[Vehicle] Curious to everyone's thoughts on A2G

Just leave this skyknight alone, it isn't going anywhere.
He is stuck in an endless loop of "how many rockets it takes to kill an aircraft?"



P.S. the answer is 4

So much flaming and hate.

Air units are destroyed too fast by other air units compared to what ground units can achieve, generally speaking only, and there's no as easy retreat from other air units as from ground units.

I feel like people hate lock-ons for basically no reason. It takes multiple hits to be destroyed, there's a warning that grants a lot of time to react, there are equipment counters to them along with gameplay counters. Gatling / Flak weapons are a similar threat and yet no one complains about these as much as about lock-ons.

The game should've really had specialized aircraft instead of a one fits all design idea. I'm still all in for scrapping ESFs and adding generic transport- and attack choppers and planes with assigned anti-aircraft and bomber roles that people know how to fly, where attack choppers carry the AG firepower but don't have the mobility of a plane and where planes are forced to move forward to stay in the air instead of hovering on the spot or very slowly towards one direction while farming everything ahead.

There are 3 approaches to firepower:
1) strategy game approach:
-certain units are effective vs certain units but countered by others -> variety on the battlefield but numbers can't be balanced, may feel very unfair and one-sided if things snowball
2) cost / time approach:
-it's accepted that there are more powerful units but these cost more nanites to pull, allowing that only once every x minutes
3) over time approach:
-taking damage from a kind of weapon stacks weakness towards that weapon, causing it to deal more damage the more hits are taken from that kind of weapon (or damage type instead) with stacks falling off either over time, when healing or only on death; the more effectively a certain unit is countered or the more it fails on it's own the more damage taken by sources it's already been hit by before increases; depending on stack drop off mechanic used medics and engineers may or may not become more useful with this

Hidden approach - Powerup: Quad Damage:
You find and use a Powerup, named Quad Damage: A Flash appears behind you and you become it's roadkill.
This unlocks a hidden directive to destroy 1000 Flashes to gain the wheel of fortune.

Far from a sky knight. I am a horrible pilot.

The question re: rockets is very important. It is leading to the point that with a very small amount of teamwork, ESFs are no threat.

The solo aircraft, that requires more teamwork than a 2-man main-battle-tank.
Which can arrive in seconds, unlike said tank.
Also said aircraft has the grand ability to dodge, to leave the rocket's range & fly back in under a minute, and is capable of killing all forms of AA faster than the AA can kill it.
"Small amount of teamwork" after you yourself talk about entire squads to engage one man.

You led the rocket? Oh joy, it has flares. You just gave away your position.
You led the rocket? It has terrain, it just rammed the rocket into it without a damn.
You led the rocket? It left the zone for all of a few seconds if that.

A tank enters a combat zone; It can not easily disengage, nor fire off rounds in close quarters with barely a scratch.
The closer it went, the more time it takes to disengage.

An aircraft enters a combat zone; It has no issues disengaging regardless of distance, and can mid-air repair.
It also has a safe spot from everything on the ground: Sky limit.

No threat?
Try having ESF pilots with any intelligence.
AA takes time, AA is easily destroyed, AA is ineffective against even aircraft.
AA must be massed - Which is easily disrupted by aircraft, and easily avoided & prevented by aircraft.

If a force must have every single component with perfect communications just to engage aircraft, while the attacker just needs singular aircraft with no communication between pilots..
The idea of combined arms went to hell.
How? Aircraft win the ground fight, and the air fight.
Why bother with anything else? Oh right to cap the points.
So 1 infantryman, and the rest aircraft, results in the enemy needing AA tanks, AV tanks, AI tanks, infantry & aircraft.
Or just aircraft.

Ground threat? Aircraft.
Infantry? Aircraft.
Tanks? Aircraft.
Aircraft? Aircraft.
AV work? Aircraft.
AI work? Aircraft.
AA work? Aircraft.
PMB? Aircraft.
Mass of opponents? Aircraft.

There is nothing aircraft can not handle, or engage.
No defense against aircraft, that actually works.

What is the most effective 'counter' to ESFs? ESFs.
Liberators? Liberators.
Main-battle-tanks? C-4, Number of Lightnings, Rockets, Mines, ESFs, Liberators, Galaxies.
Lightnings, C-4, Tanks, Rockets, Mine, ESFs, Liberators, Galaxies.

