Improvement: Top Turret for the Liberator

[The Degenatron]

Originally Posted by BillyBob

Yes, but that's purely from the perspective of the Liberator crew, isn't it?

Actually, it's not. Had I been think only from a Lib Crew stand-point, I would have suggested the top turret have 360 degree rotation and be as powerful as the tailgunner. That would simply be too much. Fighters SHOULD have a good chance to shoot down a lib, but it shouldn't be EASY.

Originally Posted by BillyBob

What about the pilot attempting to shoot the Liberator down?

I think it's more fun for a fighter pilot to have to juke and and dodge on a strafing run across the back of the Lib, or to circle out and wait, watching for the moment the bombadier starts shooting at the ground to swoop in and attack.

The sides of the lib still remain vulnerable, which means that "safe" pilots will making crossing runs at the lib instead of just hovering in the 6 o'clock high position.

Originally Posted by BillyBob

All I'm saying is I never experienced this as an issue in PS and I'm not sure it will be in PS2.

Wow, really? That's amazing in itself. With the pops in PS1 being so low right now, it's hard to muster a real air-wing, let alone a dedicate escort for bombing runs. Most Lib missions are just PUGs of random people jumping in with a Lib pilot.

I think it's bad form to have anything be "You HAVE to play this way for this to work." Over and over, the devs have repaeted the mantra that players should be able to play the way they want to. And to say that a Lib can only be successful as a part of a larger air-wing seems like a step backwards for a vehicle that takes a 3 man crew.

Originally Posted by BillyBob

Regardless, as these questions are all regarding the balancing of the game, I think it will all become quite obvious once beta starts and we see these situations play out on a greater scale.

While I understand your point, I don't see how scaling the situation up could possibly help the Lib in any way. It's bad enough with a 1v1 where a Reaver can get an easy kill by hovering in the 6 o'clock high position. When the numbers at 10:1 vs Libs in the sky, I can't see things getting any better.

Originally Posted by BillyBob

Best you can do IMO, is to get into beta and fly a lot of Liberators to see if this "blindspot" is a weakness making it imbalanced in any way.

If this turns out to be the case, then it will probably be pretty obvious and many will report on it.

That is something I absolutely intend to do.

I'd like to share your optimism about that, but I fear that, just like in PS1, the fighter pilots will outnumber the Lib pilots 3:1 and they'll "see no problem" with being able to gank Libs from on top.

Originally Posted by BillyBob

However, I think it's perhaps a bit premature to assume that any possible imbalance present in PS will automatically be there in PS2. I'd say we should maybe play the game first, observe and then pass final judgement based on that.

/BB

I whole-heartedly disagree with that. NOW is the time to ask for these things. It's not like I'm talking about some complete unknown here. The Lib design and operation is largely unchanged from PS1. Meanwhile, the fighters have become vastly more manueverable and quick. The writing is already pretty clear on the wall as far as I'm concerned. And I'd hate to see players abandon an asset like the Lib because it's a flying death trap, or at best a tasty decoy to draw in fighters attention so that they can be an easier target for other fighters.

The Liberator needs to stand on its own.

It needs a fighting chance to get away.

[BillyBob]

Well, can't really argue with that...all valid points as far as I can tell.

Hopefully the devs will read this thread and give it some thought then.

Again, I'm not saying the issue doesn't exist, only that I haven't experienced it as one myself.

Who knows, once I (fingers crossed) get into beta I might be the first to post here about how badly the lib need a top turret.

/BB

[Solidblock]

I know this may seem weird and has it's weaknesses, but perhaps you can choose where you want to the 'tail' gunner to be? Top or on the tail.

I know this will lead to fighters actually alternating how they approach the Lib depending on where the turret is, but because they actually have to think about it, it will act as an obstacle to them. I also think that a top turret could actually act as a tailgunner as it can face that way, however it's field of view will be obstructed by the tailend of the aircraft which won't allow the tailgunner to shoot towards the ground, but purely up in the air and to the side that will allow for at least some balance.

Tailgunner = Shoot the ground and horizontally.
Topgunner = Shoot upwards and to some extent, horizontally but not the ground.

What do you think?

[Rexdezi]

I still say leave the Liberator as it is. It is already balanced imo. It can take a massive amount of damage (did you see the E3 footage?!?!?) and if it needs someone to cover the top, the pilot should get on the radio and ask for some support!

