News: ESF Update Plans via Kevmo - Page 3

NewSith · 2013-07-02, 09:17 AM

I dislike. I predict the AA vs Air debate will again turn completely into Flak vs Air debate.

I just fail to see why people think fire and forget missiles are OP, considering 10000000 missiles can be distracted by just one set of flares. If anything flares are UP, rather than lock-ons are OP.

Dragonskin · 2013-07-02, 09:23 AM

Originally Posted by NewSith

I just fail to see why people think fire and forget missiles are OP, considering 10000000 missiles can be distracted by just one set of flares. If anything flares are UP, rather than lock-ons are OP.

Especially considering with this change you will see the lock-ons on your mini map before they get to you. So you can judge for yourself if the flare is worth using to drop the lock-ons or if you should just try to out manuever the lock-on.

Overall I am glad that ESFs will be getting some work done. I haven't flown my scythe in a long time because lock-ons are kinda broken at the moment.. the Striker in particular. I will have to brush up on my weak flying skills and try to get up to par.

OctavianAXFive · 2013-07-02, 10:58 AM

How I'm reading this.

Locust:

This is a ground attack alternative to rocketpods. The current rocket pods can be adjusted to be more like vehicle AP rounds. Meanwhile the Locust can take over the role of infantry mauler. It could be like having a pair of wing mounted banshees, though maybe not quite as potent against armor.

Coyote Missiles:

I'm not sure the current description is much to go off of. I assume these are more like striker rounds; they tickle you to death. I think these are meant to be the "low-skill" weapon against better pilots.

If this is true, then I think it's safe to say that this weapon will have the same kind of drawbacks/advantages as the shoulder mounted terror. Though obviously they only lock-on to air and have much shorter ranges/times.

Assuming my assumptions about the Coyote are correct, I'm already doing this:

Even with a handful of drawbacks this is a nasty weapon that is distinctly easier to use than a nose cannon. Just stick with the current A2A missiles with the new lock-on mechanic.

NS-50 Mass Driver:
We'll see how this plays out because again, the description is very vague.

Some of the more general changes seem fine. No more bailers

I'd really like to see more distinction between ground attack and air attack however. This hybrid stuff just seems unnecessarily hard to balance. I think it takes away from other air vehicles when the little solo vehicle can fight ground and air effectively at the same time.

My personal proposal would be change how the chassis work.

Default: Racer Chassis:
Available Upgrades:
Nose: Default gun
Secondary: afterburner tanks.
This ESF variant is basically like the stock ESF you get now except it defaults to having the racer chassis. (+Top Speed)

Certable: Dogfighting Chassis:
Available Upgrades:
Nose: Rotary
Secondary: afterburner tanks, A2A missiles, Mass Drivers.
This ESF variant is highly maneuverable and designed to dominate the skies. (+Pitch, roll, brakes) (-top speed, hover)

Certable: Stability Chassis:
Available Upgrades:
Nose: ES A2G
Secondary: Rocket Pods, Locust, afterburner tanks.
This ESF variant is designed specifically for ground attack. Primary and secondary weapons can be fired simultaneously. (+Yaw, ascend/descend speed, hover) (-top speed, roll, pitch)

This should give flying an ESF more flavor, though I'd imagine a lot of pilots wouldn't be happy about giving up their ground attack powers for air superiority.

I'm not sure they'd ever go for dividing up ground and air attack. It would make it harder for pilots to provide tangible support to ground offensives if they are stuck with just one attack mode.

My counter to that line of thinking is that a single lone wolf should not be an aerial jack of all trades unless they are willing to make extreme sacrifices; in this case they would have to use the racer chassis.

This should add a combined arms element to the air warfare. The superiority ESFs need to protect the ground pounders. Outfits shouldn't have a problem divvying up tasks and it should make things far more interesting.

As a part of this proposal, I think vehicle users REALLY REALLY SHOULD be able to go to a vehicle terminal and adjust their equipment. Obviously pulling a new vehicle should cost something but changing the loadout of your current vehicle should either be free or cost way less.

maradine · 2013-07-02, 11:05 AM

Plus one vote for the loadout tab to open when you stop on a reload pad / ammo tower. I feel like that's been sorely missed this whole time.

