I think infantry needs a slightly better counter to esf!

Imma slightly agree with Kristan, While something could be done to help infantry fend of ESFs infantry cost NO nanites and is not time gated because of that. If we made ESFs take a beating when they get close to fights at 350 nanites still, well the sky 100% will be empty as everyone is waiting on nanites or has given up the ESF. Nanites matter because its a timer, not because its a multiplier. You don't have to be strong just because you spent nanites, but if you spend nanites get gunned down and do it again you have NOTHING and have to wait to play the side of the game you enjoy.

That said, a WILD idea to break the A2G issue... Look at AH and Banshee and try and make them somewhat closer to PPA. PPA does its job (at a decent speed for both parties imo) and is horrible against other air (Mechanically). The mechanical factor and the ttk, change those and we are already looking better... imo. Reduce the cost for nose cannon ESFs (tanks are debatable). That alone would fix some of the gripe on A2G, if that doesn't I do not oppose adamts Idea of giving all faction a strikerish RL.

In short nanites = time gate, NOT we should be gods.

I think ESF and Libs would be less annoying if you could not repair them. Liberators and ESFs are annoying because at the moment versus infantry they just tank the damage because they can, repair it behind a hill no other person can get to and come back in under a minute and just harass infantry again. The lack of almost any good anti air weapons is also painful. The fact that a Liberator can tank around 2 mags worth of Skyguard shots is insanity. Burster MAXes are useless too, it's barely tickling. Anti Air turrets have been worthless for like 2 years now. G2A missiles deal decent damage and them taking out ESFs with 2 shots is right, but the range that Libs and ESFs do their work at is often beyond the lock on distance that they have.

NC and VS infantry absolutely need better AA.

• Give the default launcher the Striker mechanic so new players aren't helpless. 2 shots to set on fire.
• Crank up small arms damage against aircraft, not enough to kill, but to deter. This lets small fights have some hope till they pull AA of some sort.

As consolation for air, flak should be removed and replaced with something direct fire. Limit all fire from spawn rooms to 100m.

The range is honestly just about right. 300m to start a lock that can be maintained to 350. That's where infantry usually render to aircraft, which is why the range is what it is. Before CAI air was getting locked at 450 by HA squads that weren't rendering. The problem with AA launchers is the lock mechanic. Good A2G pilots with Stealth don't give infantry 2.5 seconds to get a lock. Every faction needs the Striker mechanic to deal with good A2G pilots who make quick passes in and out of cover, or who exploit the lock mechanic by moving back and forth behind a tree.

I worry about Tanks, at the 100 meters, but This would be lovely.
As well, it removes the Useless-or-InstantDeathforPilot issue with Flak.

Let alone if we get direct-fire, as that would make it more so on the user not the weapon, for effectiveness.
(Instead of the sheer volume of fire , RNGesus, and duration of fire)

IE, Yes to all of this.

Yeah. Esamir hills/spawnrooms and HESH would be an issue at some bases. I like the idea that's been floating around of giving spawn rooms a sky shield. Maybe let it act like a vehicle gate so small arms go through but tank shells and rockets don't.

Just give g2a locks 1km range and make them ohk.

Also buff skyguard TTK from 2 secs to .5 secs. Should take 6 rounds of flak to kill an ESF. Maybe 4 for a skyguard because its the only dedicated G2A weapon. Ranger harassers and ranger ants and ranger sundies don't really count.

Also buff small arms fire so that 10 rounds or so blows them up, especially if you hit the AB tanks. Lots of high explosive fuel in there.

Remove Afterburners and reduce max speed because all they do is AB away and repair and never die.

Please post video of you destroying dual burster maxes with your ESF so that everyone will see how ESF need nerfed again. I'd post a vid but i can't figure out the flight controls, too counter intuitive. Why is there a button for forward and one for brakes? Doesnt make any sense. And then i have to yaw and roll too WTF.

To be fair, a Scythe can just ram it (terrain depending) and the Air Hammer can pretty easily win the dps race. But yeah, ever since the Hornet nerf Maxes should easily beat an ESF outside of those two examples. If you're talking two top tier players, the ESF could win with the rotary, because the Max is handicapped due to rng. But 99% of pilots will never be at that level.

These air threads particularly bother me because the vast majority of people here have absolutely zero clue about what it's like on the other side of things. They can tell something is wrong, but they simply can't come up with a good solution if they don't spend considerable time in the air.

Wow. With such attitude and throwing insults you don't really help your argument.

Your problem is that you wanna 1 vs 1 the ESF. Something that someone have spent 7 minutes of collecting nanites. And you wanna be superior to it by what? By an infantryman who takes less than 10 seconds to respawn?

ESF is force multiplier, and to put it down you either need numbers or pulling out another force multiplier.

And guess what? Tell me which HA weapon is "hard counter" to tanks? All missile launchers could be called "deterrence" as well since you have to put down at least 5 g2g missiles to blow up a tank. Enough for them to kill you or go to cover for repairs.

So again, I stay true to my very first statement in this thread. Hard counter to ESFs - teamwork.

