The Air game is 20 times better post GU11 - Page 2

Aaron · 2013-06-21, 09:16 AM

I'm a typical burster user and it seems decently balanced to me. I can't use it at ranges like I used to, but it still does what it's meant to. I also wasn't be farmed by air either, but I did see a few more aircraft in the skies, which is refreshing to see.

AThreatToYou · 2013-06-21, 09:42 AM

If the myths are true, the skyguard is going to need more buffs and it should be on a buggy not a tank.

Why on a buggy and not a tank? Tanks are big juicy ESF targets as it is. And if they are on a buggy, we can make them sufficiently lethal to air so that enemy armor would be the best reply to it, as the buggy wouldn't be as tough as a tank. It would force the AA to retreat, allowing air to move in and support the tanks...

but with the AA on fast-moving vehicles, it gives them an opportunity to pop in and pop out. It also gives friendly armor the ability to make their moves anywhere because the AA units are faster than them, and can respond to opportunities.

JohnnyRicardo · 2013-06-21, 09:53 AM

Originally Posted by AThreatToYou

If the myths are true, the skyguard is going to need more buffs and it should be on a buggy not a tank.

Why on a buggy and not a tank? Tanks are big juicy ESF targets as it is. And if they are on a buggy, we can make them sufficiently lethal to air so that enemy armor would be the best reply to it, as the buggy wouldn't be as tough as a tank. It would force the AA to retreat, allowing air to move in and support the tanks...

but with the AA on fast-moving vehicles, it gives them an opportunity to pop in and pop out. It also gives friendly armor the ability to make their moves anywhere because the AA units are faster than them, and can respond to opportunities.

Agreed. I can't imagine how frustrating it must be driving a skyguard at Amerish during an alert. As they have no way of using the terrain to their advantage since they would most likely get stuck they are nothing more than a huge xp-bonus on small roads. It wouldnt be wrong to buff the secondary gun on tanks a bit more lethal either.

Rahabib · 2013-06-21, 10:27 AM

I would like to see a buff to top armor so that the skyguard isn't a sitting duck to hover spam. Don't buff the damage, just let tanks using top armor last a bit longer.

Jonny · 2013-06-21, 10:27 AM

I've only tried it for a day but personally I like the changes...as an AA Max. It was nice to see more pilots in the sky doing their thing.

However - while I think bursters were too effective at all ranges, I would like to see a slight decrease in bloom and corresponding slight decrease in projectile speed.

Hamma · 2013-06-21, 10:58 AM

I haven't had a chance to try out Air yet, though in a Harasser operation last night I didn't get hit a whole lot from the air.

Whiteagle · 2013-06-21, 11:47 AM

Originally Posted by phungus

I also haven't noticed the skyguard buff at all as an ESF.

Well it's practically nonexistent anyways...

25 ms to projectile velocity and deeper Ammo capacities, but thing still needs to be lead by three lenghts just to register hits.

It's still the fucking "Flak as a Deterrent" shit from Post-Launch; You can be sitting in the same Hex as an Aircraft and peppering him all day, but you are only going to get an assist when the terribad pilot crashes into the ground...

Originally Posted by JohnnyRicardo

I think it's just a matter of time before the skies is filled with max altitude liberators blowing everything back to the stone age.

Yep...

Airchavs have ruined the game, not realises them being low man on the totem pole was best for EVERYONE...

Originally Posted by AThreatToYou

Personally, now I am just glad that I can hope to use my ESF as a bomber interceptor without being trolled the fuck out with Bursters. Bursters everywhere.

Perhaps Skyguards need to be buffed a tad more, but as far as my experience post-nerf with bursters is, they are still effective at 1. gaining points and 2. deterring air and 3. killing hoverspammers.

No, Skyguards need a SERIOUS buff to take up the slack...

Their Cone of Fire is ridiculous, you need to lead by three lengths just to get hits to register!

I don't have a problem with Bursters being scaled back for point defense, but now we've got no mobile ground Flak to keep Libs at bay!

Originally Posted by Thunderhawk

Ask your ESFs to engage the Liberators.......rather than trying to farm kills on the ground.

- Problem solved

Well that would require:

A. Having contact with friendly ESFs in the Air.

And,

B. Liberators not being able to OUT-DOGFIGHT ESFs!!!

Originally Posted by Forsaken One

QFT

White that comic is so true. bursters are a useless waste of inf points atm.
You could triple the damage a SG does and make it fire 4 flak shells at once, it will still be a shitty roflpod bullseyes because of its size.

It's not that the Skyguard has poor DPS or is too big... it's that you can't GET hits in the first place!

It might actually be capable of doing more than enough damage per round to justify its size, but it's SO damned inaccurate that you are only landing one out of every ten Flak shells!

Originally Posted by Obstruction

maybe if a2a had a different lock alarm.

i'd also maybe like to see a visual indicator showing how many locks you have.

and now would be a great time to rework flares into an ammunition based built in ability for all aircraft.

I don't know about the flares, but a UI improvement for Lock alarms would be more than necessary in my book.

It's like how they put little arrows on your Vehicle HUD to tell you where your gunners are aimming, or those new Icons for Squads and Sunderers.

Originally Posted by AThreatToYou

If the myths are true, the skyguard is going to need more buffs and it should be on a buggy not a tank.

Why on a buggy and not a tank? Tanks are big juicy ESF targets as it is. And if they are on a buggy, we can make them sufficiently lethal to air so that enemy armor would be the best reply to it, as the buggy wouldn't be as tough as a tank. It would force the AA to retreat, allowing air to move in and support the tanks...

but with the AA on fast-moving vehicles, it gives them an opportunity to pop in and pop out. It also gives friendly armor the ability to make their moves anywhere because the AA units are faster than them, and can respond to opportunities.

