I think infantry needs a slightly better counter to esf!

Bursters wreck infantry? On what planet? Even at point blank range they are laughably inaccurate, slow firing and do comparatively little damage. Given how slow the Max is, an AA max is also pretty easy to evade. Unlike Skyguard, bursters cause very little damage to vehicles either and don't damage lightnings, MBTs or sunders at all.

A dual burster Max is a 450 nanite dedicated anti air platform - yet it can't even compete toe to toe with the weakest air unit in the game.......and you see absolutely no problem with that?

I Play a lot of lock-on and often pull dedicated anti air vehicles too.

The swarm is quite fun to watch and now i really tracks esf quite a Long time again.
But is it effective? Alone? Hell no, it is not. If an esf knows where you are, then you are as good as dead. And oh Boy the dedicated flying People hate lock ons and do everything in their power to make you stop. They tryhard you into oblivion.

Same goes for dedicated anti air vehicles, you pull a skyguard and shoot down 1 dedicated sky Knight, and i assure you, 30 seconds later you have either some suicide c4 Flash, harrasser or even an mbt chasing after you until you are dead.

The first main Problem of dedicated anti air is, that is is not effective at all. All of those weapons are area denial weapons and only scare Targets away. Only damaged or overconfidend Flyers die to dedicated anti air.

The second Problem is that any anti air from the Ground requires Squad Play and multiple People.
Lock ons become quite effective if used by 4 heavys that coordinate their target. But then the tryhard part Begins for sure...
The Damage from the lock ons is quite high and the esf surely feels the Impact. But engaging one alone is suicidal and not fun.
Also the lock on range is quite short now, this was better in the past. They really should revert this. Or ramp up the Damage.
If you cut down the effectiveness from having to have 4 Players coordinate to only having 2 Players coordinate, this would help.
Also it would help if the rockets where slighty more agile and a lot faster.


Anti air Ground vehicles also Need support from dediced anti Ground Forces.

But do Player do this? No they dont. They don't want to sit on a hill with 4 People and then only 1 of them getting a kill.
They dont want to babysit any dedicated anti air Ground Vehicle.
So you are mostly alone with whatever you want to do from the Ground vs air.
And that is the main Problem.
Also most know how cocky the flying People are and know About the tryhard part very well.
And they hate this, they hate having to defend against this one friggin guy that feels b-hurt and now trys to kill only you and you alone. This is not fun. But this is Nothing the game can do About. Its a community issue.
So for this the only way would be to make dedicated anti air also have its uses vs Ground Targets.
Remember the time when skyguard flak detonaton was on hit, even vs Ground? It was quite a good infanty Killer back then.
Surely they could bring that back, but Maybe not so overpowered as it was back in the old days.
Considering the rate of fire half the Splash from what a lasher would do would feel Right to me.
Then the number of anti air weapons on the Ground would increase and by that having more damaged air Targets in the air increasing chances of getting a kill for everyone, while at the same time not having to increase the anti air Damage itself.

Well they can actually wreck infantry..... from 0-1m point blank with still a relatively slow TTK. But otherwise they are worse than shotguns in their random spread, and that's saying something. A gun worse that double random weapons (COF and pellet spread). So in that one highly specific scenario that you can punch people they are ok .
Still I agree with your point! They are effective enough to win many 1v1 against infantry. It's just that their weapon effectiveness is relatively so low they run high risks and get unreasonable amounts of damage, making it highly inefficient overall.

Edit:
I agree as well with the other thing. A 450 nanite investment, dedicated against air and impractical against anything else is losing against a 350 nanite all round powerful platform. Although I agree that skill can offset nanites to a large degree, I think the bought weapons on the ESF are so strong the skill isn't offsetting much. Especially if it wins out relatively easy against it's dedicated counter.

Remember that all Maxes on live are running armor. I'm not a bad shot in an ESF, and against a moving player with ordnance armor who isn't just standing in the open you're more than likely not going to 1-clip the guy with a fully upgraded Banshee, and reloading against a burster max isn't an option. The PPA is even worse. But the Air Hammer absolutely destroys them. I don't ***** about it though because the Reaver needs all the help it can get, at least until you hit that top 1% of pilots who can aim good enough to overcome that barn wall of a hit box.

Pre-nerf wasn't all that much different against infantry, as the gun has such terrible accuracy that it relied almost entirely on splash anyway, which remained the same. Its direct fire nerf made it pointless to use against ground vehicles and removed it as an option for A2A, even as bad as it was pre-nerf against air. It was a terrible adjustment. Nerfing splash on all AI guns, a small direct hit buff to the Air Hammer, and maybe a velocity and direct hit buff to the PPA would have put things in a much better place. A2A would be better, and infantry would be happier. But they ****** it up.

Wreck was too strong a word. But still, if you turn a corner and come face to face with a burster Max with anything but an Archer you're done. I do want bursters to be replaced with something similar to a Walker, just to make them more versatile, obviously as long as that gun doesn't overshadow an anti-infantry guns. Being versatile makes everything much more fun to play, which is why I completely disagree with your argument that all aircraft should be more specialized than currently.

