anti air - Page 5

Warborn · 2004-09-13, 12:49 PM

Originally Posted by WritheNC

Just cuz he is lead designer doesn't mean they will change their minds. Sure, he might have a fresh point of view, but he won't be there long if he plans on hammering in his own vision without consent of the rest of the team.

Lead Designer gets the final say in what happens and what doesn't. Everyone else gets input where appropriate, but he's the Lead Designer because people trust him to know what is best for the game.

But you're right about the second part, half of the vehicles in the game don't do jack or are too specialized.

There are a lot of ways to combat AA, but it's not the devs' fault if nobody uses them(Although part of the problem is sitting in an AA max on air guard is boring, and flying in Air Cav is fun, which is a big reason for the disproportion).

Not the devs fault that nobody uses them? Yes, it is, actually. If the various forms of AA aren't appealing enough -- meaning if it's not effective enough, or its negatives overshadow the benefits of using them -- then people won't use them, and the developers have failed to properly impliment adequate counters. It is never our fault in situations like this. This is a game, and if it's not fun for us, we won't do it. It's their job to make sure their plans get carried out, to make sure that using AA is fun enough for the player to get used enough as expected, and that involves them predicting what the players will do. If we aren't using something enough and thus something else becomes too common and therefore unbalanced, it's their job to make use want to use the first something more, so that things are balanced.

Although, to point out (this isn't directed at anyone in particular), I do not believe that the reason reavers and mosquitoes are the most successful vehicles in the game is because people don't use enough AA. The problem is that, unlike other scenarios on the game (seeing a tank, being attacked by a sniper at long range, being close to an AI MAX), if you see a reaver or a mosquito, and it's coming for you, you are almost certinly dead. If it's a reaver, unless there is a ton of AA on it, you cannot win. You will die, and that's that. You won't necessarily die against a tank, nor will you die against a sniper at long range. It takes skill on both parts to overcome the other, and although you are at a disadvantage, you can prevail. Against a reaver or mosquito, you can't. You lose, and it's a virtual guarentee, and that makes it extremely unfun. Nobody likes to go into these games and lose automatically.

And "well you shouldn't have gone outdoors" is a bullshit copout answer in response to the fact that infantry have no chance in hell against reavers or, usually, mosquitoes when outside. A sniper's territory is outdoors, isn't it? So why don't they one-shot kill? Why can't we make a grunt's death against snipers guarenteed too? Or how about AI MAXs killing infantry 10x as fast as they do now, so that you die basically before you have a chance to pull out an AV weapon when you see them (you know, kind of like bumping into a reaver or skeeter outdoors). After all, that's what AI MAXs are for, isn't it? Killing infantry? So why not? Or how about tanks killing vehicles in two shots, and infantry instantly if they're anywhere near the blast? Isn't that fair? I mean, it's a tank, just like how a reaver is a gunship! Tanks are suppose to be unstoppable on their turf, just like you're suppose to die if you run into a gunship, aren't they?

And while we're at making the rest of the game fit the reaver/skeeter paradigm, why not have AA weapons kill aircraft in a couple seconds too? I mean, they're AA weapons. You're firing missiles, or lasers! If infantry shouldn't go outdoors when reavers are around, reavers and mosquitoes shouldn't fly when AA is around. Right? That's fair too, isn't it? It's the same logic people use to justify the reaver's power against infantry, after all, so it must be correct if the reaver's current implimentation is good as well. Wouldn't Planetside be a great game if everything were balanced like a reaver? You wouldn't need any skill at all! You'd just walk out the door, and everything you're "suppose" to kill would die, and when something that's suppose to kill you came along, you'd die. That sure would be a lot of fun, huh?

If anyone else still disagrees, fine, keep thinking air cav vehicles are just peachy. But don't try to argue with what I've written, because there is no way you can honestly tell me that these vehicles that hardly any top 10 players on any empire, of any server, don't have at least one of, are balanced. Maybe they'd be balanced if Planetside were suppose to be an online game of paper-rock-scissors, where you either win outright or lose without a chance, but that's not what Planetside is, and these vehicles need to be brought back to reality and out of whatever acid trip funk created their current implimentation in the first place.

