[Suggestion] Strove: Pokes Holes in the PPA

The point remains that they're the least dangerous thing because I have flares. Sure, I could make a mistake and take 40% of my life (or perhaps 80%) by not having flares, but why would I do that when I could simply be immune to them while taking 25% less damage from flak? I'm resilient all-around.

You're never at a disadvantage against the lock-on player:

• You have the advantage during their lockon period.
• You have an even stronger advantage after they launch (because if you didn't see them already, you see them now!) You flare.
• You have the advantage while they're reloading. (You've definitely killed them by now if you weren't working on other targets.)
• By the time they're done reloading, you're flying to cover.
• By the time their next lock completes, you're gone.

Sure, you're at a disadvantage against other players on the other side of that cover (without flares and possibly low on afterburner), but what's wrong with that?

Noseguns are already one of the best ways of killing air, certainly far better than the G2A lock-ons we're discussing, so it sounds like you have what you want?

1. If he specifically said Coyotes are crap on AI loadouts, I'd take that under advisement. He probably wouldn't though, considering it clearly adds AA capability at a slight loss in AI capability, and it's sort of a balanced tradeoff overall (even though the fuel tank loadout is better suited to many battles.)

2. This is pure Dunning-Kruger. Cover exists in virtually every base. Even super exposed bases like Abandoned NS Office, there is cover (the west hill, and if the battle is tight/small enough: behind the north building.) Air cover is basically ubiquitous nowadays and you just need to start using it more so you can begin understanding how wrong you currently are.



3. And that doesn't matter because they can't hit you with lock-ons because you're behind cover before they can launch.

I don't think we're discussing balance though. Weren't we discussing which loadouts to use and afterburner tanks?

I'm not gonna argue with you in this thread, though I'll leave this hear for you

at this point i think its fine the clip size is its limiter. now if they rolled back to the old clip size and gave it a bit of bloom like the lasher i could see that working. if it was as OP as the forum warriors make it out to be it wouldn't be so hard to find PPA gunners...

its biggest crime is being useful in a category full of useless weapons, stop crying for nerfs and start talking about how to buff the other weapons in the category

This thread is about AI ESFs. Obviously the lock-on being discussed (which has been said many times) are G2A lockons.

The loadouts one chooses are based on the game balance, which allows the player to survive without fuel tanks.

Ok this thread went well beyond what i was expecting. To clarify, the original argument was the difference in effective range between the PPA and other empire equivalents. Specifically the PPA can kill platoons from up to 300m, the canister or marauder cant do that effectively. Also a smiliar situations with the air hammer and (insert TR AI air gun here) its not so much about the PPA compared to NS weapons (although perhaps this could use a little revision) just between weapons in the same cross faction category.

Thank you all for participating in this humble thread of mine

What's this? Another PPA thread?

So can the prowler's main cannon, with greater sustainability due to tremendous projectile velocity and a lesser degree of visibility. Once a PPA is fired, just follow the giant, glowing plasmasticles to the source. A lockdown prowler at 200+ meters is much harder to reach, locate, and detonate. Nearly non-existent reload speed in lockdown makes number of shots irrelevant.

A PPA gunner will have to accurately lead and predict where a unit will run to even splash with all three shots at the ranges you specify, and the small degree of default COF makes extreme precision not possible (Although still very accurate, you can't snipe with it well enough to remove a unit that reacts after the first shot lands, at range.) Equipping the PPA means that the magrider, with it's worst-main-cannon, cannot fight back effectively versus halfway competent armor - an AP prowler can still obliterate units with precision, which is much easier to achieve due to shot velocity.

As far as the NC is concerned, the Vanguard is an AV monster, although it's secondary AI is obliteratingly potent at close range. It's the most ideal of the three ES-AI secondaries at point defense vs C4 weilding units. At this point in the PPA's life, it has had it's: Clip size cut by over half, had it's max ammo cut by a proportional amount, and I believe it had it's splash reduced slightly as well, not to mention it's recent nerf vs penetrating certain shields. All these nerfs were called for, but it's now in a fairly good place.

Now, you want even more nerfs? Hmmmmmm, let's think about this...

Now more then ever, the Kobalt is an excellent alternative to any ES-AI solutions, even the PPA. Shot velocity means you can actually hit fleeing targets at range, and traversal angles / sheer multitudes of ammo / clip size the thing has means you can continue firing for significantly longer then almost any other vehicle secondary in the game. Even now, I use the Kobalt over the PPA at long range - shot drop is nearly non-existent, and aiming up slightly means I can see my target easily beneath the crosshairs. Nerf the PPA any more, and you will see many, many more VS using the Kobalt, which has been buffed a number of times due to universal non-use.

Every faction has access to the Kobalt, but it's just not fun enough to justify - everyone likes the uniqueness of empire specific gear, and the more whining occurs, the less fun it is. If the cycle of nerfs continue, I guarantee that in a few months, nothing AI-wise will be used save for the Kobalt, at which point that will be nerfed as well. Shortly thereafter, forumside will begin whining about no good vehicle AI options.

The PPA's OPness was sufficiently castrated weeks ago, move on.