DC Universe used to be that way, and it was terrible.
But to be honest it is already like that. Especially for V.S. Our P.P.C. takes so long to kill infantry and is so weak against fighters now it no longer justifies the space it takes up. When I first started playing this game P.P.C.'s hit like they should. If you were good enough to hit a fighter with one, you did not need to land many hits as a reward for it being the slowest projectile in the game. It could deal with ground targets in a semi-hurry to make up for it being mounted onto a dinner plate. I cannot count how many times I caught a Random Battle Rank 5's Decimator round from the bottom back then. Hahaha!

If we want to kill ground targets we have to spec for ground, if we want air targets we have to spec for air. Anytime you try to split and do both, you wind up getting killed because you are not enough of the thing you need to be at that time. At least that is how it is with me.

Add C4 and or Tank Mines to that list. If you make it more walker like it will overshadow the Gorgon in my case I simply split up the weaponry to handle both. I would not go as far as speeding up the rate of fire or making it more accurate as it kills single even double targets just fine at even mid range, but I would like it to damage armor slightly to at least deter enemies from just sitting there when you clearly cannot damage them. Or worse take the time to try to run you over.

I did mention top guns as the worst offenders along with aircraft. They've been shoehorned in to such specific roles that they just aren't fun. To keep this relevant to the thread topic, I'd much rather see the PPA lose splash radius and gain velocity and direct damage. Infantry would sure be happy, PPA spam would be less, and it would be viable against other vehicles, including air targets if its elevation permitted. It wouldn't be as good as a Walker against air, the Walker wouldn't be as good against infantry as the PPA, and the Basilisk would be in the middle. That's how things should be balanced to keep people having fun and shooting things. That's exactly how they balanced tank guns on the Lightning, and I think those are the best balanced vehicle weapons in the game. Each gun shines at its intended role, but they can all do everything in a pinch.

Perhaps you are trying to fabricate an argument by trying to pass be off as unskilled or not certed enough. Unfortunately for you I have had my Lightning Racer Frame maxed before I got my Skyguard and I haev both Auraxed it and at least in the passed I was in the top 1% or something of skillful Skyguard users, so I know what I'm talking about.

Also a maxed out Lightning goes what, 90km/h on a flat stretch of road? That's 25m/s, while an ESF at it's non-afterburner speed goes 200km/h or 55m/s. Even assuming the ESF starts right on top of the Skyguard it only takes 10 seconds to reach 300m, at which point you'll hit about 1 in 4 shots with the Skyguard and can only finish off wounded targets. Unfortunately the ESF will be using things like fire suppression and afterburners so chasing ESF is a futile attempt, at best you are making sure you have a bit more hits assuming the terrain isn't too rough and throw off your aim.

Tanks don't survive "just fine" against fighters as 95% of the players does not take G2A weapons and those that do are at a disadvantage against a more common enemy (other vehicles). This leaves most vehicles open to attack.

ESFs would be totally balanced imo, if only they had no free Afterburner, improved Fire Suppression and free Auto Repair.

Yes you can damage them with firearms, but they can sit at such distance that infantry will only tickle. And they will always be able to fly away and come back in 1 minute with full hp.

That's the real ********: trying to make the learning curve less steep fro noobs devs made ESFs even too powerful in the hands of veterans.

Yes - but as I pointed out - they can only equip one type at a time and since weapons like the Banshee and Mustang do both types of damage, it's largely academic and in reality doesn't give you all that much additional survivability in a real battle scenario.

If you equip kinetic armour - you'll better survive the direct hits, but will succumb to the indirect ones. You are also more vulnerable to C4 faries and the inevitable rain of HESH spam that usually accompanies infantry farming ESFs. If you equip ordnance armour - the direct hits will shred you.

I have been saying it for ages - Maxes should have composite armour since pretty much every unit that has the potential to go against a Max can pack weapons that deal both direct and splash damage.

Absolutely false. The Banshee deals half the direct damage as the rotary, so Maxes don't have to worry about that. 99% of Maxes run Ordnance armor, which cuts splash damage in half. Combined with the Banshee's awful accuracy, Max survivability goes through the roof compared to in VR. The Air Hammer simply dumps out enough dps up close that it works, the other two AI guns don't. A purely AI ESF going against a purely AA Max is a pretty balanced fight. Again, I'd love to see AA Maxes be more versatile, similar to how an AI-gun ESF can run Coyotes, so I'm not saying things are perfect, but the relationship those two units have is in a pretty good place.

What is - the fact that Rotory and Mustang do both types of damage - but Max can only protect against one at a time? Why is that statement false?

What has the rotary got to do with it. A full health max still dies from 20 direct body shots from the Banshee (and will succumb to less if some of those rounds land headshots - which is actually quite likely given ESF typically attack from above).