What costs around the same as an ESF? Lightning.
Both are also one-man assault vehicles.
The lightning which must spec into AP, HE, HEAT, or Flak (Skyguard); It gets one weapon.
The ESF? Can carry multiple weapons spec'd for different roles, with defaults capable of harming all target types.
With AI rapid-fire weaponry with AOA, that's aircraft restricted.

Only the ESF gets the ability to have auto-repair when used with an engineer as well.

Lovely balance.
The aircraftt's version of a Lightning is superior in every way.
And is best countered with... multiple Lightnings, or an ESF.

That's a lot of words to justify unwillingness to be a teamplayer.

TLR

The aircraft ain't being a team-player, doesn't even have to.
A solo Liberator can achieve as much destruction as an insane MBT in the thick of it, but survive.

No one should have to spec into AA, and then have a dozen others spec into it, just to try to destroy the most agile target, that also gets the best repair times, the more lethal weaponry, and the ability to engage & disengage at will.

For a team-game, Aircraft are off in some other world.
Do you ever see aircraft coordinate beyond maybe the gunner & pilot of a single liberator?
They have less communication between themselves, than TR, VS and NC have between each in the Yell-chat.

Have you ever played Planetside 2? Through experience, I've learned:
- The prevailing opinion of those who play air regularly is positive
- The prevailing opinion of those who do not play air regularly is negative
Thing is, the people in the first category are far, far, far outnumbered by the people in the second category. (This can be verified by looking at the unique users stats of aircraft versus ground vehicle weapons on DA.) So it's simple math.
Let's do an example, back-of-the-envelope calculation: Let's say there are 100 players who don't fly regularly to every 1 player who does. Even presuming A2G makes 100% of regular air players happy, if even 2% of the rest of the playerbase feels negatively, it's generating twice the discontent as it is fun. And it's pretty obvious from playing Planetside that more than 2% of the general playerbase has a distaste for A2G.

People hate lock-ons because there's no interaction. You jump in your ESF, get all excited to get in to the battle, and well before targets even render you start getting a lock-on warning or pelted with flack from an invisible unit. Now from the ground's perspective, no matter your skill with your AA weapon, you just point in the general direction and wait for the square to turn green and rarely get a kill. That's just ****, plain and simple. Ground should have an option that requires as much skill as air with the same reward, plain and simple. And on that note air should have medium-skill weapons just like ground has, not the choice between l33t noseguns or noob lock-ons. This game is such a wreck.

No one is arguing that you can't use strategy to beat air, absolutely no one. We all understand your argument that this is a team game and that combined arms are necessary. What you don't understand is that there's no reason for a **** job in a game. Providing AA for your team is like getting told to clean the toilet at work. This is a ******* game, there's no reason that every role can't be fun.

Fair analysis, but as someone who plays both I can tell you the problem has never been A2G, it's been the lack of skill-based and lethal G2A.

Right, that's a big part of it. Sorry if I was unclear. I meant G2A, AA/A2G, and the inaccessibility of the airgame in general.

In a forum, not reading anything somewhat longer than a twitter argument. Nice.

Step 1: Be infantry.
Step 2: Aquire beans.
Step 3: *frrrt* Become the rocket.
Step 4: Launch yourself towards the ESF with your C4 belt ready to go off. Avoid it's nosegun or missing it. Do not get distracted by shiny flares.
Step 5: No guts no glory: C4 once close enough.

Skill based.

There's so much that isn't skill based:
ESF attacks a player base with AA turrets in it: ESF is shot at and has to retreat, no manpower or skill required, skyshield and repair modules ftw.
ESF attacks an AMP station: No module power at work there, aside from very minor self-repair on turrets and apparently, opposed to player bases, it's okay and intended having to manpower literally everything there. Despite all it's turrets amp stations, much like any other base, can't be fortified.

*shuffle through grass* A wild Lib appears ! >Throw Libball; You're already dead.

LA's C4 bricks dealing blast damage to vehicles too close by while tank shells and RPG missiles have to achieve point-accurate hits on the vehicle to deal any damage as blast damage doesn't exist for them, not even vs light vehicles, not even in minor amounts. On the other hand C4 knows no directional damage and thus plastering it on the back of a tank does nothing special. And then we have the sweeper implant that works from inside vehicles, not even at a reduced range, showing you on screen and on the minimap instead of only on the minimap where the mines / C4 are, being pretty idiot-proof.

