Standardize ESF Hitboxes

Fair enough. I don't agree, because asymmetrical balance is incredibly difficult to actually pull off and SOE have spent a lot of effort normalizing ESFs already, but the important thing is some sort of balance.

Given that faction nose gun traits are balanced against other nose guns traits, and performance stats against performance stats, yet the Scythe also has a hitbox advantage, do you have any suggestions for asymmetrical advantages for the Reaver and Mosquito? Abilities perhaps?

I fly all three and my stats on all my characters look pretty much the same. I just generally will avoid hover duels vs scythes and I try very hard to keep Reavers from getting too close. When I am playing Vanu I do my best to try and force ranged hoverduels since I know I have a slight advantage there. I don't get to fly Reaver as much these days but when I do I try to keep the fights as close as possible where its guns have the advantage.

Easier said than done in all of those fighters, but that is the interesting part of asymmetrical.

A large reason this has been and will be an issue until they are changed is due to the fact that there is such a large gap between the relative sizes compared to every other balanced aspect of the three ESFs.

It is the most noticeable, outstanding imbalance between the ESFs; no other trait is so largely differing than hitboxes. The glaring fact that these relative sizes exist will downplay ANY and ALL other imbalances until the are brought to a smaller ratio of deviation. This is a fact; and no matter how much you debate it, this will not change until 1) the ratios are brought much closer in-line to one another or 2) another ratio must be brought to levels that outweigh hitbox difference ratios.

Show me what other difference ratio between ESFs that is as large as the hitbox ratios are. Second in line right now would be Pitching and Banking Velocity Conservation due to the large ratio differences at ~ over 25-50% differences plus. Third in line may be Rotary Burst (without factoring in reloads or magazine dump times) at ~ under 18-20% difference maximum (but there are many pros and cons to having this burst/ not having as as much burst, as well as the Vortek being a major Outlying factor with a small mag size).

Other aspects of ESFs are much closer to being numerically similar ratio-wise; as for also the argument against normalization, should we revert the nose gun normalization so that we are more asymmetric?

Easy way of doing it? Yeah, standardize the hitboxes to be the same area on every single ESF. The Reaver would be what it'd best fit, and it'd just be a case of applying that to the other ones.

Of course though, that kinda breaks the idea of them being empire specific... All that'd be different would be its cosmetics then. Still a valid argument to be had here.

If you are going to do that, just make all aircraft common pool. Defeats the point of empire specific entirely though as you stated. They are NOT supposed to all be equal. They are supposed to have relative strengths and weaknesses.

If the traits of your empire's weapons don't suit you - consider changing factions. I watched these kind of debates turn World of Warcraft and just about every other faction based PvP game into vanilla mush. It seems to be the fate of all PvP games when players take them too seriously and forget to enjoy the nature of asymmetrical warfare.

If one empire is getting statistically beat by another then adjust until that is fixed... but PLEASE do not adjust by making them identical. If the Scythe is winning too much in hover duels... slightly cripple some other aspect of its performance to offset that - OR give other factions ESFs more options they can cert into that is a hard counter to dueling Scythes (such as increased upthrust or increased bullet velocity).

Well said.

I was thinking much along the same lines. SOE have downplayed most aspects of faction differentiation. Now, we could discuss whether this was the right direction for PS2, but that would be a whole different topic.

In short, I take the opinion that asymmetrical balance would have had to be focused on from the outset for it to work in PS2. Now, the only option left is to rely on small differences in stats and/or looks, sounds and feel of the weapons to give each faction a flavor.

Anything that sticks its head out too far from this is inherently complained about more than other factional differences. For example, the NC complain they don't have longer ranged weapons on their MAXes, and the VS/TR complain they don't have closer range weapons. This does not mean giving shotguns to VS/TR, just weapons that fill that gap.

Put it this way, given how close the ESFs are currently the hitbox becomes an oddity. You cannot justify such a large difference by saying "faction traits" when the majority of differences are very minor and anything that stands out has tended to be reduced. The precedent is balance through closely matched factions.


Even so, I can understand when people are part of the camp that want balance through more factional flavor, just as I understand when people want to iron out the biggest differences. [That's not to say everything must be common pool, as people are clearly happy when they're close enough so as to make no difference.]

However, it does not make sense to me that the current situation is desirable to anyone - those who simply say "no change is necessary". So these players want very similarly performing weapons, but varied hitboxes that clearly favor one side? Even if hitboxes were the primary method to define factions, each should have the smallest aircraft from a particular angle.

First let's agree the ESFs are not balanced, then we can part ways on how to solve it.