Even with fully certed ordnance armour, that still means the Max can take up to 75 splash damage per round, which is more than enough to kill it from full health in less than 2 seconds, without a landing single direct hit.

The reality is - a Banshee run on a Max is likely to land a combination of direct and indirect his, so even if you only land 1/3rd of the clip as direct hits - that still puts the Max down to less than 900 health.

That would then leave the remaining 23 rounds in the clip to cause splash damage. Those 23 rounds have the potential to deal up to 1725 damage even if the Max has fully certed ordnance armour - more than double what is needed to finish it off.

I bring up the Banshee vs Rotary because a Rotary run has to be near-perfect to kill a Max, just to illustrate how relatively harmless direct damage is on the Banshee.

As for added splash damage, yes, it's up to 75 within .5 meters, but it quickly falls off to 10 damage at 2 meters, which is a lot of what you're going to get against a decently positioned moving target outside of 50 or 80 meters on live.

I auraxed the mossy, and as much as I hate it I've got around 25 hours in a burster Max. I really have put in my time on both sides, and I still say that you either have to be terribly out of position or completely unaware to die as an ordnance Max by a single AI gun in this game's current state.

I think the Air Hammer is the best AI gun for Max killing, but I still wouldn't put money on a Reaver against a burster Max who's paying attention, not without perfect cover which lets the ESF pop out in hover already within range. And the poor PPA..... that gun just doesn't stand a chance, but that's what it gets for its monster blase radius.

So much ignorance here.

I'm still waiting for videos of ANYBODY killing dual burster max with an ESF.

Crickets.

Still waiting for ANYONE to kill a skyguard with 100 or more kills with an ESF.

Crickets.

Still waiting. And always will be. Because it doesnt EVER happen.

Prove me wrong. Please. I'm dying to learn this master secret to killing bursters and skyguards with a solo ESF.

But no one will because if they make such claims they are lying.

Video proof or it didnt happen.

Heck, you don't even have to post vids of you owning a max with a solo ESF, you could even post vids of your max getting owned by the solo ESF.

So because the majority of players don't record their play time - that counts as it not happening.

I tend to not get killed by Banshee or Mustang mossies all that much because I have learnt to stick very close to spawn when they are around and duck straight back behind the shield as soon as they open fire. I learnt this after being farmed relentlessly by them - but even so I have probably been killed a couple of times in the last few weeks if I was a bit slow reacting.

I tend to only play AA max when air is trolling. It probably represents only 5% of my actual play time - and since I have learnt to stick close to spawn when playing AA max, the chances of me being killed "on camera" are even remoter still even if I was recording. I'd have to record probably hundreds of hours of footage just to provide the 'proof' you are asking.

Sorry - but it's more than a little unreasonable to expect people to be able to magically produce such footage after only a couple of days of this thread being live. When I am playing AA Max - I don't automatically record the footage 'just in case some dude on the-internets might not believe me if I get killed by a Banshee mossie at some random point in the future.

I'd show you evidence from my killboard - only it doesn't allow you to go far enough back and doesnt show what class you were playing anyway.

Video or it didnt happen. If its so easy and it happens all the time, you should have no problem getting the video.

I'll check back tomorrow. Surely one of the 20 people claiming ESF wtf faceroll skyguards and ESF can get a video.

Any decent nvidia card will record video with shadowplay.

LOL I'd have to record hundreds of hours of gameplay. So you just admitted it doesn't happen.

Not at all.

If you ask for footage of somebody being killed whilst playing as a specific class, with a specific load-out, particularly one that isn't played all that often, by another specific vehicle again with a specific loadout - how many hours of gameplay would you consider reasonable to capture the requested event - especially when said person has learned to do their best to avoid dying whilst in the specific class and whilst being hunted by somebody in that specific vehicle packing that specific loadout?

Do you really think it's reasonable for somebody to be able to randomly capture and post footage of a specific event like that within 2 days of the thread going live? Especially from somebody who doesn't routinely record their gameplay. I don't record and store all my gameplay "just in case some random on the internet doesn't believe me when I make a post relaying my experiences within the game"

Could you immediately post a video example of a specific class packing a specific weapon killing you whilst you were playing as a specific class packing a specific weapon (for example - could you post a vid within the next two days showing a VS stalker packing a Spiker, killing you as a TR HA packing T16 Rhino.....if you aren't able to do this, does that mean it never happens?).

I have been killed by TR heavies packing T7 Chainguns loads of times. You know how many videos I have to prove it. None. By your argument "video or it never happened"...........I must be lying

ok - how about this uploaded on the 8th Sep (not my vid - this was posted by somebody else on the noob unfriendliness thread).



Full health infantry (NC Heavy I believe) taken out by a Banshee with no assist from anyone else. I timed the kill at 1/4 speed from the moment the character started taking damage - to the point they died. It took 1.75 seconds, which translates to a TTK of 0.44 seconds at full speed.

Now admittedly this isn't a Max, but a Max only has double the health pool of a heavy, so it would be reasonable to extrapolate the TTK.