Reread this after posting, apologies for the confrontational tone - i'm just irritated by all the constant nerf demands. I still, however, stand by all of my points.

Never once did i say to nerf it. Throughout, and with valid non biased points ive merely pointed out a major difference between the ES AI weapons and suggested that the three were brought inline by whatever means. This was never a comparison, as i said in the post you quoted but clearly didnt read, between ES and NS weapon or in the extreme case you brought up between an AI gun and a two shot main cannon. Comparing things that are not only in a different category but are entirely different weapons all together is pointless.

As to a solution, if you could hold a canister shot to close the CoF to make it more effective at PPA range and either lower the arc on the marauder or simply show a targeting reticle that suggests the arc then both weapons would be inline. This post is simply comparing effective range of three ES AI tank weapons, nothing more, nothing less. I am not saying the PPA is OP, its where it needs to be but has a longer range than the opposing weapons. Im not calling for nerfs, nor buffs, im calling for conversation on the topic and consideration by a dev. Even if the consideration is "well, not really" thats fine, as long as my point is there.

Ooookay, lets see here...

Not in the quote I made specifically, but I didn't have to look further then your original thread-starter post for an example.

Those would be nerfs. If you recanted later on, I didn't catch it while skimming through, in which case I apologize.

Yep, that you did - I like your suggestions in general - to add to them, I rather like the idea of a proximity, flack-style detonation for Canister - the shell would fire a cone of projectiles once it encounters an infantry unit. This would preserve it's lethality at range quite nicely, and forward-facing cone / splash damage would be awesome. The Marauder could use a complete redesign, it's not nearly unique enough.

I didn't read your post? It's interesting how many points I made regarding your various comments. Sorry, that VS Psi tech must be kicking in.

That said, my example was exactly that, an example of cross faction ES-gear benefits vs drawbacks. The VS have an excellent secondary, but a terrible primary. The Prowler has an excellent primary, but sub-par secondaries. The Kobalt has nearly as much range as the PPA, and it's significantly more accurate - thus, this allows any faction to mimic the VS's range, minus the splash, but with greater ammo, fire rate, projectile travel rate, etc. With a maximally certed PPA (clip size, ammo, etc) I still occasionally use my Kobalt. All this means that it's a good alternative, with well defined advantages / disadvantages. I called this out as an example of a good option that everyone has access to.

... Nnoooo?

Overall faction vs faction balance is determined as a whole. When viewed overall, it is necessary to compare "things in different categories." The prowler has a primary cannon that has the potential to efficiently remove both armor and infantry, but it has lacklusters ES secondaries. The magrider has a terrible main cannon, with such a slow projectile velocity that the pilot must approach quite near moving targets before being certain a shot will hit. It does, however, posses excellent overall secondaries. These are tradeoffs within different systems of the same analogous units.

When comparing two houses, would it be fair to compare, say... just the kitchen? You could have a 50 room mansion with a tiny kitchen, then compare it to a two bedroom apartment attached to a kitchen the size of an Olympic swimming pool. The whole must be considered before an adequate comparison can be made.

I realize that taking every element of every item in every faction, and attempting to compare them would be a monumental task. Broadening the scope of your topic beyond

is all I ask.

http://puu.sh/ckKTE/176989dde6.jpg
Im done here...

One of the big issues with the PPA

Everyone defending it is talking about it on the magrider. They seem to think it's comparable to AV secondaries. It is your AI secondary, try to keep that in mind.

The issue with the ppa is not on the magrider, it's not the scythe (farmers use lolpods), it's the Harasser. It should be balanced with other ESAI Harasser guns.

I don't have issues with magriders spamming PPA's. Spam is annoying but they do it less. It's more resource intensive, and spamriders are tasty targets for AP tanks IF they are trying to farm or suppress a spawn.

PPA harrassers often are just one person, cost practically nothing, get in and out better than a magrider or other tanks (stock), have lower profiles. And just run away and repair then come back to farm more.

IF you want to argue that nerfed PPA is useless against tanks I state again. YOUR AI WEAPON IS NOT MEANT FOR THAT. Use the sauron, or the halberd. And if you want to ***** that you have to get in close range. Guess what, so does TR. For both our AV and our AI weapons.

You complain that you don't want to have to get that close with a tank to another tank with the PPA..... Maybe that's because the PPA isn't meant for tanks (or armor in general). I believe the Sauron is meant for that. Here's a tip, use your anti-armor weapon for anti-armor duty. If you want a all-round platform, use some skill and be a mobile all round platform, post-nerf ppa is still quite fine against infantry (wondrous even) . You know, what its meant for.

Btw, TheFamilyGhost, the PPA is the equivalent of instant gratificiation 250 certs for a godly farm weapon is not a long term goal or investment of time. 250 certs is cake, you can easily get it in less than a week. If you have membership its take just a little over 5 days with just the daily logins and no play time.

But it is balanced on the Harasser (mostly). The 3 ESAI guns are relatively even there, as opposed to the MBT variants.
Well, the Marauder and PPA are, the C85Mod is trailing a bit behind.