The example of giving Reavers significantly faster velocity to make it easier to hit a smaller target is a good one. That would be the asymmetrical solution. Of course, you'll encounter those who look at the nose guns alone and say "NC is clearly OP".

you would have a hard time convincing soe

That the Vortek Rotary on a Reaver compares to the Stock weapons of the other two ESFs?

What happens when instead you look at all Stock noseguns? What happens when you look at all Rotaries? What happens when you look at the M18 Rotary that under-performs greatly compared to all systems in statistics? What happens when you look at the M20 Mustang that under-performs greatly compared to the other Stock noseguns? What happens when you don't take averages, but top or mid-top tier players, who, the Air game is ruled by? What happens when... so many other variables could be inserted into this sentence.

Ahh this discussion again... nostalgia.

FYI: the total coverages are:
Reaver = 22 x 39 x 13 = 11154
Mosquito = 18 x 36 x 11 = 7128
Scythe = 14 x 42 x 8 = 4704

that's a big difference from any angle

go look for yourself, you get select q4 kpu for br75+ iirc

vortek seems to be the only rotary that gets better stats than the faction default, which is why i picked it there

No. Terrible idea.

The reaver has the vortex rotary and the strongest afterburners allong with great reversibility. The mossie has the best top stock speed and the banshee (enough said).

The cythe is fine were it is leave it alone and stop trying to Nerf the VS further. SOE gave the cythe its thin profile for that reason! The cythe has the thinest frame but the longest body making it the easiest ESF to hit with flak. Please get some some decent airtime in a cythe before suggesting ideas like this.

Great, we are going to discuss stats, ok here we go.

Lets get the more up to date stat averages please?

This page as of 10/07/2014


TR just shy in there I guess, minus for infantry farming.

Just one thing before jumping on it: ESF are meant to primarily be fighters and they should be balanced towards that way.

And there you can clearly see the Saron ranks higher in total kills as an A2A gun, by a considerable margin.

The Vortek gets the highest A KPU (4.18) against the 2nd highest one, which is the Saron's 3.96, followed by Needler's 3.82, but in total average kill it falls short by almost 1000, even higher to the Vortek. The Air Hammer is just in there but now its unclear if it should be considered, since it has been stated it is an "ANTI AIRCRAFT" gun on a official post, but it still gets a lot of infantry stats; grey area there I guess.

Funny to see the Airhammer having absolutely no problems with Infantry Farming considering the PPA and Banshee stats (which is ridiculously high), but also getting a 1.27 air vehicle KPU, which stat-wise it means its pretty much an intermediate between A2A and AI, or at least almost there, already makes me think we should consider it.

Now to practice:

We all know the Reaver's Rotary Vortek is capable of one clipping fairly easily (I felt it.), not a surprise its up there. But in Average Kills the Saron is the highest among A2A stats. Considering its accurate, has a very high velocity and average clip size for an A2A gun; proves once more the Scythe reunites the optimal fighter stats.

-> All that allied to the smallest Hitbox (which matters a lot from a A2A standpoint).

And the Mossie? I guess its just a half-baked "average of averages" thats only good for infantry farming from what I'm seeing.

Ugh.

--

edit:

Oh, High Magazine (locust) Class:

VS also ranks higher in average kills with NC ranking higher (4.1) on Air vehicle KPU against VS 2nd place 3.49.

Wow man you are right, 25% higher burst DPS, best afterburner, and fastest overall speed aren't advantages.

I'm sorry but you are quite honestly the most ******** individual posting in this thread, and that is saying a lot considering this thread best serves as toilet paper.

Reaver is the best ESF for ganking and for group fights. Scythe is the worst for group fights due to the overall lower DPS, lower speed, and the ultra-****** top and bottom circular hitboxes.

I agree 100%

Yet people from other factions want the cythe nerfed further when most have probably never even spent decent time in one.

Gawd I can see how biast this argument is going to be.

SOE lock this thread please.

Your attitude doesn't do anything to help you.

Nice strawman argument.

I say the Reaver DOES have advantages to it's weapons and performance, but they are matched by the Scythe's advantages to it's weapons and performance.

You pretend I said the Reaver has no advantages.


The picture you paint because it suits your position to only list half the information rather than the full picture:

Reaver - higher DPS, best afterburner, fastest overall speed
Scythe - Smaller hitbox

And claim that this is fair.


Now let's list all the tradeoffs to provide a proper comparison, (I'll quote Repin on this):

Note - you 2 disagree on which has the fastest top speed, Reaver or Mossy. I thought it was Mossy but, really, the difference is probably minimal and doesn't change much.

Reaver: Best DPS, Best Vertical Thrust, Best Afterburners, Best Range Damage Dropoffs.
Scythe: Best Bullet velocity, Best Banking and Pitching Speed conservation, Best Air Brakes, Best Overall Hitbox, Best Reload Speed, Best Idle Decent.

