Wat If small numbers you mean 3 Skyguards to every non-ESF/Valkyrie aircraft then yes you are correct. Not surprisingly, Hornets are good at taking out vehicles and the Banshee is great at killing infantry. This shouldn't surprise you as these weapons are performing in their intended role. So is the COF. And the Low DPS. And the High cert investment. And damage to non-air units. If they meant that then it would have better DPS up close and worse DPS at range. I think you should probably check out the role of Anti-Air. And the Skyguard's TTK on all aircraft. And then factor in COF and the 5m proxy explosion. Also don't forget factor in reload times. You are really gonna need to clarify competitive, because my impression is that all pickup and organized competitive matches that I have seen thus far, the way you shot down air was with more air. If you mean pub encounters then lol. Fast response, hit and run, attrition, and zerg breaking. This isn't difficult. A Skyguard or a lot of Skyguards? Because a lot of anything can do their job pretty well regardless of how bad they are at it. It is a 1000 cert, 350 resource, and dedicated as hell AA platform. It is so incredibly specialized that you would have had to never have touched one in your life in order to think otherwise. It sucks at AI, it sucks at AV, and it is only moderately good at AA. There is no other role for it. If you can think of one go ahead and post a video of how effective it is. At worst a Skyguard could stop your NAR regen at 700m-1000m. Sans the Walker, the Skyguard is the most accurate piece of flak out there, and it barely hits anything at the ranges at which aircraft render. And definitely not killing them. Source: I fly ESFs for farming stuff and have occasionally used the AA emplacement. It sucks, your carbine is more efficient at killing aircraft. its a range of 600m. You can shoot back very easily since you are both rendering and they are stationary. Unless it is the MANA turret in which the render range is 450m instead.
Skyguards are fine. If you get caught out in a place so side-open that you can't seek cover within the ~3 magazines it takes for him to kill you, then you'll have learned a lesson and should now be able to avoid that mistake in the future.
Skyguards are in the perfect place right now. Shooting at long range is just going to warn aircraft that you are there and allow them to escape. This means that experienced Skyguard jockeys have learned to control that itchy trigger finger and let the enemy aircraft get closer before opening up. They are like a trapdoor spider waiting for their prey to lurk too close. Skyguard vs Liberator is in a good place too. Yes, a straight up one on one face to face fight will be won by the LIberator each time. Fair enough for a 3/3 vehicle. Even then a Skyguard is still -dangerous- to the Lib and can't be casually ignored. And as soon as one factors in force multiplying by adding even one extra Skyguard to the mix, suddenly the balance of power rapidly swings away from the Liberator's favor. Learning to gun a Skyguard properly is not easy. Not only do you have to develop the skill to be able to lead the shots properly to make contact on a fast moving target, but you have to be able to sustain those impacts on a target taking evasive action as well. This means that drivers have to learn to anticipate a pilot's evasive maneuvers and be ready to keep leading the target, as you only have a short window of time before you stat slamming that flak into them before they'll be gone. Any claims that Skyguards require no skill is not only absurd, it's outright hilarious.
The Skyguard is reasonably good against non-air targets. You have to play it smart of course, and there are limits to its capability, but I regularly take out isolated infantry targets (including groups of infantry who trickle towards me), other (non-AP/HEAT) lightnings, and sunderers with it, and with friendly vehicles around I often am the deciding factor in helping a friendly tank win. It does under-perform overall against ground targets and nobody would intentionally take a Skyguard to engage ground targets, but I find people generally think it's a lot worse against ground targets than it actually is. But this is just a minor disagreement out of a post of yours that I overwhelmingly agreed with.
I'd generally agree apart from calling them in a "perfect" place. I think that top armor should be increased quite a bit in effectiveness, and then they'd be perfect. It feels a bit silly that because top armor is mediocre and most of the threats I face are ground-based, that I always take front armor on my Skyguards.
that could be a pretty good solution. i doubt i will ever give up my proximity radar, but at least having the option to soak a few hits would be nice.
My experience in the skyguard has been very, very iffy, ranging from "Gently suggesting that air units should consider moving" to "I'm just going to eat all this flak and kill you anyways"
in my experience ESF tend to either turn tail or die, haven't really shot at many valks yet so don't have an opinion there, but anything larger will just tank your damage and smash your face for scratching their paint job. i always fire on libs at max range because if you let them get any closer before you fire, then they will just come down and wreck your tank, even if it is just a 1/3 lib.
