Anti Air partisans - A global invitation

i just told you i've had 10 hours in lib,
why would i need to come in yours to magically come to the decision that AA is suddenly amazing?
also you're ok with skyguard not instagibbing galaxies but youre fine with a lib wrecking an MBT in 2 seconds with the strongest gun in the game? (which costs 100 certs.)

you seem to have an extreme bias.

LOL.

Skyguard, with its pathetic accuracy (and thus effective range), is not the first choice for AI work unless the guy who pulled it is clueless. Yes, it works better than some tank cannons because those have since been nerfed to oblivion, but a Kobalt Harasser/Sunderer do the same job better and costs less resource (L: 350, S: 200, H: 150). The Sunderer is tougher and has other cert-earning utilities, while the Harasser is considerably faster. It even costs 90% less to cert in the first place (Skyguard: 1000C, Kobalt: 100C)

And you got to be kidding me when you say people are pulling Skyguard to kill tanks. Viper Lightnings are about the only thing that you have a chance without numerical advantage or the other player being a complete moron.

let's do something ok? we'll both stand 200 meters appart, and we'll shoot each other. I won't move, and I'll be using a skyguard. You use the "most powereful weapon in the game" and show me just how much you're going to get me down to. My bet is the paint won't even be scratched.

It's a short short range weapon that sucks at range. Kind of like a shotgun but even worst. The skyguard is like an automatic sniper that shoots low damage rockets. It has a HUGE range advantage. SO much so that I'm willing to do the same experiment with anything in between 100m-1000 meters.
But we don't need to do this do we? You know the result already, and you know I'm right.

Also, certs is not an indicator of how strong something is....

Not a joke I've seen it quite often actually.

-- double post -- sorry.

are you sure you are thinking of skyguard?

Want to try the experiment?

you already know noone is going to bother, i told you i've had 92 hours in the air, logging on to make a character on an alternate server and then doing all of this would take up a load of time and tell me nothing i don't already know.

people aren't refusing to join you in your lib because they're thinking "oh noes! he's right! AA is OP!"
we're not joining because we have all already flown libs, gunned libs, played AA,
there is no need to test what we already know and we think it would simply be a waste of time.

It's more like the first one "Oh noes! he's right!". But you can keep finding excuses for everything.

The best AA is an ESF with Tomcats, and it costs less than a MAX, but hey "hurr hurr too dishonorable".

The point of the Skyguard is not to always kill aircraft. If you want to get assured kills on aircraft - or any vehicle for that matter - you'll need to take more risks than just sitting at the back of an armor column. Just like you need to take risks by flying to a tank to C4 it for an assured kill, you need to take risks by flying an ESF versus a Liberator if you want a sure kill.

What the Skyguard is really good at is forcing aircraft to just go away. On that point, I also believe that the Skyguard is overpriced for what it does, but that's another story. Your job is to prevent enemy aircraft from pwning your entire army, but killing those planes is not implied in your job.

I'm sorry but 'just because' people won't do that thing you want them to do for you doesn't make you right. It means you aren't the boss of them and they strongly disagree with you and are showing statistics to back themselves up while you are basically saying:

"play with me with the default tools because it'll be weighed heavily in my favor (skill and equipment wise), if you don't I'll arrogantly think I'm right while everyone disagrees"

Well in this OP's mind, everyone who's not willing to waste time with him (ie. literally everyone) are scared of him and his indisputable facts.

In this case, I think we should all just agree to leave him to his empty triumph and call it a day. It's beginning to not worth the time doing otherwise even on Forumside.

Hey Jawarsin, I invite you to go play in fast traffic or jump off a cliff to prove that AA is overpowered.

What? You refused my invitation?!? Egads, I must be right!

I'll take a baker's dozen of victory cookies please.

This is one of the reasons I want AA changed. Currently a single flak user is simply UP, it lacks any power to kill because you can't even fly passed any AA without a scratch. AA is the strongest force multiplier in the game. A group of AA has the best power multiplication due to the low skill-ceiling to use through flak and lock-ons, and that aircraft can be much easier to see than ground vehicles moving through terrain. This is the reason why Aircraft users think it's OP, because it can always hit them. The AA users on the other hand think it's UP, because they can always escape. Sure they have a high chance to die through other sources, but people don't snipe when every hit they make means someone else kills their target afterwards. They might have some effect on the game, but they don't make you feel effective to it in any way. Multiple snipers would work, but it would still mean that you share your kills with someone else. And unlike infantry, aircraft can just move to another base within seconds while it takes minutes for the AA to catch up.
The "incredible range" of AA is also an often named problem. But at any range but less than 300, you will start missing your shots even if you have pin-point accuracy solely due to the COF (and lock-ons stop being able to lock not much further out). It is only an annoying bit of extra damage that aircraft get but to get a kill at that range is only possible if they are already damaged. I've often been the guy interfering with a dogfight, but to "steal" the kill is nigh impossible unless the dogfight is happening almost directly above you low above the ground.

