[Vehicle] Accuracy of Skyguard AA cannon.

People falsely place all air in the same category, as if a Skyguard should be able to kill a Galaxy and an ESF equally because a Skyguard is defined as "Anti-air" and the craft are described as "Air". In their eyes, this must mean that a Skyguard should be able to kill a Galaxy in 2 seconds or less or else the game isn't balanced.

1 Skyguard can less than 1 clip an ESF (which is especially easy when they stop to aim), and these vehicles cost the same amount of nanites.

When I say "2 Skyguards set up an area of denial", I mean that no air can even fly close to them because they prevent entrance from air through the whole hex. There is hardly an equivalent with armor where 2 MBTs can deny a whole army of vehicles from pushing up a hill. Skyguards can essentially do this with flak versus air. Skyguards can be pulled from any base on the map while air vehicles require a flight pad. You could pull a stronger Anti-Air cannon in a dual burster MAX, but this costs more and you are trading mobility and health for the increased damage. You could pull an Anti-Air lock on launcher, but as infantry you have even less health and mobility.

The Skyguard is the fastest, most maneuverable, cheapest flak weapon in the game. It's meant to be a support weapon.

Ah, you're thinking too small-scale. I'd prefer one of these:



Can cover an exceedingly long range, but has to deploy in order to be effective. Can OHK all aircraft. If pilots want to fly, they need to coordinate with ground teams to take out the enemy SAMs first, or they will be quickly shot down if they enter the area.

To be balanced they are completely defenceless against anything on the ground and are automatically spotted by all units within their effective radius.

Essentially a NS-500 that I've suggested before.

I'm gonna reveal you a secret: flak is not meant to destroy aircraft. It's a deterrent.
Because some in the devs team think it's unfair if flying objects get destroyed by ground forces.

On the other hand they think it's absolutely correct aircraft can farm ground troops.

Do you see it? G2A grants air deterrance XP, A2G is kill farming.
That's probably the biggest ******** in Planetside 2.

I hope you didn't pay the Skyguard with real money.

I wasn't actually talking about all air, just ESFs.
all an ESF has to do is fly at the max height and skyguard can barely tickle them.
the coF makes it almost impossible to reliably hit them, even when aiming and leading perfectly.
also if they turn you'll miss entirely due to the awful velocity.

but thanks for bringing up galaxies, as a skywhale pilot i like nothing more than seeing a skyguard, its a free kill.
2-3 of them is an even nicer sight, so many free certs!
skyguard is the least threatening vehicle to a galaxy, heck i fear harassers more.

An ESF at max height can "barely tickle" anything else on the ground in exchange for flying that high at the same ranges the Skyguard would have trouble hitting it. Including LolPodding infantry as the max render range on infantry is lower than vehicles.

Yeah Galaxys with a squad who are paying attention are probably the strongest single vehicles in the game. We can talk about how strong a Galaxy is without mentioning the Skyguard.

That's assuming you're bad at the anti air game, I'll admit, most of the time it requires a second guy to kill an esf that actually knows what he's doing, but on the flip side an esf that's locked out by a good skyguard can't do anything that won't compromise his current situation. For example, a heavy takes a route to point, route is guarded by tank, he can deter the tank or simply make another route with little to no risk to his person, air shows up, heavy can't get to point because air, then skyguard shows up and now air cannot deter heavy and heavy caps point, tank kills skyguard unless skyguard runs but now he can't keep air out but now heavy attacks tank tank either leaves or etcetc. Heavy could alternatively help the skyguard kill the air by dropping half of the esfs hp with a lockon so it can't run as effectively.

People who only play ground do not realize how much HP means to the ESF, almost all the weapons in the game are balanced around full hp entities, TTK on guns verses infantry, tank v tank, air v air, and ground verses air and vice versa. The only thing I find moderately unfair is that libs can operate with only one pilot swapping seats, that it's most effective counter the blockade walker bus needs 3 people to operate on 100%, but this is due to how bursty the weapons on a lib air verses how area denial focuses on exposure time, I'd love if the pilot was locked in his seat while his gunners could swap freely but that's a different discussion altogether.

