the role much more appealing. I also think the G40-F Ranger should be available to the tailgun, but that is a side issue.

Please see the image below for a mockup of the Active Defense Matrix

Air Roles
If the air roles are defined as follows:
ESF - air superiority fighter, designed to tackle air threats
Liberator - bomber, heavy air-to-ground craft, designed to tackle enemy vehicles
Galaxy - troop transport, operations platform

And I know some will argue with my judgment of the Liberator, but the Dalton and Shredder, despite how they're often used, are primarily anti-vehicle weapons. The Zepher is a weapon designed to suppress light armor/infantry, but from my judgment, the Liberator is primarily a bomber to be used against heavy targets (2 out of 3 bombardier weapons being designed for it, plus the tankbuster).

So as long as the ESF is further reduced from its air-to-ground effectiveness, this leaves out an important air role, which I have seen many threads suggest would be a necessary and welcome addition to the game: a helicopter/primarily VTOL aircraft, specifically designed to suppress infantry.

A lot of people will knee-jerk this suggestion after the lolpod era, but please read on before passing any judgment.

Intruder
The Intruder can be a new two man air vehicle that fills a distinct niche in the Planetside 2 aerial arena. This helicopter like vehicle can be configured for different attack loadouts and is primarily used for suppressing infantry and light armor during low altitude attack missions.

There are several special things I like about this idea.

1. Rumble seat with benefits. The Intruder's second seat is a rumble seat with a vehicle weapon option. What does this mean? It means that the player in the second seat can press interact to use the vehicle's secondary weapon, or he can opt to fire from the rail himself, with whatever weapons he brought with him. Max units cannot operate the secondary weapon.

2. No rocket pods, no explosive weaponry, period. The secondary weapon should be limited to either the M12 Kobalt or the M20 Basilisk. The primary weapon (pilot's weapon) should have the option of the M12 Koblat, the M20 Basilisk or M40 Fury.

3. Different platforms. Either side weapon options means you can outfit your Intruder with either a left side rumble seat or a right side rumble seat, creating different firing platforms adaptable to any situation. The third option is dropping the secondary weapon completely, trading it for a nanite repair generator. This is the 'fire truck' of the sky, meaning nearby vehicles will be repaired when near this special third option. The trade off in fire power allows your rumble seat passenger to look either direction.

4. Unique flight characteristics. The Intruder should be delicate, yet super agile, but very slow. In other words, it should have slightly more health than an ESF, twice the vertical lift of the average ESF, fast natural yaw, slow natural roll speed, and an extremely slow top speed (100 kph). Standard airframe upgrades should be available.

The Intruder would fill out the final role for aircraft. I see it as being a very situational specific (not a one size fits all) aircraft that will take incredible skill and teamwork to operate effectively. I also really like the idea of making the secondary gunner a rumble seat only, meaning he can be sniped, blown to bits, anything by ground troops. He faces real danger if he does not effectively take out enemy targets, which is something the ESF does not, whenever he is strafing with rocket pods. This concept craft would add greatly needed depth to the air war by creating a distinct fourth role. By extension, this enlarges the job of the air superiority role, the ESF.

Please let me know what you think about my ideas. Any suggestions/feedback is welcome. I think the combination of these three things (deployable galaxies, defendable liberators, intruders) would really spice up the air game, while solving the ESF problem.

Sunrock · 2013-06-07, 12:20 PM

Originally Posted by SolLeks

and if you srsly think that the battlefield games have a harder flight model and not just your preferred flight model, you are delusional.

Well I can barely keep the air planes in the different BF games in the air and I never manage to land any of them without dying. However I rock as a chopper polite in BF3. I think I have 1 kill in BF3 with A2A jet fights. In PS2 I am at least an average skilled polite and have shot down several ESF, libs and galaxies. So yes I think the flight mech in BF is allot harder yes.

But the main reason I want all ESF to have higher lowest and fastest speed is because it would balance the game allot more. It would be easier to survive in the air but also hard to shoot down more then one target at the time. If you are forced to do flyby instead of hover you will lower the possible amount of kills per minutes you can get as you need to reposition your self after each kill. This makes it so we can go back to how powerful the A2G weapons was before the nerf witch I think is necessary for air to be potent again. It also makes it easier to disengage from Strikers, Bursters and the like. So IMO buffing ESF mini/max speed would be good for the entire game.

At least the scythe should be nerfed down to mossy handling and then nerf the River and the Mossy down equally in handling.

maradine · 2013-06-07, 12:38 PM

Originally Posted by SolLeks

Oh really? this game is 'ludicrously easy mode' compared to what games exactly?

Well, anything by Eagle Dynamics, for starters. And then there's War Thunder. Oh, and the original Jane's blue box series. Falcon 4. And IL-2. Do you have a while? This list goes clear back to the mid 80s.

There's nothing wrong with PS2 air. It's fun, and has plenty of room for virtuosity, as clearly evidenced. Calling it "flight" and "hard", however makes me giggle into my cornflakes.

SolLeks · 2013-06-07, 01:57 PM

Originally Posted by Sunrock

Well I can barely keep the air planes in the different BF games in the air and I never manage to land any of them without dying. However I rock as a chopper polite in BF3. I think I have 1 kill in BF3 with A2A jet fights. In PS2 I am at least an average skilled polite and have shot down several ESF, libs and galaxies. So yes I think the flight mech in BF is allot harder yes.

I am fairly good at combat landing jets in BF3 on any surface that does not have a lot of trees on it, in fact I helped make a cool little 'trick piloting' video for my old BF3 clan so its just diffrent. I was also a good chopper pilot but I was a much better jet pilot than chopper.