In order for top armor to be any kind of proper protection against a direct attack from a Liberator it would need a significantly big buff which would draw into question whether it was balanced or not. Even without top armor you're generally quite resistant to any sort of attack from ESFs. It's Liberators you have to be careful of. Terrain and positioning is your best friend. A Skyguard on top of a hill has a great view of the surrounding sky, but they are also extremely exposed and just setting themselves up for getting hit in the rear-end when they're looking somewhere else. Keeping near cover that lets you break line of sight quickly is the best effect. Remember that a low flying LIberator is a huge target for any nearby tanks or rocket toting infantry and he can't linger for too long. So if you make it difficult for him to kill you quickly by denying him that easy tankbuster + belly gun attack by playing hide and go seek amongst the rocks/trees/etc then he is making himself more and more vulnerable while trying to sniff you out. Personally? I prefer running with proxy radar on my Skyguard. The biggest danger to me is C4 fairies sneaking up on you as you're spending a lot of time looking at the sky. As for the Skyguard vs ground thing, I like where it is too. You are absolutely at a disadvantage against any kind of proper ground target but you are by no means helpless. People will often underestimate a Skyguard and you'd be surprised how they can rack up the damage if you manage to sneak up on an enemy Lightning and park yourself on his rear end. Many an already wounded MBT has died to a Skyguard that saw the smoke coming from them and moved in to finish the job. Plus a Skyguard joining in on an attack with a friendly MBT can easily turn the tide. When MBTs face each other they will generally focus each other and tend to ignore the Skyguard, who can often get around to the rear armor of the enemy MBT and start putting out a respectable amount of damage.
General rule of thumb is, if it's an ESF or a Valkyrie, let it get close before you open up. If it's a Liberator, start getting damage built up on him early so if it comes down to a mano a mano showdown you have a head start on accumulated damage. THis is assuming the Liberator knows where you are and has come gunning for you specifically. If he hasn't seen you yet you can let him get closer too before you open up. THis is all assuming you're supporting friendly ground forces. If you're doing a 'lone wolf' Skyguard-behind-enemy-lines scenario then it is definitely in your interests to keep a low profile where enemy Libs are concerned, or at least wait for an opportunity to shoot them when they're already damaged from something else.
if i see anybody lining up an attack run i will fire at any range to save my allies, and the same goes for pealing enemies off of friendly air. i also tend to choose large fights where air is abundant and firing at long range targets is essential for shooing enough of them away so that i don't get overwhelmed by the ones that do get in close. i kill things in my skyguard, but killing aircraft is usually not my primary goal. my goal is usually to protect the allied forces with my gunbrella. when i am doing my job properly the enemy air either leave entirely, or they come in to murder me specifically and i get the opportunity to collect some close range kills.
Right, it should be a big buff to make a difference in the Lib matchup. But it wouldn't call balance into question because you'd still be just as vulnerable to all other directions (and most of my ESF use against lightnings tries to hit rear armor anyway; you only have to be below a 45-degree angle to get "underneath" their Top Armor.) That's ignoring the fact that balance wouldn't be called into question anyway since Skyguards are best killed with non-air AV (tank, C4, etc). Increasing the Skyguard's ability to deal only with air makes it that much worse against ground targets due to a lack of whatever other armor item you would've taken.
It needs high velocity, until then it is really a close range AA weapon. It's cheaper to pull a Sundy with an AA turret which surpasses the Skyguard. while being able to use the second turret for AA/AV or AI and being able to deploy + higher HP..
Admittedly, balance is truly achieved for utility and defense slots when the choice becomes a difficult one, or along the lines of each having a niche for a specific situation. And top armor as it currently stands just isn't worth it under any circumstances at all. If it allowed me to tank a Liberator one on one, I dunno...I think there'd be no reason -not- to take it then, and thus you get the balance possibly swinging too much in the other direction. I'd have to really run with it to form a more solid opinion. Right now the choice for me usually is either nanite auto repair so I can spend more time being mobile and watching the skies, or proxy radar for watching my back against those pesky C4 ninjas. Utility is generally a no brainer in the form of fire suppression.
Yes, exactly. That's the fundamental reason to give top armor the significant buff it needs so that players would start considering it as a real option. Though I imagine the lack of player understanding of how directional armor works actually contributes to a lot more top armor being used than it deserves. On Lightnings, visually it looks like it protects most of the area where the tank would be hit, but gameplay-wise it's only protecting against all shots above 45 degrees. Similarly, front armor looks like it only protects the useless tiny little bumper, but it actually protects the entire 90-degree cone in front of you (and up to 45 degrees of height.)