The accuracy is low because the flak detonation range is extremely large. If the accuracy was better you would have situations where ESF would be guaranteed to die if they came within X distance because it's impossible to dodge shots unless you are at long range.

The only way accurate and powerful AA guns can be introduced in PS2 is by reducing or removing the skill reducing factors, IE flak detonation range, spray and pray and lock-ons, so that aircraft stand a chance to dodge. Once that is done you can reward the G2A weapons for skill and actually have ESF die when a skillful player fires upon them and they lack the skill to dodge the shots.

The suggestions for long-range lock-on weapons that can deal tremendous damage/OHK ESF are horrible designs. They completely negate a part of the game instead of enhancing the experience for all players involved. Someone operating these OHK machines is going to have an extremely boring time, since any aircraft that comes within his area will just turn around. Alternatively he's just looking at the radar for blips and pushing buttons when an aircraft is close enough not to be able to escape. That's not fun gameplay for the user. It's also not fun gameplay for aircraft who are completely prevented to join the fight at that location.

In theory just 3 of these weapons could warpgate an entire faction.

I absolutely disagree with that, depending on how it were implemented. If there was a big red circle that marked as a no fly zone, due to OP AA radar being detected, and the vehicle had sever spawn restrictions, it could add a very cool aspect to the game. It would need serious restrictions though, like only 1 deployed per faction at a time, it takes 5 minute to deploy, and it's coverage area is marked on the map. This way they have to be closely guarded and can't be spammed. It could be cool.

It would have to be AI operated, as sitting in a vehicle that only operates when it's warning sign is up is going to be extremely boring.

I also foresee problems with such weapons even as a game mechanic. Aircraft are fast, every fast, and can ignore terrain. Add the ability to use terrain to avoid missiles and the launcher system becomes quickly endangered by the very aircraft it's supposedly going to destroy.
Then add the ability to use flares. If the aircraft in question uses flares to avoid getting killed they could already be on top of the launcher before it fires it's next missile. There's two ways to solve this and both aren't good. The first one is increasing the range of the weapon, meaning it would start getting ludicrous area denial range. The second one is increasing the ROF so that it can kill more aircraft, but that would mean a complete and utter denial of everything aircraft.

Just imagine this, how about next to the lock-on super-AA we also add a lock-on super-artillery. This locks on to any vehicle within range and destroys it. This negates the use of all vehicles, just like the AA weapon would. Would that be good for the game?

Well no, because you completely remove one part of the gameplay. I might not like the current way aircraft are designed, but that doesn't mean we should remove them. We should update them to something reasonable, something fun, something engaging. One part of that is removing the current G2A weapons, not adding more area denial weapons that completely negate aircraft in the area (or only put a time-limit to how long an aircraft can operate if you don't have enough G2A weapons).

First of all, this is coming from someone who's in the air as much as possible. The air game is what it is so I've been sucking it up and getting wrecked with just my nose-gun till I get good. Hornets also if I'm going after armor. I absolutely hate spam. I think with the conditions I mentioned, the suggested AA source would be like a mobile base that had to be taken to push the main objective. Right now there's no need to strategically strike AA so air can move in, because AA is back up within seconds. With those restrictions put in place you'd need a coordinated ground operation to take out enemy AA, and once it's down it won't magically re-appear in a few seconds like everything else in the game. And it wouldn't remove air from the game, just remove it from that one area, not unlike The Crown on Indar. I'd actually love it if losing those AA turrets on bases would be a serious blow instead of a minor inconvenience, but nope, take them down with sneaky C4 Valkyrie covert op and they're repaired in a few seconds.. I just think it would add some depth to the game, which it really needs. Construction did that, it makes little objectives here and there that are a little different every time. I think this could be the same. About the points you made: I think AI firing the missiles is fine. Maybe 1 missile every 20 seconds, so a mob of aircraft could still prevail. While making flares counter it would make flares useful again, that would make it way to easy to gank with a flare Lib or two. So the missiles would have to be radar guided instead of heat seeking, which would explain the no fly zone detected on the map. I think it could be cool.

