Make Valkyrie faster

That makes sense.

Of course what I said earlier still pretty much stands. Transportwise.. the Galaxy is way better. 12 > 6, nothing will be.. nothing should be better than the Galaxy for bulk transport. Combatwise, the Galaxy has more weapons, more health, more armor, hell in a AI role the Galaxy beats the Lib in some circumstances. The Valk doesn't compare.

I think your angle is to make it more formidable in combat. My angle is to give it a niche role.

Making it the fastest vehicle would place it in to an interesting territory. It would have the speed needed to get into and out of combat and to avoid ground based AA pretty well. It would make intercepting it a bit interesting. But as we all know, intercepting doesn't mean chasing it. It means coming from the side or front where speed matters less. Its what you can do when you bring the weapons to bear.

Besides I'm not advocating for the Valk to surpass 300kph. Every ESF has the ability to hit 320 for a few seconds (350 for Reavers). What this means is while on a burn back to its warpgate, it stands a very good chance of outrunning a ESF, I will NOT be able to simply outrun them on the way to the target.

And like I said, I even suggested giving Tomcats a better modifier against them for intercept purposes.

What this would do is allow the Valk to be more survivable and be the choice vehicle for small squads to use. The Galaxy would still be preferred for bulk transport and heavy combat.

Your idea of improving its weapons isn't something I'm against though. I don't understand why the Valk has inferior weapons compared to the ESF. IT has a Hornet like missile that has one shot and less damage. Pelter rockets with less ammo than rocket pods, a CAS weapon that is even worse than the banshee, and a rotary type AV weapon that is worse than all other rotaries (even when used outside their role in its role).

I think all these weapons should be buffed to be on par with their ESF counterparts. This would still make them inferior due to the pilot not being the one using and aiming them. But at least they can get a kill or two.

But I'd still consider increasing the base speed by at least 20kph even with a weapon buff. Tanky vehicles are the Gal and Lib, Valk doesn't need to be a 3rd. Without tankiness we have speed to make it more survivable. Heck I like this idea. a quicker, deadlier valk would make for a backbone to an assault. Much like the Sunderer is on the ground.

First, I have to say, the galaxy is a brutally overpowered vehicle. If you think a liberator is bad.... a galaxy with good gunners will easily wreck the best lib crews. They are imbalanced, but since most players who use them are incapables, it works out okay. But it's not something you'd want to use as a reference.

The valk already has it's niche, which is cheap (250 nanites) transport. As far as movement goes, it already has it's advantage in the extremely strong pitch/vertical thrust. A valk can easily make itself impossible to tankbust because it can turn way faster than a liberator can (but you can't hide from the belly... mwhahahaha).

Being the fastest vehicle would also mean that the valk would be impossible to intercept if it flew at flight ceiling.

Tomcats should hopefully cease to exist, you want them as ****** as possible against as many things as possible. Deters use.
If you want anything against valks, nosegun works. Otherwise, hornets/lolpods are an option.

I never suggested to improve it's weapon, I just said they were barely passable. Which is what they are supposed to be. Valks are not meant to be for combat; kind of like the flash has a fury, but against a good tank crew, it has no real chance of winning.


Also, having the valk have weapons on par with the esf would be a terrible mistake. Gunners have a way wider shooting angle, which makes it really easy for them to track targets in a certain area. Maybe when you have terrible gunners you'd wish you had control of the gun, but if you have a decent gunner, it'll always be better than shooting it yourself from the pilot seat. Not only that, but valks are quite tanky as it is, and from what I'm getting, will be getting even more resilient. They are also a spawn option, and allow mid-air repair.



I think the valks currently are in a perfect spot. They are a cheap disposable transport. They have minimal weaponry, and can allow a few more things with some creativity (like dropping c4/ tank mines etc), but their main use is a cheap transport and it does that well.

It is not meant to be, and should not be a combat vehicle. Despite how I know you feel about them, valks are a simple-to-use cheap transport.

