(Tank & AA Discussion) So I was watching Server Smash...

Discussion in 'PlanetSide 2 Gameplay Discussion' started by Alarox, Apr 7, 2014.

  1. Alarox

    And I noticed something. In every match it was just Infantry + Aircraft. There were Sunderers of course, and there were some Skyguards occasionally. However, tanks were almost nonexistent.

    The matches all played out similarly. One huge air battle at the beginning, quick capping/stalling of the first few bases, and then a struggle back and forth down both lanes as well as a consistent battle for air superiority.

    I personally used an MBT and a Lightning at points during the Waterson v Mattherson match. I also payed close attention to all the tanks being used while watching the other matches.

    There were only two points in every match in which tanks were useful.
    1.) A Skyguard posting up in a good location.
    2.) AV tanks protecting/destroying Sunderers when both air forces are entirely focused on gaining air superiority.

    If your side had air superiority, your Liberators and A2G ESFs could move quickly from battle to battle while killing the enemy Sunderers. If your side didn't have air superiority, your MBTs and Lightnings would rapidly get destroyed one after another. Meaning, the only times tanks ended up being useful were when air wasn't a factor, which were few and far between.

    Now, here's what I was about to post:

    But then a thought occurred to me.

    Is that all true, or was AA just vastly underused during these matches? What if faction A used only half the aircraft they originally planned, and instead had the other half of those players use Bursters and Skyguards while faction B simply used all aircraft? Which faction would be better off, faction A or faction B?

    If faction A's plan would be superior, then tanks are actually quite important as general force multiplier (like aircraft except with immunity to AA) and as a counter to AA.

    What do you guys think?
  2. vsae

    I think some people just prefer to counter air with air.
    I think that air is generally more fun, esp with absence of stupid amounts of nerdraging lockon kids.
    Skyguard/bursters is not fun.
    • Up x 2
  3. Alarox

    Very true, although during Server Smash it was all about efficiency rather than fun. Which is my concern. Is it really just more efficient to go infantry + aircraft and completely ignore AA and tanks as legitimate options?
  4. FaLI3N

    There is nothing fun about driving a skyguard or using a burster max and all skill-based counters are being nerfed. The point is moot because nobody is going to regularly pull a skyguard pack in live unless you make an outfit comprised purely of disillusioned tankers with enough built-up anger to completely ruin their own fun in order to stop some flyboys and even then the aircraft will just go somewhere else to farm.
    • Up x 2
  5. vsae

    Yes. Mass skyguards would be ineffective against mass liberators. If air is skilled, it will always outplay the ground. Furthermore, a sudden change of tactic, like to drop all the air and just pick HEAT tanks would totally destroy skyguard team in seconds.
    Aircrafts are just way more versatily, more mobile and perform better in small fights.
  6. Nody

    Faction A would still be better off because Air can only be properly countered by Air were as tanks can be countered by Air, ground and tanks. Only need to look at how games go in general today; I was in a 48+ vs 48+ battle with multiple Bursters (5+) and HA (5+) and both Libs and ESF still kept on pounding the ground forces (in case of ESF having to AB away afterwards). Any attempt to pull armor = instantly destroyed while their air could keep on having a free play because as far as Air and SoE is concerned the only thing to kill Air should be Air (which is BS if you then let Air hard counter everything else but nothing else except AIr is allowed to hard counter air).
    • Up x 2
  7. Haquim

    Just out of curiosity, what servers do you guys play on?

    Because my experience on Cobalt says: If there are more than 24 people in the hex, at least one out of three lightnings is a skyguard.
    I am an allrounder, although I enjoy flying quite a lot, but with 2 skyguards the air is similar to a pain field. Unless some dedicated air-outfit brings in a whole squad of airunits of course.

    Addendum: Sometimes I see skyguards and bursters trying to take a skywhale down while they are under attack by ESFs. If your AA is insufficient you might want to check their targeting priorities. Bonus tip: This "Server Smash" sounds like an organised event, three skyguards in TS or something similar will have little trouble bringing down libs. ESFs will propably not even realise what hit them. Assuming the communication and coordination is good....
  8. Aesir

    My take is that you always want more, good pilots in the Air than your enemy. However, ~2 Skyguards can provide a nice support for your Pilots if you drag the enemy over those Skyguards.