Hobnail · 2013-07-03, 09:28 PM

Originally Posted by maradine

Plus one vote for the loadout tab to open when you stop on a reload pad / ammo tower. I feel like that's been sorely missed this whole time.

Just allow vehicles to "b-deploy" on appropriate pads to allow them to re-arm.

WSNeo · 2013-07-02, 12:35 PM

I really don't get the reasoning behind nerfing FAF missiles. Yes they have a low cap to use but they have always been difficult to hit with, ESPECIALLY versus a good ESF pilot that know how to stay out of your lock-on view and quickly get behind you.

If anything the flares cooldowns should be shortened overall, and new options for countermeasures should be considered and making flares actually work like flares (Missiles actually tracking and following the flares), and change the name of the current flares to ECM (Electronic Countermeasures) as that's literally how they are working now.

So in short:

"Flares" should be renamed to ECM (Electronic Countermeasures) the primary role of this would be to provide wide area denial of lock ons for a set period of time and work to break missiles guided through this new "maintained lock" mechanic.
This would allow actual Flares to be introduced as an alternative. This could have a considerably lower cooldown or be able to be used in rapid succession (two or three flares in a burst) before going on cooldown. The main role that this would have would be to fend off multiple missile locks in a short period of time.

That being said I actually enjoy FAF missiles. I don't have any gripes against them other than possibly their life duration, which I honestly hardly have a problem with as I tend to outrun them from time to time whenever my flares are on CD (I guess that my playstyle is getting an unneeded buff).

I also feel that the maintained locks are going to make it a nightmare fighting top pilots as I can rarely get out of their sights currently. I use the Racer 2 or 3 frame and it feels next to pointless trying to dogfight them rather than do hit and run strikes with FAF missiles on each pass.

Cosmical · 2013-07-02, 10:07 AM

How about we have fighters that handle like fighters.

If you have a flying system that requires you to look at peoples glitchy tutorials on youtube just to compete, by binding a bunch of keys that arnt there as a preset, you have a silly system.

Added to that the fact that dogfights are won the fastest person to slam on their breaks and turn around. Did anyone expect them to work like this?

I mean we have flying turrets, theyre called liberators. A jet should stall if it slows beyond a certain speed, to encourage fast paced chases and high g maneuvers. And hit and run tactics on the battlefield. Not swiveling stationary targets.

Dragonskin · 2013-07-02, 10:39 AM

Originally Posted by Cosmical

How about we have fighters that handle like fighters.

If you have a flying system that requires you to look at peoples glitchy tutorials on youtube just to compete, by binding a bunch of keys that arnt there as a preset, you have a silly system.

Added to that the fact that dogfights are won the fastest person to slam on their breaks and turn around. Did anyone expect them to work like this?

I mean we have flying turrets, theyre called liberators. A jet should stall if it slows beyond a certain speed, to encourage fast paced chases and high g maneuvers. And hit and run tactics on the battlefield. Not swiveling stationary targets.

They would have to actually make jets if you want jet combat. What they did was make all the ESFs VTOLs.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/VTOL

If you had true jets you would need landing strips since you wouldn't be able to just fly to the ground and repair then immediately get back into the action.

Valkar · 2013-07-02, 11:10 AM

Originally Posted by Dragonskin

They would have to actually make jets if you want jet combat. What they did was make all the ESFs VTOLs.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/VTOL

If you had true jets you would need landing strips since you wouldn't be able to just fly to the ground and repair then immediately get back into the action.

I understand what you're saying and I appreciate that this is the route the dev team took to basically give us helicopters and jets all rolled into one because making two aircraft just wasn't possible at the time. But i promise you there is not a single VTOL aircraft in the world capable of flying full speed then slowing to a hover mid flight in combat, turning around and shooting at another aircraft chasing.

I think the point of what many of us is saying is that its time dogfighting came down to skill in flying where right now it is about keybinding to pull off a quick brake, reverse thrust and then hovering in a single position as you unload a clip.

Whilst many pilots will say this is skillful and many who do it are certainly excellent pilots and I have a lot of respect for them, I can tell you now that if they removed this, you would see a lot more pilots winning fights and the top gun list would change over night.

Why add joystick support when you just need to press space bar, shift and S right?

maradine · 2013-07-02, 11:25 AM

I think it's pretty clear at this point that they either:

have the ESF experience they wanted.
are too entrenched to change it.
are ignorant to how rockin' a good flight model can be.