If asking you to educate yourself is an insult then things are seriously wrong with your educational system.

So you try to ignore the inconventient reality here? I don't ask to 1v1 a 7 minute collection of nanites with a 10 second respawn+return to the battlefield. I'm asking for a 1v1 of a 7 minute collection of nanites using another 7 minute collection of nanites. But that sounds too close to balance for you so you ignore it right? Willful ignorance is worse than simply being ignorant.

Gee, would a nanite-based weapon that has a 50/50 chance of winning against an ESF when you spend an equal amount of nanites be a fair balance? It sure sounds like it! You know what's insulting? Not swearwords, swearwords are just a show of emotion. Insulting is ignoring a fair and good proposal because it hurts something that you do, at the cost of everything else.

Yes! It's an argument I've made time and again, which is why I'm asking for nanite-based counters for tanks as well as for aircraft.

And that's an insult on a whole other level. "just beat the most lonewolf vehicle in the game with teamwork". But you start suggesting teamwork with a terrible idea (small arms vs ESF) and then pray everything is allright. Nanites do not give you the power to simply beat out anyone. As NXR1 said: A force multiplier isn't there to give you an auto-win against an equally skilled player. It's there to change how you fight and with enough skill beat out your opponent.

ESF might be time-gated, but they are far too efficient for that timegate. They get enough resources back during this time, and enforce a waiting period (respawn+return to battle) on enough enemies to pay back their 7 minute investment with some extra's. A fair system would mean that on average the amount of time an ESF makes enemies respawn+the time an ESF stays alive should be equal to the cost. Should the enemy waste nanites to try and kill you, the ESF shouldn't stay alive.

Also if we start thinking this way about timegates, what about Skyguards? They are a more specialist (read: less omniversally capable) weapon that costs as much as an ESF and is also a single-seat. Yet when it engages an ESF, regardless of the ESF having a loadout good or bad against tanks, the ESF will almost always escape. In reverse when the ESF has an AV loadout and attacks tanks, 95% will never be able to survive the engagement at all unless somehow covered by other AA. This is an extremely unfair situation, and means that Skyguards would need rebalancing.

Why would ESF magically take a beating when they get close to fights? Why would that even be a problem? Also considering how the A2A system works you are already looking at a worst-case scenario causing aircraft play to be the smallest minority in the game, excepting some edge-cases. Anyway, these G2A weapons wouldn't by any means be like current deterrents, where hits (although not necessarily 100% hits) are guaranteed due to how they work. The idea would be to design weapons that are effective against aircraft if you spend about it's worth in nanites shooting it down. Should the ESF player be waiting on nanites to recharge, so would the shooter.

Making things even more specialist is a bad idea. The best system would be that as many systems are a hard counter to one thing, and a soft counter to another. So if you get caught by a hard counter, you still stand a chance to beat your opponent but it's not an auto-win. You don't want an AI-nosegun ESF to die simply because he met an enemy with an AA weapon.
Which is weird, because you assume that if an infantryman has a weapon that allows it to 1v1 air it would instantly mean no one uses ESF because they have to wait on nanites all the time, but then you immediately suggest anyone not taking an A2A ESF to be completely helpless against other ESF and to make those A2A ESF cheaper to boot meaning anyone with an AI-nosegun will get swarmed by A2A ESF even more than currently.

I would love it if they moved away from this mentality altogether. make all vehicles and aircraft 100% free of nanites to use. Then you balance them out against infantry, and give all vehicles, aircraft and infantry abilities and tools that cost nanites. If you want to be a pilot, you can be one all day long. If you want to be a driver, nothing is going to stop you. If you want to be an infantryman, you can do that no questions asked. That should be PS2, no limitations on what you play, but you can use a force multiplier by burning nanites on your tank/aircraft/infantry.

I bet most ESF noseguns can out DPS dual bursters. I just tested in VR training with the Antares (the VS AA nosegun) and even without landing any headshots - it took a full health Max out in less than 5 seconds. That's pretty academic of course - because infantry farmers pretty much always pack Mustang and Banshee which have a sub 2 second TTK on a full health Max.

If the ESF get's really close (as some pilots do) - dual bursters become even less effective because they need a minimum distance to burst and their direct damage against aircraft is pitiful.

I find the Banshee is particularly deadly - taking my Max out in a little over 1 second in some cases. Lolpods are also pretty devastating if the Max doesnt have ordnance armour fitted - and the fact you can get burst of nosegun followed rapidly by a lolpod volley means no matter what armour the Max has fitted, the Max is probably going to take significant damage or even die - unless it's close to (or inside) a spawn room.

I disagree - part of the problem with air is it's far too versatile. Aircraft should have specialisms IMO (ESF = anti aircraft, Valk = anti infantry, Lib = anti vehicle, Gal = troop transport and beachhead).

The fact that you can have ESFs, Valks, Libs and Gals in the same area all packing AI weapons and farming infantry is what makes air so frustrating to fight against.