Lartnev · 2004-09-13, 01:16 PM

I think you're being unfair against skeeters. Skeeter vs AA = dead skeeter so I don't think that's a fair argument.

The reasons that Reavers are popular are that they're great solo weapons. The can attack infantry and tanks, they're fast so you can get around, you can rearm and repair at any air tower, you have enough armour that you can engage targets such as phalanx turrets and actually outgun them.

I'm not going to argue with you, basically because I'm also of the belief that the Reaver is far better than it was intended to be. Unfortunately the devs are currently working on new content, so until we see BFRs this sorta thing is going to be on the back burner.

Queensidecastle · 2004-09-13, 02:03 PM

I thaink Warborn is way offbase and overstating the problem to an extreme degree. I have AV and almost always shootdown mossies and reavers that attack me(unless they totally come up behind me) Since I can do that and I am not a top player, I just dont buy the argument that these vehicles are overpowered at all. Yes, you are correct that you are dead if you dont have AV but if your not going to cert the counter and carry it, dont complain about death being certain. Madcow is totally correct about the skyguard and I would totally support various upgrades to that vehicle. Its like a wet paper bag and barely stronger than a MAX suit or ATV. I decert the Skyguard when I was killed by a grunt using a jackhammer (I got stuck on a rock for about 5 seconds and was owned in a vehicle by a footsoldier with a shotgun heh)

DraygoKorvan · 2004-09-13, 02:06 PM

It seems like some of the BFR configs would allow you to carry AA weapons, I wonder how that will affect the balance of reaver vs ground. Personally as it is I think AA is pretty much underpowered compared to enemy air. But that might be because I primarily play NC who have the worst weapons possible to deal with enemy air (minus the lockon bug).

If you need proof all you need to do is get a buddy in a sparrow and get yourself in a reaver, come in at max alt right for the reaver, unleash missile hell and watch the sparrow die, while you only get hit by AT MOST 5 missiles as you AB over his dead corpse. Sparrow is horribly gimp, even without the lockon bugs. I'm sure it will get addressed after the BFRs, because the devs now have the data on how many of x kills x.

Warborn · 2004-09-13, 04:57 PM

Originally Posted by Lartnev

I think you're being unfair against skeeters. Skeeter vs AA = dead skeeter so I don't think that's a fair argument.

Depends how you use it. If you try and use it as a reaver, yeah, you'll die, but it's really good for sniping infantry.

Originally Posted by Queensidecastle

I thaink Warborn is way offbase and overstating the problem to an extreme degree. I have AV and almost always shootdown mossies and reavers that attack me(unless they totally come up behind me)

Give me a break. You actually expect me to believe there's a reaver pilot stupid enough to not be able to kill you with rockets before you're able to kill him with any infantry AV weapon? Mosquitoes, maybe, but they aren't the focus of my little diatribte, though they certainly are too effective for what they are, too. But sorry, unless the reaver was horribly damaged when it came at you, or taking massive AA fire, you're full of shit. How about you get out of the cockpit for a bit and come back down to reality with the rest of us (and I don't mean playing a cloaker).

Yes, you are correct that you are dead if you dont have AV but if your not going to cert the counter and carry it, dont complain about death being certain.

Nice, didn't read anything did you? My entire point was that being dead for certain is not fun, because there's no room for skill to make a difference. As I said, if you run up against a sniper at long range and you have no long range weaponry, you aren't guarenteed death are you? No, you aren't. Depending on your ability and the skill of the sniper the outcome could go either way. If the sniper is good you will die, but that's because you're out of your element, and the sniper is skilled enough to take advantage of that. That's how the reaver should work. None of this guarenteed death bullshit. If I wanted that I'd go play Paper Rock Scissors Online.