I've been pushing for tiny, no-CPU things like slip since tech test. I don't think we're going to get there.

So, while I agree 100% with everything you've just said, I'm afraid we need to be enthusiastic for the things that actually can change. Namely - creation of new things that go into slots that accept SC, vs. ripping out core code on a polarizing issue. Cynical perhaps, but also realistic.

PredatorFour · 2013-07-02, 11:30 AM

I will wager that the new 'wing' weapons will be a total fragfest against infantry...better than lolpods are now and the nose gun possibly.

Dragonskin · 2013-07-02, 11:40 AM

Originally Posted by Valkar

I understand what you're saying and I appreciate that this is the route the dev team took to basically give us helicopters and jets all rolled into one because making two aircraft just wasn't possible at the time. But i promise you there is not a single VTOL aircraft in the world capable of flying full speed then slowing to a hover mid flight in combat, turning around and shooting at another aircraft chasing.

I think the point of what many of us is saying is that its time dogfighting came down to skill in flying where right now it is about keybinding to pull off a quick brake, reverse thrust and then hovering in a single position as you unload a clip.

Whilst many pilots will say this is skillful and many who do it are certainly excellent pilots and I have a lot of respect for them, I can tell you now that if they removed this, you would see a lot more pilots winning fights and the top gun list would change over night.

Why add joystick support when you just need to press space bar, shift and S right?

Hmm.. the game isn't based on true to life realism. It's sci-fi after all. They just based the design on VTOLs. I don't see how they can reduce the hover dog fight game without reducing the skill cap for pilots. I'm not a huge pilot in this game, but it seems like the reverse maneuver is one of the things that helps separate the skillful from the less skilled.

As for the joystick. What do you plan to use your free hand for while you are using your joystick hand? It's been years since I have used a joystick.. since Battlefield 2 days... but I remember using the joystick in my mouse hand and using my left hand to press keys if needed like normal. You would still get the higher precision of the joystick AND be able to use your free hand to press keys. I guess I don't get your question.

typhaon · 2013-07-02, 01:19 PM

Originally Posted by Cosmical

How about we have fighters that handle like fighters.

If you have a flying system that requires you to look at peoples glitchy tutorials on youtube just to compete, by binding a bunch of keys that arnt there as a preset, you have a silly system.

Added to that the fact that dogfights are won the fastest person to slam on their breaks and turn around. Did anyone expect them to work like this?

I mean we have flying turrets, theyre called liberators. A jet should stall if it slows beyond a certain speed, to encourage fast paced chases and high g maneuvers. And hit and run tactics on the battlefield. Not swiveling stationary targets.

I'd really like to see this sentiment picked up and run with by the community... I hate the way ESFs fly - it's corny!

Notice whenever a dogfight is shown in an SOE promo video... they don't show THAT. It would draw lols - so instead you see what looks like traditional style air combat... which isn't what really happens.

I remember hearing these "skill" arguments when ADAD and bunnyhoppying were in a worse state. I don't hear a lot of complaining now that they have been muzzled.

It seems to me all the flight characteristics are already in the game. It isn't a matter of ripping out the code and starting over, it's just a matter of tweaking values. Make it so they can't stop on a dime as fast... rotate as quickly while hovering... and can't accelerate from a dead stop, as fast.

Cosmical · 2013-07-02, 01:44 PM

Originally Posted by typhaon

I'd really like to see this sentiment picked up and run with by the community... I hate the way ESFs fly - it's corny!

Notice whenever a dogfight is shown in an SOE promo video... they don't show THAT. It would draw lols - so instead you see what looks like traditional style air combat... which isn't what really happens.

I mean i understand that there isn't enough guaranteed ground area for a jet type vehicle to land. But the VTOL jet in battlefield 3 does a pretty good job of feeling like a jet with hover ability, but the hover is generally quite crippling, and would never be used in a dogfight with another plane.

Its just used for landing, and the very rare situation your fighting 1 guy with just a rifle and can afford to be cocky.

maradine · 2013-07-02, 02:10 PM

If there was a "let's improve the air model without scaring away the hovertank enthusiasts" session, I'd be on a flight to San Diego tomorrow.