{Suggestion}Reduce A2A ESF costs

There are very few ESF flying around at any time. It is the most challenging thing to learn to do, and its hard for new players to get good at flying when they can only pull 2 esf before waiting for a long period.

On the other hand we certainly don't want A2G ESF suddenly becoming easier to obtain.

So my suggestion is that a stock setup, nosegun and AB pods be reduced in price from 350 to 200 resources.

From there increase the ESF cost according to loadout. An ESF that equips any wing-mount other than AB tanks costs the regular 350.

This would hopefully get more pilots flying without being a burden to infantry or ground vehicle players.

I've come to a similar conclusion, as you've probably read. The air needs more aircraft to properly function, plain and simple. I'd still like to see an addition of an easier to use nose gun as well.

For me, at least, the problem is not the price so much but the control system that I find counter-intuitive. Although I would also guess that the time it takes to restore resources would be a bit of a factor as I would spend an awful lot of my time waiting to spawn a new machine after being shot down. I didn't mind getting killed a lot as infantry when I started as the re-spawn is quick but not the case with vehicles.

I think hitting a target is what's difficult, not necessarily flying. I do think that yaw should be an option on the mouse, but I wouldn't use it. What else do you find counter-intuitive. They feel just like flying helicopters is other games to me.

It's just me really; I'm used to all flight movement controls being on the mouse (well, joystick actually).

It would be nice if joysticks worked as well in this game as they do in Arma, but I don't ever see them being competitive so I don't really want to see resources go there when 99.9% of players wouldn't use one. But I guess I can see that. Arma has roll/yaw combined with lateral mouse movement to make flying easier, but it's the first thing everyone decouples for obvious reasons. The only change I'd really give a shot is putting yaw on the mouse and running dogfighting, I think the extra aiming ability would destroy any other combination.

Rather than make it cheaper for new players to get their butts kicked until they don't want to fly ESF anymore, why don't we actually solve the problem? ESF battles revolve almost 100% purely around hover combat, which is unintuitive for the lionshare of players and the hover combat also has an inverted skillcurve, making it almost impossible for newer players to see progress because the result is practically the same even if they improve.

So we just make normal aircraft maneuvers viable. You can do this with an omniversal afterburner, and/or by adding different turn ratio's at different speeds and making the different airframes modify that, so that a dogfighting airframe can actually do combat while going normal speeds without getting ripped apart or a high-speed frame being best when flying fast and be in trouble in terms of turning and such whenever he's not going fast etc.
Ofcourse such changes would require the other aircraft and G2A weapons to get changes as well, but considering it's completely ****** up anyway at the moment that's no biggie.

Unintuitive goes hand in hand with just about anything unique. I disagree with hovering being unintuitive as these things fly extremely similar to like helos in other games. So why not just have analog throttle lock you in hover mode? Problem solved there. Add an easier to use nosegun so shooting isn't an issue. I completely disagree with your afterburner idea. That's an additional movement on top of what we already have which would raise the skill curve, it isn't needed, and would make everyone that much harder to shoot. I also am 100% in favor of a cheaper ESF, as mentioned by myself and others, let it only run a nosegun and pods, maybe even no utility slot and let it be half price. The air needs to be populated, and even with 6 experienced pilots, we were out of nanites and grounded after 2 minutes of dogfighting against an air zerg. OK, that's it for air battles that night. ESF (in some form) NEED to be cheaper. We NEED players to be able to pull enough of them to keep the sky full. Let wing mount ESF and Libs be the special vehicles, but we need population in the air, and even with experienced pilots and current costs, that won't happen. I'm all for adjusting other things as well, there are plenty of screwed up things with air, but instead of a "rather than" argument, this is an "as well as that" argument.

The funny thing is, you both are right.


I doubt it will help in the grand sheme of things but let me try and offer another perspective.
Personally i value the "unique" approach to ps2s flying, but i agree that it is one of the biggest contributing factors to the horrible situation esf pilots especially are in right now.

My point tough would be that while you both clearly have thought a lot about the issue you still are maybe a few steps to far ahead.


I would argue that actually the UI needs to get overhauled long before we can even be certain which parts of the flight mechanics warrant an overhaul.

As in which parts are unique and which are just contributing to new player fatique.