Originally Posted by Sunrock

But the main reason I want all ESF to have higher lowest and fastest speed is because it would balance the game allot more. It would be easier to survive in the air but also hard to shoot down more then one target at the time. If you are forced to do flyby instead of hover you will lower the possible amount of kills per minutes you can get as you need to reposition your self after each kill.

This right here tells me you don't fly much currently. You are currently forced to do flybys if there is ANY AA in the area, and that still does not help survivibility wise. there is a risk vs reward for ESF right now, Hover and you risk getting easily shot by everything, wile having a easier chance to shoot at everything. Fly fast and your at much lower risk, however you will have a harder time shooting stuff, I like it that way. If we fly faster, not much will change other then the ammount of lead a burster will have to do to hit you.

Originally Posted by Sunrock

This makes it so we can go back to how powerful the A2G weapons was before the nerf witch I think is necessary for air to be potent again. It also makes it easier to disengage from Strikers, Bursters and the like. So IMO buffing ESF mini/max speed would be good for the entire game.

Will not do anything imo.

Originally Posted by Sunrock

At least the scythe should be nerfed down to mossy handling and then nerf the River and the Mossy down equally in handling.

Why? why make things fly more like bricks? trying to kill the fun of flying?

Originally Posted by maradine

Well, anything by Eagle Dynamics, for starters. And then there's War Thunder. Oh, and the original Jane's blue box series. Falcon 4. And IL-2. Do you have a while? This list goes clear back to the mid 80s.

There's nothing wrong with PS2 air. It's fun, and has plenty of room for virtuosity, as clearly evidenced. Calling it "flight" and "hard", however makes me giggle into my cornflakes.

Ok, I guess I should have stated how many Arcade Flight type games are harder then this, Flight sims are obvusly going to be harder as they are sims. you are comparing two different types of games there buddy.

maradine · 2013-06-07, 02:04 PM

Hey, man, you said "games".

SolLeks · 2013-06-07, 02:23 PM

Originally Posted by maradine

Hey, man, you said "games".

Wile this is true, I thought it would be common sense to compare apples to apples, not apples to oranges ^_^

maradine · 2013-06-07, 02:28 PM

I dunno, I think it's less "apples and oranges" and more of a continuum. Can you say where arcade stops and sim begins? Is it the inclusion of 2nd and 3rd order forces? A damage model? Number of controls? Having to start up the bird on the pad? It's a curious line of thought. If you come straight from PS1, HAWX probably feels like a sim.

Lol, HAWX.

We now return to your regularly scheduled feedback thread.

SolLeks · 2013-06-07, 02:39 PM

Originally Posted by maradine

I dunno, I think it's less "apples and oranges" and more of a continuum. Can you say where arcade stops and sim begins? Is it the inclusion of 2nd and 3rd order forces? A damage model? Number of controls? Having to start up the bird on the pad? It's a curious line of thought. If you come straight from PS1, HAWX probably feels like a sim.

Lol, HAWX.

We now return to your regularly scheduled feedback thread.

I distinct sims from arcade like this.

If there is more of a focus on real life, its a sim. If there is more of a focus on gameplay, its arcade.

And back to the feedback xD.

typhaon · 2013-06-07, 03:20 PM

Originally Posted by Shogun

ps1´s flight model was easier to learn.
but maybe it´s just the stupid mouse and keybinding ps2 has in place.

for a proper flight model ps2 hasn´t enough space.
how many seconds does it take to fly from out of bounds to out of bounds with afterburner right now?
any mechanic that doesn´t rely on hoovering about will not work on that small continents.

Don't think the continents are too small... I think they are generally too tightly packed with bases.

There are also degrees of adjustment. We don't have to go from hover to 100% real flight... could move to something in between.

Sunrock · 2013-06-07, 08:09 PM

Originally Posted by SolLeks

Will not do anything imo.

If you do a flyby in say 435km/h instead of 258Km/h you will increase survivability against AA. Now if you buff the weapons so you do equal amount of damage in the time frame you have your target in sight in 435km/h do same TTK during a flyby of 258km/h. Now you have increased the survivability against AA without buffing any armor of the ESF as that will unbalance other things. But we still have to balance out the buff of the ESF weapons. To do that you nerf the hover stability and/or turn rate of the ESF to make it harder to hit things when flying slowly.

Saying that that will do nothing is IMO not well thought through comment.

PredatorFour · 2013-06-07, 09:30 PM

Originally Posted by Sunrock

At least the scythe should be nerfed down to mossy handling and then nerf the River and the Mossy down equally in handling.

Lol what? The stock mossie is easy to fly compared to the scythe wtf.

typhaon · 2013-06-08, 05:02 AM

An easy fix is to remove the A2G capability of ESF and add some kind of heavy bomber (think B-52) to the game. Tune Liberators so they are more for vehicle/tank busting -- but generally resistant to MAX flak... oh and make it so tanks/sunderers/etc. aren't such paper tigers to infantry.

I'd also tighten up the G2A capabilities...

Make MAX flak for nailing ESFs, as they swoop in to take out Liberators.

Make HA missiles for taking out Liberators.

Make Anti-Air turrets for taking out all, including Bombers.

Make ESFs for killing Liberators and Bombers... and make Bombers for carpet bombing infantry.

Sunrock · 2013-06-08, 07:40 PM

Originally Posted by PredatorFour

Lol what? The stock mossie is easy to fly compared to the scythe wtf.

What?! I have spent most of the time in a mossie but by far it's way more easier to dogfight in a scythe. You're delusional. Ands it's a fact that the scythe have the best turning rate and hover stability also it's frame make it harder to hit when you're horizontal to the opponent. The mossy is even harder to dogfight with then the River.

PredatorFour · 2013-06-08, 09:24 PM

Originally Posted by Sunrock

You're delusional.

Yeh....That's why the top players are TR mossie whores across the servers. Your delusional too.