Better than walls: a creative take on aircraft in PS2

The basic problem is that instead of the Mosquito and Reaver from PS1 (seperating A2A and A2G attack).

The turned the ESF in the hybrid of both, making them the top A2A predator and the top A2G predator, even in the same loadout.

After that it was all downhill.




I can't see how they can fix this mistake without introducing a proper Air Superiority fighter or just doing what they are doing (more AA and shields).

How about they make a new small A2A craft for the NC and VS while implenting a larger A2G craft for the TR so that they can seperate A2A and A2G.

For the NC make the reaver an A2G varriant and add a A2A faster moving Fighter jet type.
http://4.bp.************/-KphQ_NIZ2_8/UGOW1QcH-PI/AAAAAAAAAwo/vj8Y4QWeb2k/s1600/7-Futuristic fighter jet.jpg
It's sleeker design and smaller size would make it a harder target to hit than the reaver, it would have a higher speed since A2A should be faster than A2G. It would only have A2A options with certs geared towards fighting aircraft while evading locks with the already implented flares.

For the VS make the Scythe their A2G option as it has a fairly bulky shape when flying overhead and make their A2A option something like this.
http://digital-art-gallery.com/oid/...i_vehicle_nazis_picture_image_digital_art.jpg
Same as with the NC A2A option however this sports where the Gravity control hover capabilities can come from.

For the TR make the Mosquito their A2A option since it is already so tiny maybe boost the speed since A2A options should be fater than A2G options IMHO, and make their A2G Option something along these lines.
http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/855/arterburnp2finalrender0.png/?sa=0
This doesn't actually need to be monstrously huge just larger than the mosquito and would sport the surface area for A2G options and a wider area to hit since Mosquitoes are already a nightmare to hit and they don't need something smaller than those.

This just a suggestion so that A2A and A2G options can be seperated from eachother. It won't fix the Airbullies issue but atleast if A2G targets are bullying the ground they won't have the capabilities to fight off a dedicated A2A craft.

I don't see the point in reducing ammo capacity; you're just taking a LOT of fun out of flying without giving anything back. Maybe if they could one shot infantry/2 shot with spash and 5 shot tanks, that'd make sense, but right now the pods are a weapon that depends on being able to shoot a lot of them.

You also talk about reducing the amount of landing pads, essentially making camping in random spots with no supply lines of your own more rewarding.

And there is the reduction in flak damage which would do absolutely nothing; it'd just mean that you'd need one more burster to do the same job, and getting one more burster is easy.


So, your suggestions would make flying very tedious and reduce it's ability to do CAS, while making AA more annoying and not helping A2A at all. I don't like that.

What we need is making bursters unavailable at sunderers and that you can't transport them with galaxies. Flying would be a LOT less tedious with no random bursters around and then AND you'd get CAS in battles working together with the ground to take out AA while making Skyguards with their mobility more important. Also a reduction in lockon tracking ability. Then you could talk about balancing it completely.

Basically flat out nerf AA ?

Good post.
I'd like to adress your points:

1. True, both aircrafts are different, and it's much easier to hit Libs.
Flak will hit more often, and long range shots aside, it's balanced by just having more health. When a ESF needs to close in 100m to properly unload pods the Liberator stays at 300. Overall I say balanced.
At longer ranges, Libs get hit and ESFs don't which can somehow be an issue.

2. It always depends of how many aircraft is in the air. Once again, the less aircraft, the easier it is to AA.
Shooting aircraft at 800m takes a fair ammount of leading, concentration and wasting ammo. While I can afford to shoot a lone reaver in the sunset, when 5 mossies are buzzing around in a big battle, the effective AA range is usually limited to what you can kill.
ESFs are in relative safety at longer ranges by just going up and down.

3. Agreed.
Thus my suggestion to add counters with Ammo management.

I didn't mention nerfing AA at all. Just reducing damage/increasing spread or anything like that would be stupid and not fix any of the current problems.

Pilots don't have problems with 1 burster, it's 3 or 4. Making it take 1 more burster won't change anything, in return for making flying a horrible experience, more so than it is now.

I don't like most of it, but I will say, as a way of fixing the Liberator, the Nanite-based Overheating thing is inspired.

I also wouldn't mind seeing it as a way of balancing a VASTLY IMPROVED version of Rocketpods. One clip, on the other hand, is an absolute joke and I wouldn't tolerate until tanks are made to only carry 7 shots, infantry get a single backup clip and Burster MAXs only get one clip too.

It would simply make flying even more boring than it currently is. Constantly leaving the fight is not fun. Infantry wouldn't want to do it. Tanks don't like doing it (though they have to do it less than air at least), and it's already a constant chore when flying. Changing it from a constant need to repair to a need to sit there and wait for a rearm every time you've fired off one salvo (which has, inevitably) been denied by the hugely flawed projectile mechanics/hit recog... Nah, I'd quit immediately. I already don't use them as they're simply not as useful as extended AB - for them to be worth using, they need to have more tactical utility than these... But more importantly, right now someone needs to find a way to make air as a whole less irritating to the user, not more.