All dedicated AA weapons are "zero-skill" weapons.
Buffing the Skyguard to a point where it kills ESFs without the need of any skill or tactics/teamplay would be the end of PS2.

Why would you talk about something you dont understand?

Isnt that the definition of ignorance?

People who have never even been in an aircraft have no place talking about air balance.

Its really that simple.

Skyguard is boring to use because once you kill a few planes no one comes back.

If i get hit by flak i fly in the opposite direction with afterburners and make note of the location and then proceed to stay as far away from it as i can.

There is no back and forth between an ESF and a skyguard. Skyguard wins every time.

So if you improve skyguard, to the levels it was in beta, then all air would die as soon as they came within range of an invisible target.

What should be done is to give skyguard a nosegun like weapon. Let ESF noseguns do more damage to skyguards. Make it a fun fight. The skyguard should have a slight advantage in hit points and obviously it already has a stability advantage when sitting still. If ESF had a chance to fight back they wouldnt just run away.

Already every vehicle in the game has AA weapons. Basilisks which used to have a low angle of fire now points straight up and every sundy has them and they are very often manned. Then you have skyguards and turrets. You have infantry with lock-ons. If you are trying to fly low to avoid those things you can be ohk by a tank.

I suggest you fly a bunch, try to participate in any large scale battle, and then come back and tell us that flak needs any kind of buff.

I die to tanks 1k times more often than i die to airplanes. I get so excited when im infantry and a lib comes down and kills some farming HE tank. Needs to happen much more often imo.

I don't buy that argument. You can do nothing but play Skyguards you're whole PS2 career and have a great understanding of Skyguard balance. You know exactly what units you can and can't beat under what circumstances.The tricky part is not being biased in your conclusion, like you are. You think your AA nosegun should also kill infantry and tanks effectively. That's what wing mounts are for. You have the only vehicle in the game that can specialize in two things, and do both extremely well.

They're called Hornets, and they wreck Skyguards. If you don't equip A2G missiles, then don't cry about not being able to kill ground. You keep arguing for your AA aircraft to be able to compete with an AA tank, it's just ludicrous.

Whats the argument for a skyguard buff again? I just got on it and went on a rampage killing 7 esfs in different areas. And then outran the tanks. Then killed the sundi....it's starting to make me want to aurax the lightning

I think it's AA effectiveness is perfect. I do wish it had tighter accuracy in exchange for less burst range though. Just to give it a little better ground performance once air bugs off, and require a little more skill from the shooter when going after air.

Skyguard simply sucks...even Vulcan has a better Accuracy and this is meant to be a gatling for Tanks...


They should make a little bigger cylinder of fire and not a Cone which would improve the accuracy to the Skyguard but would also benefit the look of the Skyguard itself...these are 4 Barrels....they shouldn't spread.

Even a Burster Max is better in current state.

I think you are pointing at a different problem in the meta-game: Lack of secondary objectives to pursue.

Destroying the AA-turrets and having them up and running again before you can return with your aircraft is an annoying thing and makes infiltration or demolition work against them feel useless. Why go through all that trouble only to have it up and running again in less than a quarter of the time you took to destroy them in the first place?
But having a OHK super-range AA platform isn't going to be the right answer. You shouldn't want to remove an entire part of the game with this mechanic. That's why I used the example with the missile artillery that targets ground vehicles and OHK's them. It's a bad system that doesn't make it any more fun for the players.
What could work is something that gives the owners a massive advantage. For instance a long-range AA radar that reveals every aircraft constantly so players are far more aware and capable of anticipating on them. This is a high-value target that players want to destroy that doesn't instantly remove aircraft from the playing area, assuming there's not enough G2A and preferably hoping that along with this change we get some well-balanced G2A weapons.

