So every HA can be an aircraft counter? - Page 4

Fenrys · 2012-07-18, 01:55 PM

It'll be fine.
If you ever flew against the TR in PS1, you'd know lock-on's from infantry-carried launchers are only a minor annoyance.

Just keep moving, approach from the flanks and rear, and don't slow down during your strafing & bombing runs - by the time you are spotted, your ordinance is released, and you are afterburning away.

The Kush · 2012-07-18, 02:40 PM

The awful threads created since about march never cease to amaze me. /sigh

Phizuol · 2012-07-18, 02:57 PM

I can't remember which I hated more in PS1, damn lock on Strikers or the counters-everything Reaver. The two of you deserve each other!

But seriously I think using flares seems perfectly reasonable. When you run out go back and get more. It seems like it would discourage air camping but yet not forcing you to bug out the second you see a lock on. Of course "we will have to see what happens in beta."

Reizod · 2012-07-18, 03:04 PM

<--- Vet here also

I'm okay with it since Flares work just fine.

Even though I am a dedicated pilot and should be against a "one size fits all" rocket launcher, I'm not. However, I do think they should increase the time for lock-on a wee bit.

Sifer2 · 2012-07-18, 03:47 PM

Meh unless you give Infantry an AA sniper rifle type weapon with near instant fire then lock on is required or the weapon is useless. It's almost impossible to hit moving air targets reliably without some homing capability if the projectile doesn't move really fast.

One of the most frustrating things in FPS games with air vehicles is when you just can't kill the damn things too. It's fun for the one guy in the Jet bombing everyone but pisses off way more people on the ground who keep taking shots at him but he always just boosts away. So having more AA out there to prevent that will only make the game play better for the majority IMO.

Sephirex · 2012-07-18, 03:50 PM

Originally Posted by The Kush

The awful threads created since about march never cease to amaze me. /sigh

But they keep us so amused.

Raymac · 2012-07-18, 04:08 PM

I'm somebody who plans on spending most of my time in a Reaver and I have no problem with HA having fire and forget lock on weapons because frankly, with all the terrain features on Auraxis now, I'm going to rather enjoy dodging the missiles. Oh you want to give me counter-measures too? Well thank you kindly.

GreatMazinkaise · 2012-07-18, 06:03 PM

The existing general purpose launcher (what all the HA are using in the videos) looks more like the T:A Slayer than anything in Planetside. It's lock-on, Fire and Forget, and has a slow moving projectile (which also happens to be single shot). Who knows what the other weapons are going to act like at this point? Are TR getting a real Striker that can fire multiple shots in succession? Are the NC getting camera bombs back? We'll see...

maradine · 2012-07-18, 06:23 PM

My personal preference for anti-aircraft aircraft lethality, in descending lethality order, would be:

Other aircraft
Dedicated flak (burster, lightning/skyguard)
General purpose guided missiles

I think this is how it is already shaking out? Hard to tell without being able to play.

GreatMazinkaise · 2012-07-18, 06:26 PM

Originally Posted by maradine

My personal preference for anti-aircraft aircraft lethality, in descending lethality order, would be:

Other aircraft
Dedicated flak (burster, lightning/skyguard)
General purpose guided missiles

I think this is how it is already shaking out? Hard to tell without being able to play.

I'm not sure about the accuracy of the first two, but otherwise that's what I'm seeing.

LegioX · 2012-07-18, 06:31 PM

Alot of people on here are saying without "lockon" ability for ground units, air will be able to own everything and be OP. How about this, call in air support? Isnt thats what air-to-air pilots are for? Shooting down other airplanes? Good lord...........

Sephirex · 2012-07-18, 06:34 PM

Originally Posted by LegioX

Alot of people on here are saying without "lockon" ability for ground units, air will be able to own everything and be OP. How about this, call in air support? Isnt thats what air-to-air pilots are for? Shooting down other airplanes? Good lord...........

I really hope that's a mission option. Extra points for every aircraft you dogfight down in the area.

Also, I think flak is honestly more powerful then lock-on rockets. You can make a pilot's day miserable before he even knows you're there.

EisenKreutzer · 2012-07-18, 06:39 PM

Originally Posted by LegioX

Alot of people on here are saying without "lockon" ability for ground units, air will be able to own everything and be OP. How about this, call in air support? Isnt thats what air-to-air pilots are for? Shooting down other airplanes? Good lord...........

Thats not an argument against lock on though.

Sephirex · 2012-07-18, 06:41 PM

Originally Posted by EisenKreutzer

Thats not an argument against lock on though.

He's arguing that the original argument is pointless, as it denotes a self-contained system, thus instead of contributing to the argument against lock-ons, he's proposing an alternative view.

Still though, aircraft should not just be countered by other aircraft. That would dull the joys of the combined arms system, and turn the game into "who's got more aircraft"

ParisTeta · 2012-07-18, 06:50 PM

Infantry AA should be powerful enough, to force the attacker from the attack, or risk getting damaged/killed, it should not be a hard counter vs. Air. Infantry AA should be defense first.

If you make infantry AA strong enough as a hard counter, Air Units would become pretty meaningless because the mass will be infantry due vehicle timer, and only infantery can capture.

EDIT: MAX are excluded and should be hard counter, especially with dual aa cannons.