[Talek Krell]

Given how deadly the Lib is, it's reasonable that it would have some sort of vulnerability. In PS1 having the TG under the tail made you choose between flying high where your blind spot was protected or flying low where you could cause more damage, and it was a good trade off.

PS2 is a new game and new design approaches may be needed, but until we hit beta we won't know what we're working with in the first place. The Lib's bombardier position already had a number of AA options in the E3 footage, and I still suspect that they may be placed on the top of the vehicle.

Kudos on using the bombardier to control the gun though. I always felt like they should have just let the bombardier switch between the bombs and the TG in PS1. Neither job really demanded full attention, and you could never get a pub to TG for long.

[The Degenatron]

Originally Posted by Solidblock

I know this may seem weird and has it's weaknesses, but perhaps you can choose where you want to the 'tail' gunner to be? Top or on the tail.

I know this will lead to fighters actually alternating how they approach the Lib depending on where the turret is, but because they actually have to think about it, it will act as an obstacle to them. I also think that a top turret could actually act as a tailgunner as it can face that way, however it's field of view will be obstructed by the tailend of the aircraft which won't allow the tailgunner to shoot towards the ground, but purely up in the air and to the side that will allow for at least some balance.

Tailgunner = Shoot the ground and horizontally.
Topgunner = Shoot upwards and to some extent, horizontally but not the ground.

What do you think?

Are you talking about switching "on the fly" or as a side-grade? If the top turret was a 360 degree turret with a gun on-par with the tailgun, then yes this would make a good compromise. It lets the pilot customize the Lib to the type of flying he wants to do:

Close to the ground fast attack = Top Gunner to watch the air.
High altitude bombing - Tail gunner to watch for fighters coming up

But even then, you still run into the problem where the Lib is forced to press against the flight cieling to protect itself and to give the tail gunner a chance to shoot at the fighters. As soon as the pilot tips the nose down, the Lib descends and it becomes vulnerable and gets shot down.

I still think giving the Liberator the ability to defend itself while climbing and descending is only fair.

Originally Posted by Rexdezi

I still say leave the Liberator as it is. It is already balanced imo. It can take a massive amount of damage (did you see the E3 footage?!?!?) and if it needs someone to cover the top, the pilot should get on the radio and ask for some support!

Just because it can take a lot of damage doesn't mean that it's balanced. Yes, I have watched the videos from E3 (notice in the video that the Lib crew wrecks the ground in their first pass, but the second one ends extremely quickly).

To me, that's exactly like saying the MBTs should have to call for help when a Lightning is chasing them.

Originally Posted by Talek Krell

Given how deadly the Lib is, it's reasonable that it would have some sort of vulnerability. In PS1 having the TG under the tail made you choose between flying high where your blind spot was protected or flying low where you could cause more damage, and it was a good trade off.

It's vulnerability should be it's slow speed and wide turning arc.

Liberator low level flying went out of fashion in PS1 pretty quickly. I don't remember the last time I saw one not cruising at max alt.

Originally Posted by Talek Krell

PS2 is a new game and new design approaches may be needed, but until we hit beta we won't know what we're working with in the first place. The Lib's bombardier position already had a number of AA options in the E3 footage, and I still suspect that they may be placed on the top of the vehicle.

I haven't seen that, please link it if you can.

I certainly don't agree that nothing can be inferred from how the Liberator worked before and from the E3 videos.

One thing I can bet on: the damage and radius from the Lib mortar will be dialed down before beta starts. It simply was just too much at E3.

It's still a big lumbering beast (as it should be). It's slow speed and low manueverability already put it at a HUGE disadvantage against the fighters.

Not to mention that every fighter in the air has the potential to be a "wasp", which means that the Lib is now in a LOT of trouble.

On top of that, my opinion is that having the Liberator get "down and dirty" close to the ground makes the whole game WAY more fun. But it's going to get absolutely HAMMERED by ground fire doing that. THAT is where its thick skin really comes into play - it has to be able deal some damage and get away if played well. It WON'T get away if it can't fend off persuers after its attack run. The Lib should not be a one-use kamakazi aircraft.

Originally Posted by Talek Krell

Kudos on using the bombardier to control the gun though. I always felt like they should have just let the bombardier switch between the bombs and the TG in PS1. Neither job really demanded full attention, and you could never get a pub to TG for long.

