[Suggestion] AA/Flak should be stronger and shorter ranged

The air ground relationship clearly needs a full rework to become healthy, but I think this could be a pretty simple and solid first step.

This would deter ground farming, but leave A2A combat undisturbed.
Since they're shorter ranged, there could be AA on smaller outposts and it wouldn't affect A2A.

The only thing that worries me about this is that liberators could be affected negatively, maybe they could gain some resistance to flak along with the stronger flak to retain their A2G role.

Opinions?

No. Range should actually be buffed. Sorry that you don't get to do your a2a duels. You're part of the game so deal with it. Your suggestion would just further increase the disconnect of air and ground and would allow more planes to roam around freely undisturbed to do their hit and run ground farms.

Why should we not be able to safely engage in air combat?? There's no reason flak should be a part of air combat, it just makes it boring and feels like you always have to run from fights.

The point of making flak stronger is to deter hit and run ground farming, but in the first place, hit and run farming isn't the issue, its people who sit in place for a long period of time and farm.

Im somewhat ok with this in general but it wouldnt really work in practice

The issue is sky high liberators and galaxies

We need something thats like the bursters but deals more direct damage at the cost of having no flak explosions

A weapon made for bigger slower targets

I agree that this is a problem, but i'm not really sure how to fix it, i'd hate to to see libs get gutted again.

You're weapon idea seems right, something that does a little more damage but has slower velocity so it doesnt threaten A2A or uninvolved ESF's. Maybe some sort of long range laser guided flak missile or something, just gotta make sure it isn't strong against ground targets.

I think the key to a balanced A2G is keeping it as seperate as possible but while keeping interactions that do happen healthy, and try to make everything have a specific job and a specific counter

Depends what is meant by AA. I can see hand held rocket launchers being short range. Perhaps vehicle mounted and burster Max having degraded performance over greater range, but AA turrets on buildings are big mothers and ought to have range. In fact I was in a turret last night and it was very hard to hit aicraft at long range anyway due to the projectile spread and the very small movement of a distant target that was all that was needed to throw aim off.

The only serious harm I did was to aircraft actually attacking the base. Guys duelling in the air were either too agile as targets or I couldn't shoot becasue the imprecise nature of the AA was a risk to a friendly. My turret was eventually destroyed by a Lib firing from extreme range. I was able to get a few hits in return but I'd have been seriously peeved if he had been able to dhoot at me without me being able to return fire

I am not an AA expert so I could be missing something fundamental here..........

That's the point lol, also, in high altitude areas (meaning theres a lower amount of airspace) I tend to get flaked all the time while in A2A

Skyguards are fine, but only when coordinated in Groups, 3 to 4 Skyguards calling targets really wreck things.

The problem is this works for about 2 minutes and then the air has left for good. Then the skyguard has nothing to do, cant kill anthing else.
And if you are alone, then the air isn't even impressed by your being there. Sure you chase them around, but it is only a matter of time till the gang up on you or a lib Comes the way, that simply kills you in 1 clip and 1 gunner shot....

This is supposed to be anti air, then we should get more resistance against air weapons.

The spraying skyguard works fine in groups, but what about solo? Give us something like a vulcan for anti air: A semi-accurate direct hit only weapon with high velocity, and high damage, but maybe with a short ammo clip.

Or maybe something like a walker-skyguard: 4 rotating walker turrets close together mounted ontop a lightning.
Imagine 4 rotating 3 barrel guns.

There is no reason why air should be a part of ground combat either. If you want immunity from us, we damn sure would LOVE immunity from you!

i dont know what the hubub is all about with skyguards, i play my skyguard frequently and have never found it to be ineffective or useless when brought to where enemy air is. id like different weapons for lightning anti air just to be able to mix it up a bit with the technique of how to shoot them down.

Can't remember the last time I saw a mossie inside a biolab, or any other building.

Here's the thing, the last time I used rocket pods was phase one of the PS4 beta, and it was the first time i used them, then i never used them again.

ESF's shouldn't be part of ground combat, I agree, except for the occasional nose gun kill on random infantry while you're bored, infantry shoot at us occasionally too right?

I think there should be rocket pods, for situational use, but there needs to be adequate means of easily deterring them as well, but if an ESF is just flying around not bothering ground units it shouldn't have to worry about getting bothered with flak.

Libs of course belong in an A2G role, and that's where the balance gets hard.

Because this is a combined arms game? Did you seriously suggest that flak should not be part of air combat? The only reason it was designed in the first place? It feeling boring is subjective, you're not supposed to like flak if you're a skyknight that's the whole point of the design of the weapon. If you truly want to deter ground farming than you'd buff flak period not Nerf it to serve your skyknight dueling needs.