That's a lot of people who touch it only once every month, and every month another group of a few hundred players tries it again? PS2 doesn't sport the player base for such a thing, not enough new-player influx. Occams razor: it's more logical that theres a small group of dedicated players, and a larger group of players who use it every now and then.

He sucks at flying and you use that as argument that you are right, even though it could be bad luck or lack of skill that caused it, which could be righted by using it repeatedly for a longer time.
Just look at the first experience in tanks nowadays. Even an MBT user stands a large chance to get killed almost instantly unless he accidentally ran with a Zerg, simply because he doesn't know the layout. He can accidentally drive underneath Spawnrooms without knowing what they are, or drive across minefields, drive straight into enemy regiments of infantry or tanks because he doesn't know how they will react (with lots of rockets and shells) or doesn't know they are even there.

First, "some leading required"? A Lib can fly at 600+m and still go so fast that you need to aim so far up front that the Lib is off-screen! The shells travel so slow and have such a large COF that the only reason you basically hit is because the Flak doesn't need to actually hit and some of it will accidentally hit simply because the aircraft is within your COF.
Secondly this is the entire problem: because it has such a weird system, it isn't allowed to have any meaningful power to kill aircraft. If the current flak was upgraded even slightly it would be OP against ESF, simply because it can hit so easily. That's why the entire AA scheme needs to be changed. No more deterrents (the developers themself call it deterrents and designed it that way, which proves that they don't have enough power by themselves to kill but only to scare away. Well, it doesn't prove it exactly seeing how Harassers are supposed to be transports and that's the last thing they are used for).

But you are ignoring the players that did fly and point out all the flaws!
And the results are there. It´s the only vehicle that can actively attack without camping and get a dozen kills+vehicles. As a pilot once said while complaining: "the nerf to Rocketpods and other ESF weapons is a detriment for the game. I can hardly get 2 vehicle kills and 5+ kills per run anymore".

Ok, so would you agree to a more "bursty" AA unit?
Also, every single infantry and tank immidiately jumps on top of a Skyguard because they are easy pickings. You are never safe, and the tunnelvision you have while using one makes you even easier for ground troops to C4 you or kill you while you are busy. Not to mention that aircraft are so fast that when you move from a random altitude from behind, which is easy to do in aircraft, that you stand a 90% chance of surprising them anyway.

Results? Something like Oracle Of Death can show? Something that others before me already have shown? I don't think thats necessary anymore.
The Liberator has a higher starter skill to work, but it quickly surpasses the Skyguard. The Skyguard quickly reaches a maximum damage potential as your skill stops mattering. The Liberator has a skill ceiling that keeps on giving more and more, and with a well-trained gunner it starts outperforming just about any vehicle...

Ah yeah I missed it. 3 kills, 175 shots, 119 hits. Not exactly "deadly effective" although you might have cleared the skies. Additionally, how many times were you killed while using it by the very aircraft you were trying to destroy? How many times were you killed by something else because you were using one?

Just shows that aircraft are too good, even against other aircraft.

That depends on the stats. Imagine this: there's 1 pro player that's 50% better than any average player. Which is pretty good. But there's also 200 average players that perform average. Then the 1 pro player will have slightly more weight but compared the the average players it falls flat on it's face.
And here's the fun part. If you now say "but most players in the air are pro players" that only means that the "average pilot" has a high average, and that the amount of "top players" has become smaller, as the only "top players" are the one's who are in the top % group, since the top % group now is only marginally better than the average pilot (who's got a great average already).
Also, the new player influx to the average players will drag it down, but that's also part of the average just like the pro players pull it up. This means that the current average is biased both ways, which means that the average is the actual average and the stats are correct.

There's more things that can watch aircraft, but a lot less of those things can effectively attack them. In fact, the AA lock-ons get more ground vehicle kills than they get Aircraft kills. So an AA lock-on is just another danger to ground vehicles, but ground lock-ons aren't AA weapons and not very capable of it either. dumbfires have some AA purposes when firing at hovering aircraft or aircraft that don't move during their strafing run, but they are still at the bottom of the AA capable chain.
So to conclude: there's more effective and powerful ground AV than there is AA, even though AA can be seen by more sources more easily.

No, ESF can get more skilled, the skill-ceiling of AA simply stops incredibly fast. This means that AA stops being able to get more skilled as extra skill doesn't matter. Being pin-point accurate even in leading helps, but due to COF it stops mattering. if you can keep 100% of the aircraft in your leading COF, it doesn't matter if you aim in front, on top or behind the aircraft or even above or below, you have an equal chance of hitting it due to the randomly scattered flak in the area. It becomes a game of chance rather than a game of skill...
For the AA, not the aircraft. They can keep getting better, there's almost always something else to learn, and each thing you learn makes you more powerful.
If the AA mechanic was changed so that AA can get a skill-ceiling similar to that of aircraft, you would instantly find that there's pro-players that can rival ESF players already.