A few examples that stuck with me after heck maybe by now 5 times of coming back to the game and relearning how to fly.


1. Radar

This i would argue is the most important part that needs a change.
While the little radar is nice and more or less sufficient for ground combat, in the air it completly fails to deliver.

Even with the by comparison to traditional flight models static hoverfight, being able to keep track of your opponent is cruicial and right now not supported in any way.

Anyone who has been flying in this game for a while probably knows what i am talking about and has seen it happen to them (early on) and later on to some of their opponents.

Just take any new pilot and simply fly past them ... by the time you turned you ll most likley find a very confused enemy that will keep on rotating randomly until he/she finds you again.

Given the theoretical time to kill of noseguns and the fact that esfs are quite vulnerable during a turn, this usually is a death sentence for anyone new.
(And best of all, it's an issue that hover as well as the turn based flight model would face)

We realy need a decent z axis representation on our radar ... a clearly visible and distinct way to keep track of your relative position to your enemy.
Maybe the spot mechanic could be reworked and integrated into that but regardless the radar needs to change.


2. The Cockpit

This must have started out as faction fluff but since it has a quite significant effect on the pilots performance it got hotly debated and twisted in every possible way/direction.

Regardless ... a clear and unobstructed view for all esfs heck all vehicles should never have been a balance issue.
Being able to see what you are doing is necessary to enjoy it and the fact alone that even now some new pilots don't know how to look around inside the cockpit should be reason enough to completly redo that part of the ui.


3. Third person view

It's nice that we have it avaliable, i would even say it's down right necessary in many situations BUT again the ui or well the lack of it is bothersome.

The radar map, altitude and afterburner fuel indicators need to be visible in 3rd person view.
And vice versa we need at least a stylised representation of your vehicle in the cockpit view too.

Switching between the views alone (while necessary) can be very disorienting to someone new and shouldn't be made harder by an obfuscated ui.



Tl;dr.:

There are a ****ton of issues with esfs and aircrafts in this game, but before we have an UI that's usefull instead of a handicap i don't think it's realy possible to be 100% certain of which other parts need to be changed.

I'd like to point out that I did say he should have used "as well as" instead of "rather than", as you're right, this isn't a single issue, its many small cuts that caused the air game to bleed all but a few pilots. But that aside.

Get the awareness implant with real money, or if you're a vet with years of work returned as iso or maxed out certs. problem solved. But I agree, as do most, the stealth/engagement radar re-work was an epic fail that made the situation for new pilots worse. Especially since spotting targets is iffy at best. But there is that nifty ESF indicator in 1st person view that show exactly which direction your spotted target is. I honestly think that's adequate. Another thing to consider is render ranges. With as abysmal as they are in PS2, I'd rather rely on WW2 era tech and more direct fire, gritty dogfighting tactics. I'd be in favor of ditching radar all together actually. Not that I don't love beyond visual combat in other games, but it just doesn't fit PS2.

100% agreed. The Reaver is almost universally regarded as the worst ESF performance wise, and it has awful visibilty. I know some great pilots who flat out refuse to fly anything but the Scythe just because of its superior cockpit. I don't personally mind it so much, but it's just another tiny feature that stacks on top of the many unfavorable qualities of the NC ESF, just like most NC equipment.

I don't mind this actually. I play Squad and Arma 3 when I need a break from PS2 and the lack of visibility of the driver really gets you in to the moment, and makes teamwork essential. Part of the big problem with this game is the utter lack of cooperation and all the CoD kids. I do think 3pv is fitting for this title but I don't think it should be a replacement for first person view. I do wish the hud would get an update in other ways though, such as a flare and fire suppression cooldown timer. How is that not a thing?

intuitive does go hand in hand with unique. For example: you could create an afterburner system who's direction is based off the stance of your engines, which is only visible in 3RD person and not even has a representation on one of the aircraft. Or you could let the direction be based on the input of the player. The last one is both easier and more intuitive
This is by no means "adding skill", in fact it decreases the skill floor and increases the skill ceiling.
Example:
We have only 4 directions to walk in. Forwards, backwards, strafe left, strafe right.
This means you have less control, but a higher skill floor to learn it. If you move forwards and try to add strafe left you'll either keep moving forwards until you let go or go left immediately. Its unintuitive, although the option of "newest input gets priority" is the most intuitive of these options.
Now we add 4 more directions, the diagonal movement:
Forwards+left/right, backwards+left/right. This is the systen we have now. Its intuitive as the buttons we press are simply the movement we make, and that means its simpler to learn properly despite being double the movement options.
And thats what omniversal jets would offer: your button combination determines where you go, rather than an indirectly controlled stance of your engines that offers only 2 directions (diagonal will add too much speed and your engine will move in the forwards position).