Thanks, and I completely agree.

My vision of the Liberator is not for it to linger over the battlefield, but to swoop in, hit hard and then run away. It should be able to come in low, hit some ground targets as it passes over, take a beating from a couple of ground flak cannons (Turrets or Maxes) and then pull up as it flies away, getting clear of the ground. If a fighter gives chase as it's climbing out of the target zone, it should not be 100% defenseless. The bombadier should be able to switch to the top gun and fire back at the interceptor.

What stops this plan in it tracks are two things: Lots of AA on the ground or just a few interceptors in the air. If the lib comes flying over and there are 4+ AA cannons waiting for it on the ground, it should not even make it to the other side of the base. If there are 3+ interceptors giving chase as it flies away - it should be toast.

I'm not asking for it to be invincible.

I am asking for it to be slightly more than a match for a single interceptor while flying in a straight line (climbing or descending) and the interceptor is persuing. The lib should not be able to win a turning battle nor be used as a "loiterer".

[Baneblade]

There is one thing that should be taken into consideration: Can aircraft fly inverted?

[The Degenatron]

Originally Posted by Sobekeus

There is one thing that should be taken into consideration: Can aircraft fly inverted?

I know it can see-saw back and forth, but I haven't seen one maintain level flight upside down yet.

That said, even if it could, is that even reasonable?

I'd hate for the dominant tactic in PS2 be that Lib pilots roll the Lib over and fly that way to fight off interceptors. Crazy things should happen in the game as an exception, not the rule.

[Dacrim]

I agree with this. In my experience the back gunner of the liberator has seemed pretty ineffective...too ineffective.Not only is the gun weak but it is located in a place that can cover about 1/4 if not less of the area that the liberator can be attacked from.

Also, considering the fact that for a liberator to be effective at doing its job(bombing) it must move slow and usually in a linear fashion so the person manning the bomber seat can aim and have good timing. This makes the liberator almost defenseless against other aircrafts because about 75% of it is unprotected! Making It a sitting duck when you consider the maneuverability of the other aircrafts!

Not adding an extra gunner but moving the tail gunner to the top of the liberator will at least make it less defenseless.And lets not forget, the particular gun being used as air-to-air defense by the lib is not very strong. I think it would make the lib more balanced as oppose to unbalanced.

[Immigrant]

Lib is a bomber it's meant to fly high so guy in the upper turret would die of boredom while waiting for someone to occasionally engage it from above.

Also it does need a weak spot as well as anything else and top is perfect. Smaller aircraft should protect a Lib when engaged from above.

[Knotz]

I think the lib should be left as it is. Immigrant is right, the top turret guy would be left doing nothing if it was a standalone spot on the lib, and if it is a hotswap for the main gunner, then it sort of waters down what he's there for. I think getting a fighter escort is the way to go. What happened in WW2 when bombers were going to other countries? (The Nazi's bombing London/Manchester/Bristol/etcetcetc and the British/Americans bombing Germany towards the end of the war) The bombers were ALWAYS escorted by fighters. To not do so was suicide. As it should be in PS2 in my humble opinion

[Baneblade]

Originally Posted by Knotz

The bombers were ALWAYS escorted by fighters.

Not always, but even so the bombvers still had plenty of point defense MGs.

[Knotz]

Originally Posted by Sobekeus

Not always, but even so the bombvers still had plenty of point defense MGs.

find me one example of a real life raid where the bombers went in unescorted and it wasn't complete and utter suicide.

[Neurotoxin]

Can you show us an example of a plane or gunship that currently exists, with top-mounted weaponry? I know the game isn't based on reality so realism isn't a factor, but has it ever been done?

Libs have the same flight ceiling as other air, so a lib can fly high to keep their top secure. When they are swooping down to do a targeted strike over an area, they trade accuracy for safety.

[Knotz]

Originally Posted by Neurotoxin

Can you show us an example of a plane or gunship that currently exists, with top-mounted weaponry? I know the game isn't based on reality so realism isn't a factor, but has it ever been done?

I can't think of any examples, other than that massive airship with the gun entrenchments in Avatar but that obviously doesn't count... http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature...d7RaNN4#t=139s

Nope... can't think of any