There's a lot to talk about.

Like my bonus checks. They weren't in the mail. Also my mailbox was C4'ed again this morning. Dinkelberg

The censoring has made your post hard to understand.

I'm glad you confirmed my suspicion; that the hollering is for the ability to play alone with no penalty.

When I play (perhaps it is the server and time zone), the teamwork is superb. Everyone plays their part- for the team. Someone has to clean the toilet. The satisfaction in it is that everyone gets a clean toilet.

I feel sorry for folks that don't experience the satisfaction of good teamwork. It's one of the things I enjoy most in the game.

Yep, been here since the start, and have brought each faction to 100 several times.

The forums have never been about people owning their experience- only about how the devs need to change the experience.

Is it possible that the people that play ground regularly don't get the combined arms riddle? That they see themselves as victims in the game- instead of players?

Do you have children? Through experience, I have learned that tears are the first answer when responsibility looms.

It's rare that someone argues against teamwork so transparently.

Yes, I see air teamwork a lot.

Because you aren't there doesn't mean it doesn't happen.

ex wannabe skyknight here (so prepare the pitchforks^^)
but i'll give it a go and try to explain the issue from my perspective.


My main issue with a2g was never with how powerfull it can be.
There are plenty of devastating force auxilaries in the game (like c4 light assaults on any base with a walled chokepoint, mbts shelling from a hill, a scattermax sitting in a small room and so on, heck even a single sniper aiming at a vehicle terminal can "take out" a whole army)

Power isn't the problem ...
It's the way this power is applied and the fact that you almost get forced into a2g ... that bugs the living hell out of me.


I ll try to explain but it's more of a feeling i got from experience.

The first time i decided to try my hands on an esf, i spend (like most) a few hours in the vr and once i managed to not crash every few turns (trust me that's tough at first) i went out into the wilderness.

It didn't exactly take long for me to realise that i can't hit the broad side of a barn so to speak and while a2a engagements certainly tought me quite a bit in those days it was basically impossible for me to win back then.

On the other hand as soon as i had my grubby hands on the lolpods certs and kills started coming in like crazy and funnily enough my average time spend in the air increased by A LOT.

In the end it took me about 1k lolpod kills with esfs pulled only when i am low on nanites and focusing on a2a in the meantime to actually reach a level where i could stay in the air long enough to afford my next esf (while using an a2a loadout)


Over the years i have taken many many breaks from the game and when i come back it's always the same.
My nosegun aim is completly down the gutter and requires weeks if not months to get back on par, all while pretty much from day one i can be "competent" in an a2g role.


This has to change ...
Having the most devastating part of an esf as at best a learning tool is just the wrong way to go at things.
I should have to spend as much time training a2g as a2a to be effective ... hell given the potential impact on a fight a2g should be the thing that takes a hell of a lot longer than a2a.


But right now a2g combat is not only pretty much the only thing a "new" pilot can do in an efficient manner, it also is what will keep said pilot alive much much longer than a2a.


Add to this the huge discrepancy in cert payouts for both roles and it's not exactly a big surprise when you see the majority of pilots getting stuck in their a2g role (for the most part)



Tl.dr.:
It's not realy a balance issue, the problem is that pilots are heavily incentivized to focus on a2g and get punished for trying anything else.

I think you're missing one important thing.

Once air superiority is gained, pilots will attack the ground. Its what airplanes do.

This is to all of us: the combined arms riddle is an interesting one. What we see as being a problem in the game is actually us not understanding combined arms cause & effect. In this case, the effect is ground forces attacked from the air. The cause is that the air has local superiority. The next move is to build A2G defense- something that people evidently don't get.

A2G is okay -- if they're hovermans I can just lob dumbfires into them for certs.

Good post and this exactly why I said in on a previous page that one of the better things they could try with the air game is to raise velocity and anti air damage on nose guns.

You have no clue how post of the year that is.
I tell people complaining in prox about airstrikes to deal with it, not deal with it as in ignore it, as in pull a plane and kill it, "but I can't fly" then rocket "but they avoid it" but are they shooting you when you do?

The only real thing that stops me from killing infantry with a mustang is 4 or more get pissed and pull a max or heavy with rl, then they get mad when they don't kill me and send hatetells. At this point I'm pretty sure it's less about combined arms and more about getting even.

In my experience G2A is pretty effective against ESF's, especially the G30