As for "the same as other helo's". Not in the slightest. Any game with helo's I've ever played has helo's with a constant thrust downwards to keep it in the air. When you bank left or right a portion of that thrust is aimed sideways and you are moved sideways and lose some of your upwards thrust.
ESF and all aircraft in PS2 have no downwards trust. They just hang in the air. You bank left or right, you still hang in the air until you bank far enough, at which point you just lose altitude. Even then an ESF can remain airborn despite "hovering" upside down, although eventually it will slowly hit the ground.
Besides that, the controls are ofcourse batcrap insane compared to any other game. You either use full mousecontrol, or full keyboard control (like the GTA series offers, truly wonderful flight system that). Not this half keyboard half mouse stuff (in total the mouse does the same amount of actions ofcourse but you know what I mean).

Making ESF cheaper would be a similar idea to adding the engagement radar for newbs: its going to backfire and hard. Most new players arent that interested in A2A because the system doesnt favor any normal air combat you would expect to work, in fact trying to use air maneuvers out of other games will make you an easier target.
So what you are left with is new players who try the A2A system for its cheaper price, get their butts handed to them faster and they quit the air-game faster, leaving the A2A jockeys with cheaper ESF making it easier for them to keep the newbs down.

And the air needs to be populated by ALL types kf aircraft, be it A2A ESF, A2G ESF, Valkyrie, Galaxy or Liberator. But the ESF is so vastly superior in handling and not sacrificing firepower compared to the other aircraft its used 5x more than all other aircraft combined... And with the balance as it is, they are going to be vastly more used than when I calculated it, probably on the lines of 6 or 7X more used than all others combined.

The skill ceiling on ESF doesn't need to be higher. Think about what you're saying.

The controls are nearly identical to Arma, but I agree the physics in PS2 are extremely lacking. Getting better at ESF helped with helos in that game and vice versa, I actually have near identical mapping on my keys. Pitch/roll on my mouse, yaw on A/D, with the exception of collective on W/S instead of throttle. Anyway, after spending most of my time in each game flying, I believe it's the physics that would lead to better dogfighting, not controls of your directional afterburners. Really stop and consider my proposal of not going in to hover until you hit analog throttle, then being locked there till you hit accelerate. That puts a clear line in the sand between helo and plane flight characteristics. Maybe combine that with an increased time to move from flight to hover and hover to flight, so a Skyknight can't just reverse maneuver and boost and be right on the *** of someone doing a strafing run. Include a longer acceleration and braking time to increase the benefit of maintaining momentum.

I posted in my "cheap ESF thread" a story about a fight from tonight. We were getting swarmed by VS air so my platoon dedicated an entire ragtag squad to air. There were only 3 or so decent pilots, little to no communication, and most of the guys even brought A2G loadouts. We beat the Scythes, had what was left of our ranks mopped up by some top tier Reaver pilots, then got wiped by an overwhelming number of VS air with missiles once we re-pulled. We were all out of nanites, couldn't fly anymore, and that was probably the last decent air fight I'll see this month. If we had cheaper ESF we could have kept the fight going and had a great evening. Keep this in mind, we were going to lose either way, but with cheaper aircraft we could have kept engaging, kept having fun, and kept them from farming ground, which sure as **** they went back to do. I know you cringe when you think about OP ESF being half price, but what if that only applied to ESF running the stock nosegun and fuel pods? Infantry and armor wouldn't even notice them, only other aircraft. Plus that would incentivise players to stop using farming wing mounts and cancerous A2A missiles. And this leads well in to your next paragraph....