PS: Someone on teamspeak was just calling them by their other name aside from cert piniatas, thought you might want to know. They are also called baby seals.

I think of it as a light transport for inserting small squads sneakily. At the flight ceiling, no one will notice a valkyrie coming.

Neither is the flash, but that at least has the decent fury and renegade to make it a combat vehicle.
The valk has 1 gun that is "ok" and the rest are poop tier, it should have the option of becoming a combat vehicle just like every other "transport" vehicle in the game.

I have to disagree. For F2P you might be right. But for members, we can (and do) use the Gal as a disposable transport. When I was playing NC, I used to run a 4-6 man squad and we'd pull Gals over Valks for this reason. Even running Engineer, I never had an issue pulling a Gal out my ****.

I don't think the Gal is OP either. Its strong, for sure. But strong can mean effective, not OP. And I'd like to see the Valk be in the same tier as the Galaxy. Just in a different manner.

That's because you haven't flown enough. The gal is the most broken air vehicle atm. Just most people suck, so it doesn't really matter 99.9999% of the time; but it's extremely OP in good hands.

Then use the gal as a disposable transport. Honestly, it's a waste most of the time because you can redeploy, so it's really for tiny missions. Either way, that's the valks purpose, and it does it just fine right now. I'm f2p, but I never really run out of nanites and I got certs out of my *** at this point (especialy with the construction patch, it literally sent my average base sph from 40k to 50-55k or so); but I still use the valk if I need a quick transport. It's convenient, smaller and more agile than the gal. That's what (and all) that it's good for; and it does the job just fine.

The valk's weapon are fine for how tanky it is. Flash weapon are trash for how tanky it is (albeit it has cloak to help compensate).

They really aren't. For the man-power required they're rubbish. All the A2G stuff is worse than the single man ESF's, and rival the PPA on being useless used out-side of their intended role (like against air). The valk also isn't tanky at all, not unless you start putting engineers into the rumble seats but at that point why not put those engineers into a fully manned battle gal, liberator or ESF squad which is far stronger & deadlier versus anything?

It's a joker aircraft that has very minor roles in the game. That's not to say it isn't fun to fly or you can't do silly things with it, like Drifter squads or rumble strikers.

It's a transport vehicle, not a combat one. It's weapon is okay to deal with the small occasional threat, but they're not made to be farming machines.

https://forums.daybreakgames.com/ps...two-birds-with-one-stone.240929/#post-3398118

Also make the valkyries play the "Ride of the valkiries" be default

Since they screwed the galaxy over, I'm for this.

The ones that aren't completely terrible aren't having 5 minutes duels with other ESFs, although I do get some of the competent ones too.

I mean, if I want to kill an ESF, its actually cheaper to bait ram than to bother with pulling my own ESF. That's a 100 nanite trade right there in my favor. If I lose, I've bought time for my ground pounders, other fighters, or other assets to engage it or get under cover. I have also encountered situations in which I drop off a group, and an ESF with A2G pops over the hill or enters the AO. While dropping in a triple stack can generally give people cover, if they're going to hack terminals or cap a point in an open courtyard, that does generally pose a threat.

"Good sense" says to run away in such situations. Lots of pilots sensibly do. But the speed gap is enough that I know I'm not going to get away without a lot of hassle, unless I've pulled away far enough or have enough speed. I get a better return for the team if I occupy and harass the ESF, even if it messes with my K/D.

Besides, I only guarantee deliveries, not return trips.

I've flown plenty with it. I know what it is capable of. And I still don't have a problem with it, even if everyone was better than one of my ace pilot friends with it. Its the most useful air vehicle in the game. The other aircraft being largely useless. But they aren't made useless because of the Galaxy. That's a farce if you believe that, and I don't believe you do. They're made useless because of other factors.

I'll outline why they are useless for those still reading this:

ESF's - Lack of targets other than other ESFs. Or targets are embedded deep behind enemy AA capability.
Libs - Same thing as ESFs minus reliably being able to hit other air. Sure you can tankbust another Lib or Gal, but likely not before it retreats or performs its mission.
Valks - Can't reliably engage any target, even without AA presence. If AA is heavy enough, it can't even do its primary role.