    As for the usage of Tanks ... in those matches Tanks are nothing more than consumables to do one thing. They are an expensive asset to kill ground Vehicles. But what ground Vehicles are there? Other than Sundy's probably arranged in defensive setups ... or Skyguards, which will try to not move any further up as they really need, there is nothing for Tanks to do.

    It's probably cheaper and more effective to deal with Sundy's by the use of Air or Infantry or both combined. As for Skyguards ... they can easily be pressured off the field by one guy being dropped in the middle of nowhere with an AV turret in hands or by your Sundy's or when you do have Air Superiority, Air can probably deal with a low number of Skyguards.

    Tanks, as something you want to keep on the field, serve no purpose important enough to justify their usage in any number greater than maybe two, you are probably better off just spending your mechanized resources on more Sundy's. And the only reason you ever would want an MBT is as a distraction to tie up some enemy forces for a short duration, while the rest of your guys do something else.

    General point is that MBTs are mostly useless in any organized battle were the goal is to capture the base, instead of farming. Air is important because of it's agility and good weapons/utility/suppression on some platforms to do key things. Infantry does the majority of all the work.
    • Up x 3
  9. Haquim

    5 dual bursters and 5 lock-on HAs? Dude I took down half a dozen ESFs and two Libs in a single life as HA, assissted only by another HA and a single D-Burster, sometimes one of the towers AA guns! And thats only the kills, not counting assissts. (Happened on monday)
    If ESFs survive that much flak you should check if your mates aren't either:
    - Using dumbfires and AI weaponry
    - Or firing on totally different directions at individual targets.
    Because thats a riddiculous amount that would even bring skywhales down easily.


    If neither is the case - dude bring me a vid of that. I like flying and I know for a fact that no esf would survive that if it gets spotted closer than 100 metres.
    • Up x 1
  10. Flashtirade

    I think it could be.

    Decent AA coverage requires at least one Burster MAX or one Skyguard.
    While MAXes can be toted around in Sunderers, be revived indefinitely, and can switch loadouts when the enemy air presence is gone, they're not very maneuverable on their own and require a lot of support to keep alive and well. It's also not particularly exciting to be the one MAX on AA duty when there's no air, he could be contributing more directly to a base assault/defense by killing meatbags.
    Skyguards are fantastic AA but that's about it, they can't contribute at all if the enemy doesn't field aircraft since they can't switch loadouts. Also when they blow up, there's no bringing them back.

    Aircraft/Sunderer/Infantry has the benefit of being very mobile while fielding heavy firepower.
    A sunderer by itself is not very fast, but it only takes one to move platoons by AMS. Multiple AMSes also allow the infantry attack and defense paths. They're pretty heavily armored and almost always supported, as they're the number 2 requirement for base interaction (attack or defense requires people to actually be there, so they're number 1).
    Aircraft are extremely mobile, specialize in fast and hard strikes, and are difficult to counter directly. You can shoo away a good pilot, but he'll be back. Maybe he'll be back with friends. Concentrating on AA consumes manpower that could be used on base interaction or getting allied air up to counter the enemies' and then groundpound them.
    Infantry are the core part of any attack so they must always be present. However, they've got access to powerful AA and AV weaponry and stack very well, making them able to adapt to any threat on the fly.

    Tanks in a competitive setting have two targets: Sunderers and other tanks. However, infantry and aircraft can shoot down sunderers just fine without any of the downsides of tanks (mobility, mech resources that's not being spent on sunderers, vulnerability to aircraft).

    Mind you this is from a competitive standpoint. Live is different and tanks may have their place there.
    • Up x 4
  11. Alarox

    Very true. We used this tactic during the server smash and I saw it used constantly during the other matches.

    Although, at one point during the match I was rolling around in my Skyguard with another Skyguard focus firing with me. We were supporting our pilots who were fighting above. Two Liberators and an ESF decided that we're annoying. We died.
    • Up x 5
  12. Aesir


    The issue about ground based AA, you do not have enough people to build up a absolute Air Defense in a CC match or a Server Smash. You can't just waste a ton of people on AA, you need the majority of your Players as Infantry, fighting for Capture points.

    On the live Server this is a different topic, because there are more people, meaning you will hit a critical number of AA at some point ... but under limited numbers, ground based AA is mainly ineffective compared to actually having your own Air taking care of things.

    The single purpose of any other asset that is not Infantry ... is to support said Infantry as best they can. Tanks do not provide anything remotely useful to Infantry. Air can atleast scout, can put pressure on other support assets like Sundy's and make the enemy pull something to counter it. Which costs you manpower on the capture points.