I fully agree. The dominance of ESF in the current game is a problem. That said, the reason other aircraft can't function is because of the lack of ESF vs ESF combat. ESF vs ESF fighting should be a constant thing while A2G aircraft do their thing. Gals and Libs should have fighter escorts, and Valks should be able to sneak through the mess under the radar. This can't happen without a populated airspace, and as easy and intuitive as the controls get, you'll always have one faction with air superiority because the other guys don't have the numbers and can't beat them in the nanites game. ESF need to be cheap and plentiful to allow the other aircraft to function. Otherwise, you're left with basically what we have now, a single faction with air dominance and their Libs and ESF wrecking armor and infantry, completely unopposed.

This would be great, even for veteran pilots.

when they discovered the RM bug they should have fixed it and then made it a slot item as a frame type, then they could balance the 'hover chassis' speed, turn/pitch/roll rates to make it weaker against other chassis types so there is a meta choice to make (a real one, not the garbage they've been fumbling around with on tank guns recently)

so if you pick X chassis you may be strong verse Y chassis but weak verses Z chassis. with those changes they could possibly make them change the armor type of the aircraft as well, meaning some A2A and AA weapons can be better verses specific chassis to make up for the difference in exposure time to their counter.

a good example would be if there were actual airbases and picking say dogfighter chassis removed hover mode or dogfighter has a heavily restricted hover mode with poor maneuverability designed purely for landings in uncontested hexes.

they won't change it because they seem to be in love with the tiny few that love that RM hover honorable duels stuff jsut as much as they are for infantry focused 'gameplay balance'.

OP the only way i see a cost reduction for A2A ESFs is if they split the ESF in ESF-1A and ESF-2B and make one have all the A2A type weapons and the other all the A2G type weapons and any that don't fit into ether on both.

if they did that they could also balance them separately (speed, armor, pitch roll and yaw rates)

it seems simpler then trying to adjust cost based on loadout choices.

you cant get good at ESF cause there better player who will farm you.
currently on Cobalt - try to fly ESF, there bunch PRO gangs will will be glad to farm more noobs, you will not learn how to fly, you will learn never spawn aircraft anymore.

Since I got called out I am going to clarify a few things. I was streaming for Grisha last night so I got proof.

1. Yea, we didn't start hunting air until [burt]daimiyo showed up to a VS and NC fight. We didn't just went after TR after that, we switched because NC had a lot of air too, and two pesky reaver that would shadow and pick of one of us.
2. Same thing, we had ~3-4 people had mics, most chitchat, only 2 were active with communication. The squad rely on mainly on waypoints and since our friends from Asia don't understand english so well. Burt is mostly American so I don't know how you consider us having the adventage.
3. We did #1, meet air resitance(we died a lot), we switched out. Is this some kind of excuse for why you lost? The 2 reaver were using A2A loadouts too, one of my better pilots were using the default options. I used missle because I can't aim for **** while streaming because there is a noticable delay for inputs on my end, but thats an excuse, I'll use what ever I feel like fits the situation; and almost switched to afterburners just to chase fly those 2 reaver that keep shadowing us.
4-5. This is the biggest lie, or misunderstanding on your part, you have told, we didn't swarm you or even outnumber you for that matter. You're Burt, you will always outnumber us.
4-5. You repulled ****** A2G when there was a contest over air, why not just pull afterburners, the reavers did it, we did it. Who was even leading? You right now->http://stats.dasanfall.com/ps2/img/banners/saltyvets.png


TLDR: We didn't outnumber you in the first two fights as you say we did, we caught you offguard last fight because I lead the squad to specifically flank, got lucky you were fighting reavers. Twitch link was the stream last night. I time stamped the youtube videos if you want to go look for yourself.




6*.NC had it too, I was playing on NC earlier for an ~hour, most of the time they just sat at warp gate and squabbled, check the 1st hour of the twitch link, 2/3 of it was small talk, 1/3 actual fighitng. I didn't want to say anything because I was there as a friend of a friend so I just followed orders. https://www.twitch.tv/videos/183358075

Skillceiling means nothing. Example:
Imagine if the skill in a particular vehicle/weapon was just a number from 1 to 10, with 1 being "I'll sometimes accidentally shoot the other way" and 10 being "aimbots slow me down".
In a Skyguard, the difference between a 2 and a 10 isn't very big, because the power you get from becoming better at leading and such is small. Even when firing at a stationary target you don't even have to be dead-center to get the same amount of damage as someone who does aim at the center, simply because of all the COF RNG.
In an ESF, the difference between a 6 and a 7 is already larger than between the 2 and 10 of the Skyguard. Simply because the amount of power you gain for each bit of extra skill is disproportionate to the skill earned. Even if the amount of extra skill is just as large as between the Skyguards 6 and 7, then the ESF will still gain way more power to use against his opponents.
So even if we make the skillceiling near infinite, which is already easily achieved by doing things like shooting a dumbfire off the back of a Harasser at a stationary tank 1000m away, it doesn't mean that the newbs will be slaughtered. The thing that's important is the amount of power gained from getting better.