Couple this with HESH spam and it means it's often impossible to get between the spawn point an the capture point, even if the spawn room itself hasn't been lock down by ground troops.

That happens the other way round though. 450 nanite Max with dedicated AA weapons goes head to head with a 350 nanite ESF packing Mustang or Banshee - the Max will lose as it is quite simply outgunned.

An ESF should not be able hover toe to toe with an AA Max and win.

That used to be the case. Its direct damage got cut in half not too long ago. Leave it up to Daybreak to balance things with a hammer. Since all Maxes run with explosion resistance the Banshee losing its direct damage got hit really hard. It's just another fail from the Daybreak balance team. It rivaled the Rotary with ESF ttk, but it was MUCH harder to use than the Rotary. And I can't imagine anyone complaining about that. I got killed by this one great pilot with the Banshee a couple times in a row while I had a stock gun in my Reaver. I didn't cry about it, I sent him a tell saying well done, as I've tried and failed to beat decent pilots with the Banshee only. That was the only Banshee I've ever been killed by in the air that wasn't paired with Coyotes. I can get behind an AI nerf, especially if that loss of AI ability would translate to less annoying AA from the ground, but **** Daybreak for HALVING direct damage and catering to no-skill splash. Seriously, the AI guns were made worthless against all but infantry, for no reason because they weren't all that great against vehicles anyway, and everyone was complaining about their power against infantry. It's just backwards as ****. Kind of off topic and ranty, but just another example of why I don't play this game anymore.

Why? Giving how the AI guns were nerfed to **** against anything but infantry, why shouldn't they go toe to toe against a Max with dual bursters, which as bad as they are can still wreck infantry point blank, unlike current AI guns against other aircraft.

Tank combat ttk is too long, but the way that every gun works decently against everything makes driving them feel pretty good, just like every infantry gun has decent versatility, at least until you heavily specialize with something like a sniper or shotgun. Every rifle/canon has its specialty, but they all work in a pinch. CAI really screwed up air weapons and top guns by making them too specialized. Things are especially worse for desolate air because if you're too specialized, you might go half an hour till you happen across the only target you can engage. Think of each infantry class only being able to fight a single other type of soldier. Now pretend that each fight only has 1 or 2 enemies. You can see how annoying rock-paper-scissors gets when there just aren't enough targets. It would be annoying as **** even if there were enough targets. Imagine if your medic could only kill engineers, and HAs could only kill medics.... You'd just be rolling the dice to see who was around the next corner. That's essentially what you're asking for air to be like.

It has occurred to me that I most be one of the worst pilots in the game, cause there is NO way I will kill a buster sub 2 seconds with banshee... absolutely can't.

Fair enough, was a random idea.

I understand what you mean but you've picked the wrong example. ESF are too versatile because they can equip 2 hard counters at the same time, rather than have 1 hard counter and be soft against others. And a Liberator for example is an extreme powerhouse. Having a TB, Zepher, Dalton, shredder or even a Duster as primary MBT weapon would be extrenely powerful, and the Lib can equip 2 at a time! The only limitation it's got is that it cant really counter ESF that well.

Making everything specialist is also a no-no. You dont want to lose just because someone showed up with your counter, its a terrible thing! Look at how infantry do it: an LA isnt necessarily better than an Infiltrator even though the LA wields weapons with more DPS and overall versatility, because the weapons, abilities and potential playstyles of the Infil balance it out. A gameplay where either the LA or Infil almost automatically loses isn't enjoyable. The best system for PS2 vehicles would be that they all have their playstyles and powers depending on the weapon, but not a single one would be superior or auto-win in a battle.

Absolutely nothing wrong with that. Since I dont expect you to mimic my ideas exactly (and you shouldnt) I'm curious to how you would solve if not the imbalance, then the bad experience that infantry has when facing aircraft.

I think there are actually too many ways to bring them down... Now with Light Assault getting into the action (Built-in Rocket launcher) it can be down right horrifying to fly, (No AA set-up needed) I used to love it, but since I spent more time running hiding and skydiving than I did actually getting kills, I all but gave them up and clung to my first love, the Flash. Against BASIC infantry, numbers are where you have your advantage. 4 or 5 missiles against 1 plane is a death sentence for a Fighter. And a fighter stands literally no chance against a max with Bursters. I curtsy to those who still fly and get ground kills with the nose gun.

There are just sooo many ways to deal with them. I am shocked people still use them. The A.S.P. system knocks them down to their true worth on the battlefield. Hahaha! They should be cheaper.

Did it - I shudder to think what it was like pre-nerf then.

I have just tested in VR training and the Banshee only needs about 20 direct hits to take out a full health max. For an 800 RMP weapon that represents a TTK of around 1.5 seconds. I ended up counting shots instead of timing it because the Max died so fast - I couldn't get an accurate reading on my stopwatch.

A half decent pilot could easily land 20 out of the 35 shot magazine given how accurate the weapon is - so even if it took the whole mag - you are still looking around a 2 second TTK and that's without accounting for the fact that many of the missed shots will do indirect damage on top.