Granted the PPA-H seems to be used more, but per used it doesn't really do much different from the Marauder-H.

So why you want to focus on the Harasser in this instance has me a bit confused.

It's accuracy at range are entirely what leads to it's ultimate spamability and are what made it unbalance. A weapon balanced for the harrasser should rely on a good driver and maneuverability to do it's Anti-infantry job . The new changes bring it inline with the other ESAI weapons which are currently balanced. An AV is wisely used in the "one-man perch" is a smart and acceptable use. An AI "one man perch" should bring with it GREAT risk.

My issue with the PPA was never it's damage, clip, how fast it killed etc. I could give 2 ***** if it's not a OHK. It's that it could sit so far out of effective threat range (from infantry). A mounted Vehicle weapon is never (or at least should never) be designed for sniping. The harasser PPA is essentially a mobile PPA turret with long range.

I'm sure you would complain if the mana AI turret was effective at the range the PPA is. And that's the problem. Rapid kill Anti infantry weapons are game-breaking if they effective at long ranges especially without cover. I don't care about the PPA at all on Hossin (wonder why). Sniper rifles are balanced at that range because even with high skill they don't get kills that fast, are vulnerable to counter-sniping and aren't nearly as durable as vehicles. A vehicle weapon with that range is vulnerable to exactly nothing unless there is something that has an equivalent kill time, or at least similar kill effort.

If the AP MANA turret was as durable as the harasser and protected it's occupants from explosions I am sure you would say it's unbalanced (but it would be the ONLY hard counter to the current PPA). The PPA pre-nerf is just that. The "nerf" isn't a nerf. It's a rebalance.

On a tank, it's defense against close range infantry (and C4), on a harasser, it's a heavy harrassment weapon meant to suppress and scatter. An anti-infantry harasser should be flushing out targets. Not perching afar as a one handed gunner with only one crewman.

I would argue that all AV secondaries (harasser primaries) should if anything be more accurate, because thats a good secondary role for the harasser. Perching on the fringes to harass armor.


TLDR Everything in the game needs a hard counter. Pre-nerf the PPA didn't have that. I don't want it to be nerfed more. But I would like people to stop saying it's useless and crying that they lost their farm tool. People padding their stats and grinding their way to BR100 using farm tools is frankly disgusting, not to mention unsportsmanlike.

Even the current Striker isn't useless in my eyes and it was nerfed HARD.(not directed at you Flag) INB4 "ur TR der nerf banshee" sure go ahead. A healthier game needs less farm tools and I play across all factions though I main TR.

Oh I'm well aware of the characteristics of the current live PPA.
It didn't seem to matter much for the Harasser performance however. And I'm not sure that the new one will be worse -on the harasser-, because of how that platform works.
Also, the counter to the AI Magrider (the only place where the PPA is a problem in any way) is the AV tank, be it an AV MBT or AP lighting. Or a Liberator.

For the AV guns on the harassers, they are accurate enough. It certainly doesn't need buffing in any way.
And I say that as one who spends most of his time as of late driving an AV Harasser. If it needs buffs of any sort, the guns are not the way to go.


Anyway, what really gets me these days is how -certain people- who complain about the PPA and it's effectiveness are wilfully ignoring their own weapons who share the same degree of over-performing compared to the relevant peers.

See this I agree with, there are however a few people trying to complain about the PPA being brought in line (range wise) as if it were supposed to be some counter to tanks. Makes no sense to me. I am glad to see that we agree.. I think. I have been trying to get my outfit and other people to use harassers more, they are fun, especially when used in Guerilla warfare, which I am trying to culminate.

Marauder, Canister, and PPA are and have been fine damage wise to Infantry. They SHOULD Hurt. They are mounted weapons. However They need to be in the relative threat range that anti-vehicle Infantry have to be balanced. Infantry should be able to fight back, it shouldn't be easy, but it should be possible. Rocket launchers aren't much of a deterrent if you can't land a hit. Most rocket launchers have rather bizarre drops and "appear" to have a strange COF. It's more like lobbing molten metal out of a tube than it is like firing something that is consistently propelled by a fuel source.

I always had a wary respect of the Supernova after it "appeared" to one-shot my rank 4 blockade armor sunderer at full health. The game told me it did 100% of the damage, but any manner of things could have happened......

As far as AV secondaries being more accurate. I wouldn't complain, but I am also not suggesting it.

I haven't had a chance to try the new PPA, but I do look forward to facing it, it sounds beastly but reasonable. Like facing skilled Shotty Reavers. Annoying, painful, but doable.

OK i would first off like to thank you all for participating in a largly productive discussion. I would like to thank the devs and forum mods that have acted whether that be due to this thread specifically or not.

The PPA had its changes, its not a spammable ranged anti infantry weapon now. And i wouldnt even see this as a nerf.
The new PPA is strong in close quarters and, in the hands of a skilled gunman, still quite scary at ranges up to around 80m.
The fact that its total burst potential has gone up is actually very synergistic with the mags ability to peak, unloading 12 rounds at double the previous pace before taking cover again is a great tactic and is very rewarding for a good tank duo.

Developers of PS2 I salute you
o7
Strove