Okay, so how much does it take to even out a 60% larger hitbox? Let's go with the DPS and afterburner, as you implied this was even. Remember, the hitbox differential is more than twice the size of the DPS differential so that won't even things out alone.

Reaver: Best DPS, Best Afterburners
=
Scythe: Best hitbox

That leaves us with:

Reaver: Best Vertical Thrust, Best Range Damage Dropoffs
Scythe: Best Bullet velocity, Best Banking and Pitching Speed conservation, Best Air Brakes, Best Reload Speed, Best Idle Decent

Looks to me like the Scythe has a couple advantages more than it needs. 3 performance advantages vs 1 for Reaver, and 2 weapon advantages vs 1 for the Reaver.


Finally, let's take a look at the group fight differences you described. The Scythe only suffers a maximum 17% penalty to its hitbox (I know, it looks larger because it fills so much area, but most of that is empty space as the blades are thin). Furthermore, that's against the Mosquito which has a nice overall hitbox anyway.

If we compare the Reaver's top/bottom to the Scythe's, it's only 8% difference. So that 8% in one situation is somehow a fair trade for 60% in another?

Plus, if you do any sort of turning during a group fight the Reaver will actually be the slowest and most vulnerable during those maneuvers due to the banking speed penalty, where the Scythe, again, comes out better.


It's not like anyone here is even asking for massive sweeping changes. The Reaver could have a 25% larger front hitbox instead of 60%. Or it could have faster rounds to make up for shooting a harder to hit target.

Fine tuning balance is always controversial.

Best to compare like weapons. We wouldn't compare a close range infantry weapon with long range ones.

Using the same site:

4302 - Saron Laser Cannon | Aircraft KPU | Daily Average: 3.81
4900 - M18 Needler | Aircraft KPU | Daily Average: 3.72
4600 - M20 Mustang | Aircraft KPU | Daily Average: 3.33

4604 - Vortek Rotary | Aircraft KPU | Daily Average: 4.09
4911 - M18 Rotary | Aircraft KPU | Daily Average: 2.94
4304 - Hailstorm Turbo Laser | Aircraft KPU | Daily Average: 2.87

Not that I like to put too much emphasis on stats, SOE have far more information than us. Even so, it at least appears that the NC stock nose gun is under performing, as are the TR Rotary and VS Hailstorm.

Personally, I'd like to think as many weapons as possible should be equally competitive and something is wrong if they're not.

A large total difference, yeah.

When you do the Hitbox calculations, remember, many of these models that were used for pixel comparison do not include the variable wings/thrusters for the Reaver or the variable thrusters for the Mosquito. These change depending on your flight mode, effectively increasing both forward, rear, top, and bottom (even sides to some degree) hitboxes when at certain flight modes and reducing them when they are in the other mode.

For example, Reaver wings and thrusters are flat with minimal forward and rear profiles when in forward flight, reducing the frontal hitbox when moving. When hovering, the wings and thrusters flip to a vertical position, greatly increasing frontal and rear hitbox sizes while reducing top and bottom sizes significantly. This makes ganking a moving Reaver from the top and bottom ideal, while engaging the frontal and rear while they are in hover mode compared to moving much more ideal then when they are moving. Same applies to the Mosquito, but to lesser effect, but the Scythe has no moving parts to cause this issue we perceive with the other ESFs.

I have no 'faction' and I have 183 hours in my mossie and 160 in my scythe. As it stands my stats are near mirror images of one another.

It really is largely a matter of knowing what each fighter/loadout is good and not good at, and flying accordingly.

They could standardize ESF hitboxes - but to be fair, they'd have to remove the Reaver's extra AB advantage and standardize that too. The only reason it was added was due to the Reavers being disadvantaged with its larger hitbox.

Or everyone can learn to fly better - the difference between ESFs isn't huge at all today - its 90% pure pilot skill or more that factors into who wins fights in the air.

Isn't the AB for catching up to the Mosquito, since that has the fastest cruising speed? And the Scythe has the best brakes, pretty sure the best acceleration too (though that might be the Mossy).

Whatever you pluck from the Reaver to say "there, that makes up for the hitbox" means it's no longer making up for performance or weapon advantages that the other sides have. You're just trading which one of the Scythes bonus' is beyond what the others get.


Experience being the most important factor doesn't stop weapons from being fine tuned. I don't see why it should stop with hitboxes.


Furthermore, ESF hitboxes do not need to be equal. They should simply vary by more reasonable amounts same as weapon traits etc. and each vehicle should be best from a certain angle. The Scythe shouldn't have such a massive total hitbox advantage.