So every HA can be an aircraft counter?

[The Loverator]

Originally Posted by Klockan

I didn't understand what you were ranting about, is it too easy to get away from lock ons making aircraft too powerful or is it too hard making HA too powerful?

It is whining. Easy as that.

I may sound arrogant, but Nope - everything is fine as it is.
Aircrafts are very powerful. I think, everyone can understand that very easily if he or she
watches Footage about Aircrafts long enough.

But: Not always are "other" Aircrafts around in the Hands of the other Faction's, to counter them.
Not always are Flak-Towers in Reach to pilot and to use against Aircrafts.

AND: It is not always that one or several M.A.X.-Units are around with Anti-Aircraft Weaponry and
a nice Position to shoot on Enemy Aircrafts. And Aircrafts are fast. VERY fast.


And even if the Liberator and Galaxy are not as fast as the smaller Aircrafts, they have heavy Armor.
S~o,
what is Infantry supposed to do if Enemy Aircrafts are around?

Shiver in Fear and Despair about being powerless? Infantry-Weapon's are very weak against Vehicles.

The heavy Assault-Class is allowed to be a bit powerful against Vehicles. At LEAST a little bit.
Aircrafts are very powerful already. It's just that they are not completely overpowered,
by having Heavy Assault's in the Game which can "lock" Rocket's onto their Tail.

Everything otherwise is bi***ing and whining.




greetings, LV.

[EisenKreutzer]

I have no problem with auto-lock on, as long as it is possible to break the lock by either evasive manouvering or deplying flares/chaffs/whatever.

[Flaropri]

Originally Posted by EisenKreutzer

I have no problem with auto-lock on, as long as it is possible to break the lock by either evasive manouvering or deplying flares/chaffs/whatever.

Which you can according to what we've seen so far.

[haticK]

We can't really answer that considering most of us haven't played the game yet

[DukeTerror]

Between this and the one about dying/respawning we're getting posts on the "philosophy of gameplay" without even truely knowing if the issue of discussion is even relevant to PS2. Heck, I even think both those concerns are relieved by the design/gameplay we've seen. Bored people I guess...

[stordito]

in current jet fighter you can lock anywhere, almost 360* thanks to the HUD in your helmet.
However Air to Air works best is the speed bethween the 2 planes is minimium AND the target is moving away, because missiles are locked with a conjuction of radar,image and heat(exaust) detection.

So to balance the game you could be either allowed to lock anywhere but the missile loose effectiveness and precision if shoot from the front (this would reduce spamming in a face to face air combat too).
Or you can make so the lock engages ONLY if you keep your crosshair locked on his ass for 3 seconds with the locking signal beeping faster and faster in both planes...imagine the stress of being followed by a skilled pilot with the beeper in your head...

TL;DR
Air to Air lock should be reduced to a bare minimum and award who can fly better for longer, not just a cheap aim assist.
Air will be targeted from ground with a lot of stuff, no need to ruin the cool doghfights we could have higher in the sky.

[maradine]

Originally Posted by stordito

in current jet fighter you can lock anywhere, almost 360* thanks to the HUD in your helmet.

Assuming we're talking about the JHMCS, about 180 degrees. The seekers in the AIM-9X will only do about 90 degrees off boresight. If they're behind you, you're not firing missiles at them. If you're thinking of the Hornet sequence from BF3, let's just say that Dice was a teensy bit generous.

[WolfAlmighty]

Haven't had a chance to watch the video yet, but I'm pretty much against lock-on weapons in general in video games. I will definitely reserve judgment on PS2's system until I've played it, but I'm hoping there aren't egregious amounts of lock-on gadgets.

[AgtPanda]

I'm all for lock on items if the missiles can be countered not only by flares but also by evasive maneuvers.

Before BF3 was released (Beta= The only good fun I had with that game) someone released codes to the caspian border servers. The lock on missiles had physics... I could pull a sharp 170 degree turn and watch the missile fly by me. That was fine. Stuff like that separates the good pilots from the bad zerglings. But now the missiles can apparently stop and turn on a dime in order to hit your jet, and that is anti fun.

Another problem is the fact that in BF3, there are only 2 jets on your team in a potentially 64 man server. Which means everyone on the ground wants you dead. In PS2 I hope this is remedied by the fact that air cav seems to be on par with footzerg a lot of the time, and at other times said footzerg is occupied with the enemyfootzerg.

TL;DR Insta win lock on missiles suck. Dodgeable missiles are fine.

[ThermalReaper]

I'm asking to discuss whether or not this will be a possibility and if you have this same concern and no, I haven't played the original planetside.
I never asked about how it really was ingame.

[Turdicus]

The handheld AT weapons don't seem to do much damage against aircraft, especially the lib. The only times his plane took massive damage were when it was hit by tank shells (mags still trying to be snipers i guess) and when enemy reavers kamikazied into it. When he was hit by rockets the damage was puny.

Also keep in mind that there are several options available for HA other than the standard lock on missile. In neuro's cert page there are dumbfires, tv guided, and even a direct fire laser weapon nicknamed the lancer. Lock ons will be common, but if the damage is low and other options available then it shouldnt be a problem

[ThermalReaper]

Originally Posted by Turdicus

The handheld AT weapons don't seem to do much damage against aircraft, especially the lib. The only times his plane took massive damage were when it was hit by tank shells (mags still trying to be snipers i guess) and when enemy reavers kamikazied into it. When he was hit by rockets the damage was puny.

Also keep in mind that there are several options available for HA other than the standard lock on missile. In neuro's cert page there are dumbfires, tv guided, and even a direct fire laser weapon nicknamed the lancer. Lock ons will be common, but if the damage is low and other options available then it shouldnt be a problem

Now that's more I like it. Thanks for that post.

I'm breaking the discuss rule here, was there any information that there will be AA/AT specific handheld rocket launchers?

Also, I'm revamping the original post, one minute please.

[Turdicus]

Originally Posted by ThermalReaper

I'm breaking the discuss rule here, was there any information that there will be AA/AT specific handheld rocket launchers?

Well this was what I was basing my info off of. This is from the E3 demo though so things can always change. http://www.hamma.ws/ntemp/Infantry/H...lt/HeavyAV.jpg

[Marinealver]

HA is almost like a mini MAX that can capture points or a Heavy Weapon/ Anti Vehicle hybird. What we know about HA is

It can carry 2 primary weapons, one being a LMG as a squad automatic weapon, the other being an Anti-Vehicle weapon which could be swaped for a MANPAD (Man portible Air Defese).

A MAX is more of an Armored Infantry firepower support in which it can tank indoor firepower, act as an Anti Vehicle Ambusher along with a dismounted squad, or act as a LAAD (Low altitude Air Defence) augment for a unit.

[TheCaptainC]

maybe the av weapons of the ha should be changed so you can either lock on air targets or ground targets but not both with the same loadout