If we increase the skill ceiling for ESF, but make it easier to get into and allow more common flight maneuvers to be as powerful as hover fighting, you've effectively reduced the power gain per skill while still increasing the skill ceiling.

Better physics will help, especially if it truly allows for a helicopter style flight afterwards. This would especially be nice for the Valkyrie if they create a combat variant of it.
And a button-controlled hover/flight mode is something I proposed myself as it removes the need for learning the unintuitive indirect control and even allows potential maneuvers by switching between the two mid-flight. Having ESF also drop like a stone if you aren't going fast enough before going into flight mode would be nice.

But even though those idea's are nice, they aren't going to solve the underlying problem, unless the physics are specifically redesigned to make common air maneuvers viable. and the underlying problem is simply that Hover Combat reigns absolute supreme over everything else.

As long as ESF remain as they are, cheaper ESF is going to be a detriment. Additionally, if the aircraft get the possibility of more maneuvers, then the option for escaping an air battle and surviving becomes possible. This shouldn't be an automatic escape similar to how you can escape G2A ofcourse (and it shouldn't be possible with G2A either), but with the option there you can survive longer and keep your nanites alive. This would be similar to how tanks and infantry can hop behind cover or try to evade enemies for long enough to recuperate and have another go, and with that option the need for cheaper ESF is reduced.

Another thing: Dependency on ESF by other aircraft. A big nono. The ground game is already polluted by being completely reliant on dedicated G2A weapons to protect themselves, assuming the G2A weapon has enough firepower to actually do that. All aircraft should have the option for viable A2A superiority, regardless of it being a Galaxy, Liberator, Valkyrie or ESF. Each would have their own attack methods, weapon selection and best situations to function in. That's the best way to balance it, the best way to allow for a diverse and well balanced air.

All very good ideas. They could all go in and not really change the ESF flight model. And would also fit with any ESF flight model changes that might be decided down the line.

Question on Radar: do you have any image references for the radar you suggest? It will be a lot easier to consider adding, if the Devs can see what you have in mind. Also, this of the 3 would probably take the most Dev work to get done.

I would also suggest:
1) sounds levels be the same for 1st and 3rd person view. Right now it is a huge advantage to be in 3rd person just for hearing better, and hearing is a major part of ESFs.
2) add a 3rd person visible indicator of what flight mode a Scythe is in. I know a player can use the contrails, but the Scythes lack of obvious/easy visual indicator of flight mode makes it much harder for new players to learn on.

Good sample of the ESF A2A game.

Swarm vs. Swarm
1) Swarm vs. swarm, bigger swarm wins
2) Swarm vs. swarm, the group with experience (as pilots and/or in communicating) wins
3) Swarm vs. swarm, the group coordinating and using communication wins
4) Swarm vs. swarm, the group that has A2A loadouts wins
5) Swarm vs. swarm, the group with ground support or not otherwise being engaged by a 3rd party wins
6) Swarm vs. swarm, the group with the surprise strike wins

Swarm vs. Pros
1) Swarms need more players to deal with Pros; the number the Swarm needs goes up disproportionately the more Pros working together. Swarm will need less players if they have more experience or A2A loadouts to deal with Pros
2) A2A Reaver is faster than than any other ESF (especially Scythe), and careful A2A Reaver Gank Squad pros can dictate engagements, especially if their opponents have slow/non-A2A loadouts: initiating combat, evading combat, or chasing down fleeing ESFs
3) Swarms will run out of Resources and be unable to respawn, this means that Pros can beat Swarms simply through very easy to trigger attrition caps

I posted some replies in the other ESF thread. Sorry, 3rd world internet. You can read it there.

You can join an air squad as well and then you can have more time to practice. Hang back a little while the more experienced pilots engage the enemy, and practice your aim.