AA is rarely held because it's unrewarding. You have to share your kills with aircraft or other AA, aircraft will quickly go to other places where no AA is around and they aren't forced to go away and repair every few minutes.

Allright, let's do it like this:

If I want to prove how useful a shotgun is, do I go around running with an LMG Heavy and wait till I get shot by a shotgun and say "See? I was right!"
Or, do I pick a shotgun and start using that to show how powerful it is, regardless of range etc? Maybe I can prove that the range doesn't matter by a few simple ways to use any base layout? Maybe I can't prove it because the layouts don't support it that much?
If I take the Heavy with LMG style, then you don't know the effort and the amount of failures it took before you got the kill. And the LMG Heavy can also play aggressively and skillfully, but set himself up to get killed because he makes sure every engagement is around tight corners where shotguns reign supreme.

You want us to pick a Liberator to prove that AA is OP. Why? Why wouldn't we pick the AA, it's like you want to pick the LMG Heavy to prove the shotgun is OP? You yourself ignore me when I suggest you come and join me with AA, but you at the same time tell others that we are so bad and scared to prove you right and that's because you are supposed to be right.
But I can say the same, why don't you join me in some Skyguard runs? Afraid I will prove you right?

I can guarantee you that, outside of "for the lulz", nobody with two brain cells worth rubbing together isn't pulling a Skyguard to take on tanks or infantry. They're taking on tanks or infantry with the Skyguard because there's no air to engage and they don't want to abandon or respawn their tank.

This, this this this.

This is precisely the issue with the current flak system, hence why I believe the single best thing that can be done to the Skyguard is replace the flak with a SAM battery, and rework flares to be a bit less effective against large groups of missiles (perhaps a maximum of 4-5 instead of all of them). The reason for this is you'd be able to have an exceptionally powerful close-range AA tool, perhaps capable of taking out an ESF in a single (long) barrage, but with a hard limit to its range. It'd also be difficult to avoid, but not impossible. Think evading the previous Striker incarnation.

Regular flak would still exist in the form of Burster MAXes, turrets, and the Ranger.

I got a NC alt on Emerald, but what are you trying to prove? That G2A is OP or that Libs have a low survival time?

I got a halfway certed lib with zepher/thermals, walker, nar, racer and AB. My survival time is pretty low, but primarily due to ESFs. Ground AA doesn't kill me since the TTK is pretty low. As long as I have a safe zone, I can do bombing runs, hide, repair and repeat. However, if I have to dodge G2A and deal with an ESF, it's impossible unless I have a pro gunner who can down the ESF fast.

I would say G2A is fairly well balanced vs Libs. It's ESFs that cause the balance problems. Good ESF pilots can live forever, because they can fight other ESFs and AB away from flak/G2A lock ons.

Here's a problem Anyone try and shoot down a Gal sitting directly above their base being a spawn point? guess what you'll have to go to a different base waste 350+ of your resources to pull an AP tank to take it down because at that base you cant hit it. Its out of range for lock on and if your lucky enough to pull anything from that base you cant hit it do to the angle not to mention how tanky the thing is to begin with. The reason most people believe aircraft is op is because by yourself its almost impossible to take one out because they can always get cover or out of range rep up in the middle of some field real fast and come barrage down a few more guys and they might think anti air is just fine because they have been harassing a base for so long that 3-4 people pull anti air to take out their 1 light aircraft and they just pop because 4 people got lock ons.

From my experience as a lib gunner the only time we were shot down was when we did something stupid like hitting a tree flying low enough and still enough we got hit by ap tanks or they had an entire squad of AA. In a lib most bases have some sort of cover near then so you can be hovering completely still get hit by a rocket and have their AA turret open up on you and you can still get away repair and come back for more kills on well anything other aircraft infantry tanks it doesn't matter.

Now from my experience with trying to deal with air well you don't you deter them you make them leave for a little bit and lock ons well forget about it light aircraft can fly outside of your lock on range before you can get a second shot at them you will only kill them in groups. AA guns well they also just deter the thing is you can lead all you want but half of it is predicting where they are gonna go they can stop and change direction pretty quick so unless they are flying in a straight line your not gonna get a kill just make them bail for a bit. Sky guards same problems as the AA gun but you also have light assaults going "oooh free lightning kill" because you can deter aircraft but you cant do anything else.

I think the reason people think aircraft is OP is because they can actually manage to kill other aircraft because they are they only ones that can chase them down they can also kill tanks and infantry and pretty much always get away and come back when the heat gets turned on.

now as for if its OP why doesn't everyone do it well its pretty simple have you seen the starting aircraft doesn't even give you a basic feel of what the ones that are wrecking, you don't start with any sort of rocket pods and you have a bad gun on the front and it takes a while to fill in the gaps. Secondly its harder to do ill admit i don't fly myself because i suck at it i just don't want to take the time to get good at it even tho you can kill tanks infantry and aircraft while getting away from any AA whose sole purpose it to deal with you sure it may not be easy but that doesn't change the fact that you CAN.