Absolutely love it

Well currently ESFs are not invited to the party that is big fights. Too much AA there and you get killed instantly.

But lets break down the problem:
Why is there a need for AA maxes?
Rocketpods is the main problem, isnt it? When you give a vehicle a weapon that works well against anything, then the next logical step is giving infantry something that can counter it... If there were no rocketpods, there would be no need for AA maxes.
What weapon should we give the ESF instead of pods? Well pods is a low skill-ceiling weapon: You point your crosshair at something and the rocket flies in that direction.

Unguided emp bombs would be pretty cool: Massive damage on direct hits but higher skill ceiling since you have to take into account stuff like trajectory, distance, speed. Don't know how it would work out; as many things, it sounds good on paper.
And it needs to be emp so it doesn't damage infantry.

I'd always opt for a more specialized approach to vehicle design, like they've tried to do already, but haven't succeeded doing.

Air <> Air > Tanks <> Infantry <> Infantry
Dunno how that would work, but I'd test it out if I were in charge...

Well... enough of my incoherent thoughts.

I understand where you're coming from; as availability means reliability and we're observing that with the HORDE of Strikers being used. In PS1, Galaxies and Sunderers had 2 MAX slots.

But there would be too much of a difference in availability between ESF and MAX; remember than ESFs can fly individually, and they can fly FAST. Setting up heavy logistics behind bringing a MAX to the battle would probably decrease the number of MAX units but on the other hand drastically increase the number of Lock-ons, which is already easier to spawn AND require a nerf to compensate, resulting in a global nerf for AA.


I don't think Bursters are bad by definition.

I like these "bubble" forts, but I'd like to have fun flying as well.

My Summation of the main problem:
Air vehicles can't make a big difference quickly, which means they need to spend more time at any one location.
This feels like a "bully" tactic to infantry. Since the plane doesn't have a frequent reason to leave, the infantry will either have to kill the plane or leave the area.

I like your ideas for managing these problems with ammo. Lowering the amount of ammo an aircraft can hold would give them a good reason to spend less time over a target. Increasing the speed at which a Liberator can fire is a excellent addition to this idea. It would allow them to make a battlefield impact in a closer relation to their cost and team-work needs, while preventing them from "bullying" anyone for too long.
I'd suggest that another way to do this could be to increase the reload time according to how many shots were fired. From reloading after 1 shot being like a Dalton reload, but after 10-16 being something silly like 30 seconds. ROF could increase during firing as well, to prevent the need to loiter.


My main concern with using aircraft in Planetside is the lack of easy communication. There's just no easy way for ESF/Liberators to know where they are needed. They mostly have to fly around, look for AA to avoid, then try to find someone outside of AA areas to kill.
I'd like to see a Leader cert tree dedicated to helping pilots. Maybe placing meaningful aircraft specific information on all pilot's maps.
Maybe just giving squad/platoon leaders the option to designate bombing targets and approach paths that all squad/platoon pilots can see on their maps.

I don't think people have a problem with getting killed from the air, it's part of the battle. What people HATE is that an ESF can loiter over a battlefield and rain continuous death. From the ESF side, you NEED a lot of rockets because it will take two volleys to kill a tank. Make the air weapons powerful, but very limited in supply. One load of rockets, where 3/4 of the load will kill a tank if you hit with every one, sounds good. Cut the gun rounds in half and increase their damage maybe 10-20%. So you get one good pass, do your damage, then you have to exit the battle and come back if you want to do it again. In short, I agree with the OP.

There's a lot of other options other than bursters, including Skyguards.
Nerfing AA availability wouldn't allow planes to play bully on small engagements, but it would give A2G a big space in battles, since the enemy couldn't just spawn another burster.

But it's quite a complex issue. I think making bursters less available would be a good start, and then see what happens then.

Agreed that comms are lacking:
The colored smokes with limited render range do not cut it.

Pilots need info directly on their HUD


And most importantly, scouting in the game is limited.
Adding a UAV of sorts would definitely help.
http://img543.imageshack.us/img543/2448/sundycom2.jpg

Play World of Tanks. It's actually a vehicles game. This one is actually an infantry game, otherwise the capture points would be capturable by vehicles, and the priority target would be the tech plant not every sunderer

I actually play this game for the ESF combat

Also, even with World of Tanks, there are too few vehicle games. Infantry FPS are beyond count, thousands of games. There's no reason to make another one

Except that it's how war works, a dozen tanks for every hundred soldiers, only a handful of fighters too

And in real war infantry don't get to respawn every 10 seconds after death

And jets cannot be spawned by every infantryman at will

I agree that real war examples should be kept out of game balance discussions. How it is in real war is irrelevant to PlanetSide 2

my point is that this is based off of warfare. So it makes sense that vehicles have their place, rather than being a kill all.