What you're suggesting would make a bad problem already worse. On Connery we have scythe gank squads crashing TR and NC fights and terrorizing air in general. Air has a ton of anti ground options and you're trying to kill one of the only ground anti air options.

The average KPD of the Skyguard is barely 2.

Weapon effectiveness in this game, and pretty much all games like this, is measured in how many kills/points it gets you.

The Skyguard sucks at it's intended role. Not that hard to figure it out.

And if you counter with "deterrent", well let's extend that to it's logical conclusion. Let's have all A2G weapons shoot rubber bullets from now on. Made to deter, not kill. Think pilots would be cool with that?

because people that drive aircraft dont know how to flak armor lol i have no problem with flak but when it comes to the lightning wow that skygaurd just anialates me lololooool

First question:
Why shouldn't ground units be able to safely engage in ground combat? It's not as if vehicles can really hide except in very few extremely select places.
If you don't come up with an answer to that you also know why there is absolutely no reason for aircraft to be able to do A2A combat.
Also considering the amount of A2A combat that is actually disturbed by this it's a mute argument. 95% of AA guns is located nearby a base, the chance of an A2A scenario happening above AA sources isn't high because the aircraft avoid them in the first place.
In actuality, A2A combat should need to be faced with more interference from AA guns. Fusion, your proposal is nothing more than a segregation proposal. If we want PS2 to thrive we need proposals where player interaction is increased, not decreased.


AA needs it's effective range cut short to make it easier for aircraft to join battles that have AA in them, but not by reducing damage outputs at range. The effective range needs to be reduced by increasing the skill required to hit at range. Currently it's mostly an RNG factor where the COF and flak detonation determine if you hit or not and your skill quickly caps out and doesn't improve your power. By introducing things like, oh I don't know, ground AA without flak but higher DPS values? You could easily create AA weapons that have shorter effective ranges but still have the option to do effective long-range combat without it preventing aircraft from operating there.

Also your idea that Liberators would be negatively impacted is weird. Liberators that make use of bellycanons rather than TB strafing runs would benefit immensely, and be capable of hovering over fights pounding infantry and vehicles to dust while the ground is ineffectively trying to damage it with it's range-nerfed AA guns.

A range nerf is not the answer. It's already hard enough to land consistent hits at long range with AA.

The answer is increase the flight cealing, then buff the HELL out of all AA.

That way they have a zone where they can fly, dogfight, and conduct Air Ops free from all AA. But get close to the ground? You face the wrath of those you have ground-spammed.

I honestly think this is the most fair, balanced, and unbiased AA proposal to date.

stop speaking like some uppity piece of **** for a start. thatd be great.

I do fine with my skyguard, where i go in my skyguard, air does not go, i get certs galore and they dont, mission accomplished.

Except for the part where aircraft can play safely, anywhere.

There are a few instances where aircraft cannot always attack infantry. Biolabs were named, even though the defenders will always be able to kill off the infantry at their spawns (Sunderer at teleporter, Sunderer at Gravlift, Sunderer at Jumppad) and on route to the Biolab. Otherwise every single base in the game has more than enough open ground to cover for infantry where aircraft can mess you up.
Vehicles have it even harder, and except in a few very limited instances like in the Biolab or Techplant vehicle bays you'll never really be safe from aircraft and always have to deal with them.

There is absolutely no reason whatsoever anywhere to allow aircraft the safety to fly or fight anywhere. Yes, even aircraft at the flight ceiling shouldn't be safe!
Why? Because of area control! To make area control have any value whatsoever it needs to mean something, to make it mean something it needs ways to exert power over hostiles, preventing them from entering the area without challenge. By allowing aircraft to fly as high as they can even now you already allow aircraft to avoid all ground weapons and safely get at any base or area they want. Ground vehicles, even the Stealth Flash, all have more trouble than this. And if the game would put any effort into it, vehicles and infantry would also need more effort to get around to increase the value of base ownership and area control.

From what you are saying, you seem to want to be free of flak so you can engage in A2A in peace. BUT the fact is that people don't pull AA for fun - I never think "oh it's a small base fight so best pull my Burster Max" - they pull it to try and deter some pain being dished from the skies above.

If it isn't you dishing that pain then it's someone else. But when you say "ESF's shouldn't be part of ground combat, I agree, except for the occasional nose gun kill on random infantry while you're bored" - i'd suggest that at least occasionally you deserve it !

Air vs Ground and vice versa has always been a balance challenge. Powerful AA clears the skies, not much provides a deterrent but little else and smaller squads without decent AA turns into a Turkey shoot for the pilot.