Honestly I wouldn't mind transplanting the current Skyguard Turret to the Harasser, but the one currently on the Lightning certainly needs it's CoF tightened so you can actually hit things AT RANGE!

Originally Posted by JohnnyRicardo

Agreed. I can't imagine how frustrating it must be driving a skyguard at Amerish during an alert. As they have no way of using the terrain to their advantage since they would most likely get stuck they are nothing more than a huge xp-bonus on small roads. It wouldnt be wrong to buff the secondary gun on tanks a bit more lethal either.

Actually Amerish is one of the few places a good Lightning Skyguard driver can stay alive...

If you know how to move off-road, you've got plenty of cover from enemy Armor and Infantry to keep the sky filled with Flak.

snafus · 2013-06-21, 11:53 AM

Originally Posted by JohnnyRicardo

I think it's just a matter of time before the skies is filled with max altitude liberators blowing everything back to the stone age.

If that happens your air power must really suck. And all your ground forces must have a strong urge to lick windows and not pull sky guards.

Whiteagle · 2013-06-21, 11:55 AM

Originally Posted by snafus

If that happens your air power must really suck. And all your ground forces must have a strong urge to lick windows and not pull sky guards.

Again, this would require:

A. Having Friendly Air around to cover you.

And,

B. THE SKYGUARD ACTUALLY BEING WORTH A DAMN AS AN AA PLATFORM!

snafus · 2013-06-21, 11:56 AM

Originally Posted by AThreatToYou

If the myths are true, the skyguard is going to need more buffs and it should be on a buggy not a tank.

Why on a buggy and not a tank? Tanks are big juicy ESF targets as it is. And if they are on a buggy, we can make them sufficiently lethal to air so that enemy armor would be the best reply to it, as the buggy wouldn't be as tough as a tank. It would force the AA to retreat, allowing air to move in and support the tanks...

but with the AA on fast-moving vehicles, it gives them an opportunity to pop in and pop out. It also gives friendly armor the ability to make their moves anywhere because the AA units are faster than them, and can respond to opportunities.

As much as I love my Harasser to man we can't put the sky guard turret on them. They are simply to difficult to kill for the majority of players that go against them. Hell it is quite common for me and my outfit to go on 60-70+ kill streaks with them under continuous fire. The sky guard is still a difficult platform for ESF to get rear shots on but they are at least engage able by even mediocre pilots.

Whiteagle · 2013-06-21, 12:00 PM

Originally Posted by snafus

As much as I love my Harasser to man we can't put the sky guard turret on them. They are simply to difficult to kill for the majority of players that go against them. Hell it is quite common for me and my outfit to go on 60-70+ kill streaks with them under continuous fire. The sky guard is still a difficult platform for ESF to get rear shots on but they are at least engage able by even mediocre pilots.

You mean that the Skyguard is engageable by ANY pilot, even those who would be shot down by sustained CARBINE fire because even the VIPER is now a better Anti-Air weapon then the Skyguard...

blashyrk · 2013-06-21, 12:00 PM

Originally Posted by Whiteagle

...

I knew you'd be the first to whine about "Airchavs" as soon as GU11 was published.
And you're basically the only person to whine about ESFs post-GU11 (even though it may seem otherwise but it's just you with 100 posts on a bunch of different topics whining about the same thing).

You actually have to lead with the Skyguard to hit an ESF? Oh noes! Why, how cruel is that now, when you could basically flak an ESF into oblivion in under 5 seconds just by pointing at it and holding the 2 mouse buttons...
It now takes a little skill and practice to be effective against ESFs? That is sooooo unbalanced! Yeah, right.

Especially considering that ESFs are basically made of paper and pretty much ANYTHING can do considerable damage to them.
ESFs can be killed by:
* Tanks (Skyguard, any 2-man MBT crew)
* Harassers (very tough to hit from an ESF, and with the Vulcan you can't even think about rocketpodding them)
* MAXes (no, buster maxes are not underpowered now, they just aren't overpowered anymore)
* Anti air and anti personnel turrets
* Concentrated small arms fire
* Other ESFs, sometimes Liberators and/or Galaxies

If an ESF gets into a Burster MAX's effective range (i.e. for rocket podding) it's still toast like it was pre-GU11).

snafus · 2013-06-21, 12:08 PM

Originally Posted by Whiteagle

Again, this would require:

A. Having Friendly Air around to cover you.

And,

B. THE SKYGUARD ACTUALLY BEING WORTH A DAMN AS AN AA PLATFORM!

I know it's a crazy idea whiteagle that you rely on your team in a team based game

Whiteagle · 2013-06-21, 12:09 PM

Originally Posted by blashyrk

You actually have to lead with the Skyguard to hit an ESF? Oh noes!

Ok jackass, you want to know how bad the Skyguard is at it's intended role?

The VIPER is now a better AA weapon thanks to actually being buffed into usefulness!

Yes, I'd have a better chance of killing air with the a default Cannon then the dedicated FLAK TURRET...

Or as it was at launch, a fucking Spear Base CANNON!

maradine · 2013-06-21, 12:30 PM

Originally Posted by snafus

I know it's a crazy idea whiteagle that you rely on your team in a team based game

I love this argument. Specifically, I love how it's uttered mono-directionally without any hint of irony.

Originally Posted by phungus

I can't just hoverspam my rotary (but I will until some peasant does grab AA).

Are you roleplaying or something? This sort of attitude is why the air-giound argument is farcical.