When it comes down to it. The only Role ESF's and Libs have is sundy hunting. They're not bad at it. But when a ESF goes into that role, other ESFs pick them off. Libs have less of a problem, but being so large, it makes it risky.

And look at it from this angle. If they took the Galaxy out of the game. Not nerfed, but just out entirely. The problems air has will still have those problems. Valks wouldn't suddenly be better. Used more, but not better. In fact I'll dare say the Sunderer gets used more in comparison.

Your aim would have to suck really bad for a duel to last 5 minutes.

And once again, you'll only ram bad ESFs (unless you are insanely 1/1000 lucky). Especially since esf got afterburners/are faster.

I don't know where the mentality that pilot would run away comes from. The mentality of a pilot isn't "I'll harass this ESF, buy time for my team". It's "I'll wreck every single aircraft that comes here, keeping the skies clean for everybody" and, on top of that "I hope I can find a good pilot to have nice fights against".

If you want, I can hit you up when he does, but a good exemple would be to look at discotoff's stream. You'll see what an ace pilot does in the air. I STRONGLY suggest you go look at his past broadcast or highlights - only the planetside 2 ones obviously.
https://www.twitch.tv/discostoff2/profile He speaks both english and german in case you suddenly wondered

What you said only apply to the average player. Unless the AA is insanely heavy or he's forced to fly too close/low to it, an esf pilot is usually about to kill the other person and get out before he dies. Also, an esf can go behind enemy lines where there's no AA and cut off air-support.

A liberator... I think the TTK on a gal is something like 6-8 seconds; I can't remember exactly. It can also one clip another lib with the tankbuster. The only reason you think it's not reliable is because you don't have experience with it (or you're on connery haha). And yes you can hit air reliably. Here's a video of me (flying, I'm the barcode) and Limits (gunning the dalton) session on connery. I think he ended up being something like 4 deaths 100 kills (and I had obviously a few kills of my own) in a small session. Yes Connery is a joke server, but just look at the dalton shots, he's extremely reliable with it.

I also wish I could show you clips of iHearColors shredding for me, but he's as reliable as one of your infantry leetfit folks with an Orion - but with the shredder. Your missconception about liberators is probably because you haven't seen/ never been part of a good lib crew or flown with good lib folks.

If you ever want to get the experience of what a good lib is, feel free to ask me; I'll see what I can arrange.

My opinion on Libs mainly comes from applying how they can be used in capturing a base. Which they cannot be used for. About 90% or slightly more bases all have control points in locations where you can neither attack nor defend with a Lib. Defending with a lib is slightly better due to being able to destroy sunderers. But I'd argue a vulcan harasser is way more efficient and reliable.

Volume of kills doesn't impress me. I've done similar with a Lightning and Harasser (as the driver, with my buddy gunning). What impresses me is when you use your tools to become a force multiplier and push a larger force from their own base.

I doubt you'll have many montages showing that.

Actually, that's basically most of what happens. But nobody's interested in seeing me terrorize a base by killing their whole armor column. Or saving a base by wrecking every single attacker's sundy. So people just don't show it that much.

You just don't really realise what's going on because you're not in that lib. It's EXTREMELY rare that someone notices. Sometime I get he occasinal /tell by someone who just noticed I killed all the armor about to blow their vehicle. But it's rare.

The TTK on a sundy is something like 6 seconds. Which, if done correctly, can be made to be insanely fast too. (2 clips of TB blows it, or 1 clip+ a good gunner that can keep landing shots while you move away and allows for continuous movement).

A harasser is incredibly inferior to kill sundies. It's damage can be out-repaired (a lib's damage cannot unless you really good A LOT of engies repairing. But usually you kill it so fast there's no time for 5-8 engies to get on the sundy). It's limited by terrain, whereas a liberator can kill a sundy on one side of the base, and then go to the other side to kill their other sundy before people can even get the time to spawn at the new location.