    Tanks can be dealt with by everybody, you don't need to greatly swap out anything, because your squads will probably have AV weaponry with them in the first place because of MAXs.

    It concerns me that SOE is deciding to nerf Tanks even more, they already serve no purpose for actually playing the objective of the game ...

    (Cert farming is not an objective in the game ... )
    • Up x 9
  13. Naterian

    Faction B would be better off.

    Mattherson vs Waterson

    Mattherson won the air game because we had more air, Waterson won the ground game (presumably) because they had more ground. Aircraft can't capture points and once an area becomes heavily contested it becomes a no fly zone anyway. We didn't do too much to support our ground because of lack of communication and many of us would have been more help on the ground.

    How it works is: The larger the battle the less effective air becomes. If you are serious about wanting to hold or capture an area then use ground, it has far more staying power.

    You can still make air work though if you are organized enough, it's just much more difficult.

    • Up x 1
  14. Qaz


    1. Bursters and skyguards are extremely immobile. You set up and you get a defensive AA bubble. Everything outside of the bubble is out of your reach. Repositioning is both extremely slow and dangerous (because both sundies and SGs can be ganked easily by infantry, tank, and air based AV).

    2. Your own air will be wiped out by theirs easily and consistently, as they'll be heavily outnumbered.

    3. Your AA is useless beyond being AA, while the ESF/libs are massive force multipliers against ground, air and infantry. So, pulling AA over air to deal with air means that you're gimping yourself quite severely.

    So, in my opinion side A would not do particularly well. They'd be too reliant on static defenses, they'd have no air, and they'd be bombed heavily at all times.

    The bottom line is that air is that dominant for a good reason. Things are a bit different on live because battles stagnate more and there can be massive amounts of AA, but if people started switching from tanks as standard means of camping a spawn in to libs, tanking as a gameplay style would become way way harder. Luckily, this shift hasn't been happening on miller yet though.
    • Up x 1
  15. Kriegson

    Right now organized aircraft > organized anything. Evidently they are working on some AA weapons (Massive lockon pods looks like?) but imo we need a large skill based weapon for MBT's that doesn't step on the toes of the skyguard but rather compliments lockons and flak via high burst DMG with a slow skill based shot.
    • Up x 1
  16. Haquim


    "FLAK, high burst, slow skill based shot". Sounds like a WWII 88mm FLAK to me. But I doubt the ESFs would be happy if MBTs get a weapon that is actually designed (as opposed to, ahem, repurposed :rolleyes: ) to OHK them :confused:
  17. Kriegson

    Give it a very distinct noise while traveling and I would think probably 80% damage to an ESF or so based on composite armor or not. Not sure about how the velocity should work...maybe a rocket assist that makes it go exponentially faster?

    At any rate, it needs to be more effective against larger aircraft, less effective against smaller agile craft (Due to them being able to dodge and a smaller target).
  18. lothbrook

    The solution has nothing to do with tanks or G2A, aircraft need to be pushed into more defined roles like tanks have been, no more libs and ESFs that can wreck everything on the ground and air with a single load out. This way tanks become more viable because the number of aircraft that can actually kill them becomes much smaller otherwise their air just gets overwhelmed by a more dedicated A2A force.

    Another issue is the effectiveness of Infantry AA and AV, why pull a skyguard or a tank when you can get a bunch of free lock on launchers and aim them at the sky, or an AV turret and pound tanks into dust. Theres also the issue of what to do with your skyguard/tank when the vehicles and air are all dead, aircraft start killing infantry, and infantry start capping points, and bases continue to lock tanks out more and more.
    • Up x 1
  19. Slandebande

    I agree with what Qaz said, and I also think that unless the side fielding AA only has to defend one single base, they would be at a disadvantage. Granted, MAX'es could perhaps work, as they are easily able to change load-out, but using Skyguards and the like would simply mean the enemies aircraft would be able to out-maneuver your aircraft, and strike the other bases / Sundy positions without AA. I think AA is fine when you only need to defend one base, but as soon as mobility comes in play (via more than 1 base being contested), I would say Aircraft would dictate the fights over AA.
  20. Flag

    Not on a permanent basis at any rate.

    But there are times when it happens, and it's not exactly fun for ground.
    I have more fun being shot at by flak when in my Liberator than getting bombed by air in my Mag.
    • Up x 2