Similar things could be done in bases. Those AA turrets? What if you put 2 or 3 hitpoint sinks within the base, open to shoot with vehicle weapons if you have the right angle. Destroy all 3 hitpoint sinks and the AA turrets go offline.
This could be a theme throughout most bases. Important doorways could be blocked with shields that prevent enemies from entering (but not from firing through). To move through them you need to destroy a shield generator somewhere inside the base. Other important places could now have an anti-infantry turret in them that's only useable as long as the generator is still online. The turrets of large facilities such as AMP stations could have a generator/hitpointsink that prevents hacking of the turrets as long as it's alive.
The idea would be that the defenders would have the advantage when you start attacking. A tight team of defenders could keep up these generators and remain at an advantage through skill, strategy and tactics. The attackers would need more than Zergtactics to break through and target specific generators to get passed certain area's or keep getting funneled through chokepoints and easily defensible area's.

The best would be if vehicles were the most important in destroying these generators so that they have more goals to complete. You could place these generators in tough to reach places for vehicles, so that the vehicles need a lot of defending while they move through tight area's. This creates a dependency on everyone. Vehicles and aircraft to take down the hitpoint sinks, infantry to defend the vehicles and aircraft from retaliation and finally infantry to make use of the openings vehicles provided to finally capture the base.

says the guy with barely 30 ours of experience on the Skyguard across 3 accounts.
Isn't that the definition of ignorance? Talking about Skyguards if you don't even really have experience in them?

Statistically, the Skyguard is pretty bad at killing air.

Air Kills Per Hour
NC ESF Tomcats- 32.74
NC Liberator Dalton- 11.21
NC ESF Coyotes- 10.99
NC ESF Vortex- 8.28
NC Skyguard- 5.63
NC Liberator Walker- 5.14
NC Liberator Shredder- 4.2
NC ESF Hornets- 3.47

The Skyguard ought to be as effective at killing air as ESFs are (both being 1/1 single person 350 nanite vehicles). In any fairness the Skyguard should probably be better at killing air than an ESF because the ESF can mount two different weapons and become effective against different types of targets, while the Skyguard is limited to killing just air.

The main problem is that Skyguard effective DPS is far too low. Unlike a ESF that can chase down targets, the Skyguard can't keep up with even the slowest aircraft. This means that the Skyguard needs massive DPS buffs so that it can easily kill aircraft before they get away.

This can be solved in a variety of ways. Increasing damage. Reducing aircraft HP or armour. Increasing velocity. Decreasing CoF. Essentially anything that will let the Skyguard kill any aircraft within 2-3 seconds.

I mean you know you have a problem when the Dalton, a A2G cannon, is about twice as effective at killing air as a dedicated G2A weapon!

I try to play a little of everything and really try to look at the situation from both sides. I was in a Skyguard for an hour last night and an ESF for about 3. And flak was annoying on both ends.

So how about this?

• Halve COF, Halve burst radius & increase velocity: Add some skill to flak, and let maneuvering in the air help you dodge, right now it's just RNG. But overall, I think the Skyguard's deterrence level is fine, they really do limit what enemy air can do.
• Increase direct hit damage to aircraft: This is the big change that I think will help with overall balance. This keeps flak damage and deterrence the same as it is now, but lets the Skyguard stand a chance once that single unit gets singled out for a Tankbuster run.

The tighter accuracy and velocity let it have more of a role on the ground once it chases air away so it's not just sitting there after it's primary job is done.


I'd like to see this for base AA, Rangers and Maxes as well. For base AA it would be nice if they had a much higher tank resistance, same damage taken from C4 and air, and take 4x as long to repair. It should be an effort to take those turrets down, and once they're down then air should be able to move in and do their thing. And for God's sake, fix freakin spawnroom shields, the game can never be balanced when there's 1-way fire.