And as I also pointed out, using the retarded logic you're using to justify the reaver being unbeatable and unavoidable unless you've very close to a tower or door, why not make AA instant kill too? After all, it's the reaver's fault for flying in an area where there's AA, right? So he deserves to die with no contest? Right?

You don't even read a thing I write, Queensidecastle, so just stop replying to what I write already.

Queensidecastle · 2004-09-13, 05:32 PM

First of all there is no need to get nasty. This is a usefull debate and I can assure you my reading comprehension skills are quite up to the task

Give me a break. You actually expect me to believe there's a reaver pilot stupid enough to not be able to kill you with rockets before you're able to kill him with any infantry AV weapon? Mosquitoes, maybe, but they aren't the focus of my little diatribte, though they certainly are too effective for what they are, too. But sorry, unless the reaver was horribly damaged when it came at you, or taking massive AA fire, you're full of shit. How about you get out of the cockpit for a bit and come back down to reality with the rest of us (and I don't mean playing a cloaker).

I do this every single day I play Planetside. Now, I will concede that NC players are at a big disadvantage here being that the Phoenix doesnt hit aircraft well and you cant move your trooper while controlling the flight, but that only indicates a problem with the Phoenix, not the Reaver/Mossy. The Lancer and Striker are more than up to the task at taking out aircraft in short order. If it is a Mossy, you can make the pilot bail with 1 clip from a Striker. If it is a Reaver, you can make them bail if they do not have shields or have taken any damage at all and most always, you arent going to be the only person shooting at them.

As far as death being certain. Well, get AV and it is anything but a certainty and in fact, AV is a multitude more effective at taking down aircraft one on one that at taking out anything on land short of a Skyguard. You got any idea how many striker missles it takes to destroy a Vanguard? Now how many for a Reaver? You pop almost any reaver with 3 in a row and they are gone baybee and the Lancer is even more deadly. The Phoenix with any support at all is just as deadly, albiet you need at least one person watching your back, but like I said, thats a Phoenix problem, not a Reaver one

You are right when you say certain death isnt fun. I dont particularly like it when I am obliterated by a flail out of the blue, or sniped by someone I didnt see, or a Reaver over my back, or a cloaker that caught me healing behind a tree. These are just the hazards of playing the game. I would focus on your AV tactics. I see that you are TR so you shouldnt be having any problem with this

ChewyLSB · 2004-09-13, 05:49 PM

All of my characters have AV, except for my NC because it's not quite up to that level yet, so I'm quite a bit of a Lancer and Striker user, and I think you're overestimating the strength of those two weapons. Good luck hitting an aircraft that's moving at anything about 50% speed. Now, I've gotten quick adept at leading, but it is still insanely difficult to hit a Reaver. Now, a strafing reaver isn't difficult to hit as long as you've practiced with the Lancer, but as soon as the damage on the reaver gets high enough, the reaver can simply Afterburner away and go to the nearest air tower, heal, and rearm.

So, yes, I can get the odd reaver kill every now and then, but saying that AV is a counter to reavers is like saying MA is a counter to Snipers. It'll win every now and then, but you can't rely on it.

The same thing goes with the strikers, ESPECIALLY with all these blasted lock on bugs. An after-burnering reaver can easily outrun a striker, and since a striker has a limited range, it will eventually burn out.

Queensidecastle · 2004-09-13, 05:55 PM

So, yes, I can get the odd reaver kill every now and then, but saying that AV is a counter to reavers is like saying MA is a counter to Snipers. It'll win every now and then, but you can't rely on it.

Yeah, I mean its not a for sure deal but it makes death by said Reaver/Mossy anything but a certainty. I kill at least one attacker a day this way, fend off several more, and of course sometimes lose.

