via Twitter: AA OP

[Hamma]

Many of us know this..

[Frotang]

Doesn't matter how much they nerf, a group of 3-4 dual AA maxes will decimate any and all aircraft which I dont mind. I think having basically mobile AA turrets is the issue, AA maxes need something different than flak, like the old sparrow missiles......

[IronMole]

Originally Posted by Frotang

Doesn't matter how much they nerf, a group of 3-4 dual AA maxes will decimate any and all aircraft which I dont mind. I think having basically mobile AA turrets is the issue, AA maxes need something different than flak, like the old sparrow missiles......

Yeah great. Let's fetch back the original problem of locking missiles...

There is just too much AA access - you can have them on every vehicle, MAX's and even HA weapons... Not to mention the AA turrets.

They need to restrict access, just like they've restricted classes.

Main AA should be, Skyguards and Turrets and maybe MAX's.

[EvilNinjadude]

Skyguard=Super effective. Guess I need to trim down my landing times for airpads if I want to survive...

[Sledgecrushr]

They really need to increase the flight ceiling so there is room above AA to operate.

[maradine]

I am a complete and utter skyguard whore. I actually like it more than flying now, which is probably a pretty decent indicator that's it's gone a bit too far. The real question is how to balance it without returning to where we came from - a pack of dedicated anti-aircraft units incapable of dropping a fighter on a pass.

Things I don't want to see:

• A return to ridicu-recoil
• Further reduction in rounds per magazine

Things I won't like but will probably have to happen:

• Damage per round reduction

Things I think would be a better alternative:

• Passive threat indicator on HUD - all aircraft on the continent receive obvious and continual spot data on any hostile skyguards that have been tagged with Q. Warning lights, buzzers, etc.
• Threat radar module - when equipped, all active enemy skyguards show up on HUD

In the real world, AAA is deadly but very avoidable. That's not a bad model to emulate. If your ground team is spotting the lightnings, you should never be surprised by 40 rounds in your hull again.

Originally Posted by Sledgecrushr

They really need to increase the flight ceiling so there is room above AA to operate.

This would also be a fantastic idea. Wholeheartedly supported.

[Miir]

The problem isn't the damage. It's the amount of AA people can have and how quickly they can get it. That is a common issue with a game that has 1000 players fighting at once.

If they balance it based on those times where there are 50 people with AA maxes or Skyguards. Then those other times when there are only 2 or 3 guys you'll find that your AA is completely worthless.

AA damage is fine. Pilots should not be able to solo.

If they want to do some side grades that increase armor or change the weapons to something heavier with a lower capacity sure do that. But don't nerf AA anymore or it'll just turn back into to Pilotside.

[Malorn]

Has anyone tried AA against level 4 composite armor?

Might be difficult to balance if its calibrated with composite armor in mind when most players don't have composite armor yet. I can see this going the other way - they nerf AA and then pilots get composite armor and AA becomes ineffective again.

[Malorn]

Originally Posted by Miir

The problem isn't the damage. It's the amount of AA people can have and how quickly they can get it. That is a common issue with a game that has 1000 players fighting at once.

If they balance it based on those times where there are 50 people with AA maxes or Skyguards. Then those other times when there are only 2 or 3 guys you'll find that your AA is completely worthless.

AA damage is fine. Pilots should not be able to solo.

If they want to do some side grades that increase ammo or change the weapons to something heavier with a lower capacity sure do that. But don't nerf AA anymore or it'll just turn back into to Pilotside.

Balancing against critical mass is always going to be an issue. AA is one place where it becomes problematic, but also with Tanks, rockets, and AI MAX.

The more the fight is focused, the more this becomes a problem. Its one reason they like spreading out the fight across different territories so you don't get 500 people in one spot annihilating everything.

One way to help resolve this is to apply the idea of some sort of adaptive armor where if you take damage from multiple sources in a short time frame (i.e. multiple people are shooting at you) then you have more damage resistance. It helps counteract the problem of critical mass without impacting small-group situations. That's the real danger here...balancing the game for the small fight at the expense of the big fight, or vice-versa. Scaling the damage based on number of sources might be a way to help compensate so we can get balance on both ends of the spectrum.

The idea of that mechanic would be to not pile up hard counters but to diversify.

[MrBloodworth]

You know. Sometimes, Pilots should simply not fly in an area. There is nothing wrong with that. Conversely, there are time ground units should really not step outside. That's OK too. No amount of code will make players play smarter.

The real issue, is that that aircraft or ground unit now costs resources and have a timer. You get one shot to test your plan. One.

[maradine]

Well, three, really. You can get a lot of fighters out of a resource pool, and the timer can be certed down pretty low.

[MrBloodworth]

Still. That's a cut by PS1 standards. 3 tries, your play-style is over, stupid idea to fly in the same area or not. I do not personally play air, so that entire pool is useless to me.

[maradine]

I'm OK with "three strikes and go do something else for a while".

[MrBloodworth]

Right, because that's fun. Thank god I can stay in my medic suit, I feel sorry for the Vehicle players out there.

[maradine]

There's a balance between fun and consequences. Vehicles make you considerably more powerful than infantry. The tradeoff is that you can't waste them.