Your experience is limited to incompetent pilots. And I'm not taking anything away from you, but there's a reason why some vehicle outfits would shoot at certain libs they recognize first. Because they know if they don't, in a minute there won't be anything left to attack with/defend with.

A well used liberator is the deadliest vehicle in the game by FAR. The only thing about it is an extremely small amount of players are actually able to use it correctly.

Most bases actually have an exposed route to the point. So a liberator can sit there and kill everything. Reality is though, a burster will be pulled, or rockets shot and you'll have to leave. But you can clean every enemy vehicle from an area, meaning nothing to defend with for the enemy. Or kill a whole enemy attack force because it relies on vehicle (sundies) - including those platoons that have 4 gals sitting up at flight ceiling (an extremely common thing. you can't do anything about it unless you got a liberator). Liberators can also fight air.

Yes liberators will usually kill armor, but that's because killing plebs is not really fun... The only time where I've actually enjoyed it a bit is when you go bomb a biolab pad with 90 players on it. That's a glorious moment; but otherwise....

And you say the amount of kill doesn't impress you. Here's a little mark for you to ponder on. My average score with a liberator after the construction patch has been about 50-55k per hour with no boost, no membership no nothing (I'm a f2p; well, with a few camos ). Try to imagine what I have to kill to get that amount of exp. And figure that I'm the pilot, not the gunner.


I'll reiterate, what server are you on. I might be able to get you to fly in the tailgun of a real lib crew, and see what it's actually like to see what a competent pilot sees.

Very much agreed, the Valk sorta needs some kind of wing pod in order to evolve into a close air support gunship.

Well they don't have to remove lolpods from the ESF, I just like the idea of more vehicles having dumbfire rocket pods, like the Lightning.
Anti-armor kinetic bombs and Anti-infantry cluster munition bombs sound perfect for further options that synergies well with the Valks gunning choices.
Afterburner fuel pods, including their Quick-Recharge and High-Capacity variants, would also probably be good.

Hey now, some of us just don't have the RAM on our rigs to handle flying at high speeds in this game!
Hence why I've got to sit through dozens of loading screens to defensively redeploy.

While I will give you that a Valk should go FASTER than a Galaxy by default, I don't think it should outright be able to outrun ESF stock.

Again, that's way too fast, especially for what Valks are suppose to be doing.
I'd give them a 200 kph base instead, same as your standard ESF.
That should allow them to be faster than Galaxies, able to keep pace with ESF, but (with the addition of pilot controlled Wing Hardpoint equipment options) NOT the outright superior choice of Aircraft for Airchavs.

Agreed, and even worse, such a huge speed advantage combined with any potential support armaments would make it the new go-to skychariot.

It'd be the Lib-pocalypse all over again!

I get the point you're trying to make, but it's just too EXTREME of a buff.
Bringing up to ESF Speed, then adding Wing Options like the various Afterburner Fuelpods or Pilot controlled Secondary Weapons, would be more than enough I think to make it as flexible an aircraft, if not more, than the Galaxy and ESF are.

And I can mostly agree with this, EXCEPT for maybe the better diversity when it comes to armament.
I mean, the Valkyrie already has a far greater number of turret options than the Galaxy, and I'm firmly in the camp that wants to give the Valk Wing-mounts, as it will just make the vehicle even more flexible when it comes to it's role as Close Air Support.

Well as Jawarisin mentioned, they are thinking about given the Valk guns another go over.

Well the Galaxy does have the Walker, so Anti-air on a transport aircraft isn't any thing new to the game.
Going back to potential wing-mount, Coyote Missiles could also work...

Not necessarily against this either, as Tomcats are suppose to be the heavy-hitting, anti-airbus torpedos to the Coyotes hail of incremental damage.