When I am out in the open I look at the skies and I can also hear if planes are flying around. I take note of where they are, whether or not they are going for me. Invaribally they come for me and I am waiting for them. BLAM. The way reavers have to hit you with rockets usually has them coming in head on from some direction. If you see them coming, you can pop them 3 times before they get any rockets to you. It really is a lot like Pocket awareness that Quarterbacks in football have to have. You need to know what is in the sky around you and make many 360 degree twirls as you move across the landscape

Madcow · 2004-09-13, 05:56 PM

Originally Posted by Queensidecastle

I do this every single day I play Planetside. Now, I will concede that NC players are at a big disadvantage here being that the Phoenix doesnt hit aircraft well and you cant move your trooper while controlling the flight, but that only indicates a problem with the Phoenix, not the Reaver/Mossy. The Lancer and Striker are more than up to the task at taking out aircraft in short order. If it is a Mossy, you can make the pilot bail with 1 clip from a Striker. If it is a Reaver, you can make them bail if they do not have shields or have taken any damage at all and most always, you arent going to be the only person shooting at them.

This may work when you're in a group, or when you go up against idiotic pilots. I don't even fly any more and was never that great a pilot, but every time I was in TR territory and got the missile lock-on message I'd check my HUD and if missiles were only coming from one direction I'd lick my lips, go obliterate the sap and watch his remaining missiles fly without guidance, go to an air tower and heal up to repeat. The only times I had issues with this was when multiple Striker users jumped on me, in which case I'd try to lose lock and then come back around from behind the most isolated spot on the HUD I'd seen missiles coming from.
Also, the Lancer isn't much use unless the pilot is doing too much hovering in which case they should get blown to crap.

ChewyLSB · 2004-09-13, 06:01 PM

You just proved my point. AV is not a counter to Reavers. A "counter" doesn't fail 90% of the time, it should be able to destroy what it's made to counter a majority of the time. Also, a "counter" shouldn't require more people.

So that's exactly the reason why a skyguard isn't a viable counter against Reavers either.

This is what I propose:

- Reaver is made a two man vehicle

OR

- Skyguard is given rocket resistant armor, to make it resistant against Reaver attacks, but vulnerable to other types of attacks

Of course, that would piss off a lot of people, but that's what I think should happen.

Queensidecastle · 2004-09-13, 06:08 PM

I didnt prove your point at all. You arent guarenteed to kill a reaver, anymore than they are guarenteed to kill you. A "counter" doesnt mean a guarenteed anything. I have killed heavy assault rexo's with Darklight more times than I can even count and DL is the "counter" for cloakers

ChewyLSB · 2004-09-13, 06:11 PM

I never said a counter is guaranteed to work. A counter is supposed to be effective and killing something, and that something isn't good at killing it. Now, obviously, a counter isn't going to be 100%. I'm sure there's situations where someone was using an SMG and got a lucky shot on a sniper. But it should work more than 50% of the time.

Queensidecastle · 2004-09-13, 06:18 PM

hmm, It works just dandy for me.

Also keep in mind Planetside is about to become a really hostile place for pilots:

Wait till you see a AA equipped BFR in action (at least in current balance). I worry more that they are overpowered (but those mossies will be slipping through the shield with their little gun, so they will be something the BFR will have to keep swatted away). - SamhaynePS

AcidCat · 2004-09-13, 06:33 PM

Originally Posted by Madcow

This may work when you're in a group.

Isn't that that the key here? If you're going solo commando and a Reaver sees you huffing it across the landscape in your Rexo, well yeah you're toast, and there's nothing wrong with that. If you're playing as part of a group, any sensible group is going to have some kind of AA solution, even if it is just multiple guys with Strikers.

I've been on both sides, I've died my share to Reaver rockets and I've done my share of killing when I had the Air Cav cert. Sure I could take advantage of troops coming individually out of a tower, small groups of unorganized infantry, but any Reaver pilot knows a real hotspot is a killing zone and you'll be getting lockons the moment you make yourself known. Reaver is best as a scavenger picking on the weak.

Anyway, I also think the issue of Reaver hate has been blown out of proportion.

ChewyLSB · 2004-09-13, 06:37 PM

You people are all missing the point.

Why should you require more people to get a "counter" of a vehicle that requires less people?

A counter shouldn't require more people to operate, then it's not an effective counter!