Aircraftside 2

Discussion in 'PlanetSide 2 Gameplay Discussion' started by TripleMeows, Mar 28, 2014.

  1. Riddlley

    The problem with AA is how fast it scales. If one AA unit was all it took, the skies would be empty. Air is visible from a kilometre away, which means it can be fired on from as far. That's why. You need to consider the broader scheme of things and not treat it like it's just you and the aircraft. That's almost never the case.
    • Up x 3
  2. AssaultPig


    The real problem is that aircraft are too lethal. The potential impact of a good ESF pilot or liberator crew on a fight is much larger than what those players could do in a lightning or an MBT. That means that dedicated AA has to be quite threatening to aircraft, else they'd dominate every fight (more than liberators already can, anyway.) The result is the highly binary air vs. ground game that exists on live: if there's no AA then aircraft utterly dominate, and if there is substantial AA aircraft basically just have to run away.

    If aircraft had less A2G firepower (especially against ground vehicles), their durability could be improved and the threat of AA reduced a bit. That may have been what the goal of the recent liberator balance changes was, but they didn't reduce their firepower enough to really matter.
  3. Robertooooo

    Because the player who spawn a skyguard lightning can do nothing effectivly other than maybe scare off some aircraft.
    A follow up question to your post: why should a single lib be able to kill multiple MBT's manned by 1-2 people each that costs more resources to spawn?
    • Up x 2
  4. Axehilt


    A specialized A2G aircraft should be exactly as lethal as the current aircraft are. The problem is that being that lethal should cause them to sacrifice their A2A capabilities, and it doesn't.

    If air didn't have a strong influence over the ground game, it would be useless. There's no point in taking aircraft unless you can influence the ground game.

    Which is why the balance really can't be anything other than:
    • A2G air is strong against ground, but weak against air.
    • A2A air is strong against air, but weak against ground.
    • A generalist aircraft loadout is reasonably good against all target types. (The "basilisk" of aircraft loadouts.)
    • Ground-based AA will zone out good pilots and kill reckless ones.
    The breakdown comes from the fact that aircraft loadouts don't involve an appropriate amount of specialization.
  5. AssaultPig

    the only aircraft that doesn't give up A2A utility to be good at A2G is a dalton liberator with a good gunner; an A2G fitted ESF should get eaten for lunch by an ESF with A2A secondaries or a good dogfighter with AB tanks.

    (I agree some kind of fix is necessary for the dalton in A2A)

    highly lethal A2A and A2G weapons kind of suck for both sides though. With ground vehicles it feels like there's some granularity to the combat, some margin for error that you can use to be more aggressive or survive as you learn to play better. Air doesn't feel that way, at least not to me.
  6. Riddlley

    Due to the nature of AA, sticking around means dying. The problem with this becomes lack of targets, and thus stale gameplay. This is seen with skyguards, pure a2a ESFs, and AV MBTs. Specialisation is great in theory, but another issue comes to mind. "Adapt, or die." If we could change vehicle loadouts this would be a non issue.
  7. SolLeks


    IMO not being able to change load outs is the real problem, I should be able to go from A2A to A2G by stopping at a friendly base as much as the skygaurd should become an AP tank or HE tank by stopping at a friendly base. That and how the bases are designed (though they seem to be getting a bit better) are the problems much less than the unit balance themselves. once these things are fixed, then we can fix unit balance and make the fights more back and forth instead of just gib something than sit around or fly in circles.
  8. Fangry

    Liberators should only be able to drop bombs, going sideways or upside down should disable the gun

    Skyguard need a tighter cone of fire and faster bullets
    WW2 turrets seems more effective
    PS1 Skyguard has 2 weapons, Flak for Air and Bullets for infantry, makes it multi purpose
    PS2 Skyguard can kill anything, but only air at range and MBT only if your not the target
  9. Dante02

    "The problem with infantry is how fast it scales. If one HA was all it took, no points would change hands. You can Q-spot attacking infantry from a kilometre away, which means it can be fired on from as far."
  10. Fangry

    Air can kill your MBT from a kilometer away
    No AA can kill you from that distance
  11. Dante02

    This is how the MAX works and it amazes me how many people don't know this. Base getting hammered by air, switch to dual bursters. They realign to armour, go anti-vehicle. They get to the point, switch to anti-personnel. There is no need to keep your MAX layout the same, just resupply.
  12. Riddlley

    Infantry dont render outside 300, with the exception of av mana, and maxes, both of which are treated as vehicles.
  13. Aegie

    Stay indoors and redeploy whenever you see air coming.

    In the absence of a revamp, the only way to discourage air farming is not to play or simply vacate the area when they arrive.

    Screw the "objective" of the cap point, the moment you see incoming enemy Libs just /re Incoming Libs- Redeploy.

    If there is no one to fight farm then eventually they will get bored.
  14. Dante02

    It was an attempt at sarcasm. It just flips the 'planes are fine' arguments to infantry and is just as ridiculous.
  15. IamnotAmazing

    join a squad, solo players get farmed pretty typically
  16. TheFamilyGhost

    Welcome to combined arms in a team environment. If your team is not controlling the skies, the enemy will, and the ground will have troubles.

    I embrace it. You win some, you lose some...
  17. Hoki

    I think people would rather just have a super-walker than flak anyways.

    Yeah I know flak doesn't take any talent. So give me an anti-air weapon that doesn't hit aircraft at 1000 meters, but make it rampage the **** out of anything that gets within firing distance.

    Like, kill an ESF in about 2 seconds and a lib in about 4.

    *takes breath and awaits furious scoffs from flyboys*

    Yeah yeah, pay attention to how fast aircraft kills everything else and this really isn't ridiculous at all.

    A lightning with a super-walker should gib an ESF before it can dump a single salvo of rockets.
    • Up x 1
  18. Aractain

    Flak in this game is proximity explosion, Flak in real life is just anti-aircraft weapons so the name is not relevant.

    That is a direct fire weapon type. Currently the game has Basilisk, Walker which are basically inaccurate short range HMGs (compare Walker stats with a default aircraft nosegun). Then comes the shredder but nothing like that exist for ground, why is there no shredder on a tank? We need something that's accurate and medium range but not super easy to use but not tied to a totally different play style like MAXs or limited by location like vehicles.

    Right now Engineers have a heavy AT launcher, an infantry MG but no AA - What we don't want is more lock ons or flak (game kind).
    This kind of turret provides a great way of giving AA options to infantry while keeping the weapon useful when there is no air which also provides better gameplay for air (being shot at by bullets is more fun than missiles and flak).


    Also put a shredder on a tank and sell it to me please.
    • Up x 1
  19. Dante02

    I started this week thinking that. I'm beginning to change my mind as I've been on a dedicated hate-on for libs and ESF's. Lots of burster MAX's and skyguards. I'm beginning to notice that others have been thinking the same and aircraft are starting to lose their god-like powers. A lib sitting over a point is not happening as much on Connery the last couple of days.

    It's almost like people are reading the forums on how to kill the SOB's.

    Now, if you're standing on the launch pad of some base and you're getting whizzed by ESF's and two libs up high you definitely need team work, but on the smaller bases, sitting just inside the spawn room with bursters can make a huge difference.

    It is still mostly just a 'deterrent', and the stats and XP suck, but it is _very_ satisfying to watch a lib just get on station and then have to smoke off after being Q-spotted.
  20. TomaHawk


    I agree, it is. If you don't have significant AA resources in whatever force, a single lib will destroy any chance of outside survivial. A single or even duo Stryker is worthless because of the requirement to sit there to maintain the lock.
    • Up x 1