Actually, the CAS 14-E is the only Valk gun that has an ESF Nosegun counterpart, the Banshee...
The Hellion G20 is actually a Vulcan, which is an extremely confusing choice for an ANTI-ARMOR AIRCRAFT, while the Pelter Rocket Pods and VLG Missile Launcher are as you mentioned actually weaker version of ESF SECONDARY weapons.

But yeah, I'm in complete agreement making the Valk a lightly armored, flying assault boat.
Now, I wouldn't necessarily buff all the turret weapons to ESF Nosegun levels, after all I think it's a PLUS for the VLG Launcher that its operator doesn't ALSO have to worry about flying an aircraft while guiding the Missile like the Hornet and the Pelter could be differentiated more from just an aimable lolpod, as this would also hurt the chances for the Pilot to get any wing-mounted equipment.

Same, hence why I'd rather a modest speed increase to put it at ESF levels and an increase in armament to make it have more bite.

Eh, ESF and Libs aren't USELESS, more that they needed a lot of neutering from launch in order to bring them in line with the "Combined Arms" aspect of Planetside.
They are both Aircraft, which allows them to be far more mobile than their ground equivalents, AND they can have their load-outs customized for any combination of anti-air and anti-ground combat.

Have you ever driven a Skyguard Lightning?
You CAN inflict light damage to other ground vehicles, but you're basically dead if anything its anything heavier than a Harrasser.
MBTs and Sunderers, on the other hand, can easily mix their weapon load-outs much like a Liberator or Galaxy.

Air is more fragile in most cases because it isn't as constrained by terrain as their ground equivalents, its just a natural line of logic to sacrifice durability for that mobility.

Now, the only exception to this IS the Galaxy, but that's due to it being such a large target in the first place.
Really, other than it's airborne nature, its "Battle" configuration is probably no worse than a duel Bulldog "Battle" Sunderer, but both are usually so irritating because they end up being used by a large group of high level, well coordinated players.

Well that's more due to poor base design in Planetside 2 than anything...
First, we had control consoles just out in the open, so vehicles could freely spam HE down upon them, and Liberators were at the top of this food chain.

Hell, it was only until recently that the dev team started to rework Base Design so that Vehicles wouldn't be able to lock down every Point!

Ideally, things would work like they did in the Original Planetside:

-Vehicles are used to move across the open ground between Facilities
-They then work on securing the Facilities Courtyard (every Facility in the original game had a Wall around them like the current AMP Stations), suppressing enemy Infantry and Vehicles until friendly Infantry could push their way into the Facility proper

Since the original Liberator was a BOMBER that could instantly switch between Anti-infantry Cluster Bombs or Anti-Tank Bombs, it was good at both keeping enemy Infantry suppressed and taking out Ground Vehicle targets both in Courtyards and out in the Field, so all of its current belly guns were probably designed around this general usage.

*shrug* Well. Look at it from my perspective, as someone who primarily flies Valkyries. I know that the toe-to-toe fights with ESFs generally end badly. But my primary mission is not to wreck other aircraft. Its to get people to a point, and support them while they are there. This means getting them into that a good drop position and bringing the most appropriate equipment. This entails some pre-flight decisions:

1) What do they need to succeed?
1a) Are they going to be out-popped, are there units I can ferry before the initial forces die out?
1b) Are there follow-on forces coming in other transports?

2) Can they sustain pressure on the objective? Do I need to go high and be a re-spawn?

3) How are they being attacked?
3a) Are they getting attacked from multiple directions. If so, can I destroy a defensive sundy using mines?
3b) Are they getting nailed by multiple pathing problems? (Too many entrances to cover effectively). If so, can scout radar help them focus fire and prevent flanking?

4) Is this primarily a vehicle fight? (Air and ground). If so, armor and fire suppression?

Answers to this checklist are what I use to determine load-out and mission, and can be done in about 7-10 seconds, or none at all if I've anticipated my SL/PL.

As to the ESF pilot quality question, I try to avoid making too many assertions on that. I only report what I typically observe, as I generally have to keep an eye on them if I'm operating in the same space.