So I know this is completely pointless and futile but why the flying F would anyone think buffing the Valkyrie in its A2G role was a good idea? How could anyone even begin to think buffing the Pelters was a good idea? Pre-patch: Valkyrie able to sit over a Skyguard with Pelters and win because brick wall levels of stupid balancing going on. Devs: Yeah, clearly not strong enough if it can already confidently win against the most premium and specialized G2A weapon in the game, more buffs! We still have players using ground vehicles!
So what are your well informed thoughts on the TTK difference between a Pelter Valkyrie and a Skyguard being ~7 seconds in favour of the Pelters then? Skyguard should just dodge and weave to avoid being hit from close range for around 17 seconds so it has time to kill the Valkyrie? I return it to you, lmao.
How about you don't let it get in range in the first place, since your gun is far more effective at range. Yes, the skyguard is more effective at range than a pelter. Also don't let them get rear hits like a total noob.
I dont think you realize how large that "Dont let it get in range in the first place" is. With the TTK difference being roughly 7 seconds, that does mean that anywhere a Valkyrie can fly within 7 seconds is "you shouldnt have let it get so close" range... I mean that area is like the size of a hex on the map, perhaps larger. But the real question is why should a Skyguard ever need to run for its life from a single aircraft? Not to mention how completely stupid and pointless it would be seeing how aircraft are like 3-4 times faster than it in the first place. I mean its amazing you even think that its a good argument that a anti-air tank should have to run away from aircraft, not even multiples but a single aircraft because the DPS is so utterly horrible that it doesnt stand a chance when its in range of the A2G weapon. I love people with Pilotitis, there is just something special about them.
look i wouldn´t even mind if the buff EFS secondary weapons .... but yea G2A needs the buffs it needed for year allong with further missiletype G2A weapons ... also maxes need more outdoorsurviveability ..
Thats a bit of an unfair representation of what will happen. If the Valkyrie is so friendly to fly directly in view in a straight line then yes, it applies. Just keep in mind that (the old) Valkyrie with its nose slightly down to see the ground better will fly 290m in 7 seconds, a hex is about 300m. However even in that situation, the Valkyrie can disengage almost any time and survive. The Skyguard cannot. So the Valkyrie can retry flying straight at it until it gets lucky on the Skyguard's RNG and the Skyguard needs to reload too much due to misses. But why would the Valk fly straight on? The Valk can easily use height to avoid detection. Fly very high and drop down allows you to close the distance without being spotted very quickly. Or it can fly low to approach. Any cover within 300m of the target is good enough to let you win the engagement. But the Valk can do better. Why approach from the front at all? You are an aircraft, you can approach from any direction and be likely to avoid detection until its too late. This lets you win against the most useful G2A weapon in the game... and most vehicles and players are NOT a Skyguard. Meaning almost free vehicle kills anyway. All infantry and vehicles need something to either avoid being hit by aircraft and/or scare away aircraft. After all the aircraft can escape any situation against G2A even if they picked the worst loadout you can imagine, while ground units struggle to survive even if they do pick the correct loadout.
A big reason why I am promoting the Siren on the Chimera whenever I can is both because its a great weapon but also because its a good G2A weapon. If more people used it(literally never seen anyone but me have it) then... then it would get nerfed within a month because pilots would be complaining on social media and they are the most coddled part of the playerbase so they would get their way ASAP. But it would be a fun week or two until the hotfix came and nerfed it. And yes, I do pull a Chimera every now and then as a Skyguard 2.0 but the whole being stationary is not amazing with it being the secondary turret.
... skyguard is a bad example, everyone knows how useless it is if it doesn't doppler effect an aircraft coming at it
Thats what makes it the perfect example, there is no more specialized and dedicated G2A weapon in the entire game and its basically complete garbage which gives a good idea how the rest of the options are. Basically garbage. If the devs had a clue about balancing a game they would see that if aircraft can glue themselves to a ground vehicle and win by default just because the ground vehicle cant aim up then there needs to be a counter to this and weapons that can aim up but lose by default due to lacking damage isnt exactly a answer to it.
...no, angling your tank and hitting them with an AP/HEAT round is a better option... they're not supposed to be AA, but they're better than the skyguard when it comes to AA
My gripe in a nutshell, the skyguard is trash, it needs more damage, higher fire rate, or better velocity
I mean yeah its better to hit them with tank shells but you would still have a problem if the Valkyrie has you as a target as when its above you, you suffer the -50% damage penalty no matter what weapon you are using and having to hit it 6 times to kill it with a Lightning AP is you know, not that fast either. Even with perfect aim and 0 delay between shots just the reload time with max upgrades is ~13.5 seconds and the Pelters TTK against a Lightning still stands on around 10 seconds. Yeah, stock Valkyrie(no Comp armor, no Fire Suppression) with a Pelter beats a max upgraded AP Lightning in a DPS race as well, not just a Skyguard. The devs aircraft bias is worse than you think, even a Prowler with upgraded AP reload time has 'only' a DPS of ~514 and thats the "DPS monster of the MBTs". Unupgraded Pelters have a DPS of ~409, same as a upgraded AP Magrider. Asking a AP Lightning to kill that from below is like asking it to kill a Magrider while sitting still and miss one shot first. Could happen but its more likely the Lightning loses that fight though. If the Pelters are upgraded it reaches the upgraded Prowler AP DPS too so you know, balanced as it should be. Velocity is 'ok' on a Skyguard, what it lacks is mainly the DPS so RoF and damage buff combo or one or the other would be ideal. Or the devs could just give us a smaller version of the Colossus Skylance already as if it wasnt a obvious answer to the G2A/A2G unbalance since forever, for a more skill based G2A that requires aim and doesnt rely on flak but then packs the punch to actually be the one hunting aircraft rather than be hunted by them like the Skyguard.
Well there's also the fact that the valkyrie is in the air, and is more likely to be hit by multiple opponents, as opposed to the lightning, which is on the ground.
If we were talking about a tank with a G2A secondary I would kinda agree but this is about a vehicle which entire role is to shoot aircraft and protect an area from them and has been given heavy drawbacks for that 'ability'.
You do realize you can fly low right? Its not as if 5m off the ground matters much in PS2 for how many people can shoot you. Also aircraft have the fewest users and their MO is pretty much "stick myself on top of the enemy lines where the most risk of multiple attackers is". The fact that aircraft are capable of regularly surviving a 3v1 is a testament to their ridiculousness, as no ground vehicle can survive 3 dedicated weapons attacking them. (Not regularly or without support anyway). Just imagine if Magriders had the option of flying 20m in the air. Would you count that as a disadvantage? "Oh noes, now more people can see and shoot it!". Yeah... so control when you use it? Make sure the people who might shoot you are blocked by cover or dont realize you are there or are engaged already and use lower flight when necessary?
it´s not a better option ... it´s silly when the weapon MEANT for AA duty is severly lacking in kill/deterancepotential to a weapon absutely not meant for it ..
Honestly? They probably did it to make up for the removal of the rumbler seat repairs. Ill admit that they were needed for dealing with harassers, but I still dont get why they took them off the Valkyrie. Me and my buddies will miss playing sky pirate and broadsiding ESFs with flying strikers now.
Perhaps they did but if you read some of the earlier posts a stock Valkyrie with Pelter was already strong enough to plant its rear above a Skyguard and just kill it. Add Comp armor and/or Fire suppression and they could do it with some margin of error. With the buffs Im not sure a Skyguard can even deal with a solo Valk swapping seats between the pilot and gunner, the DPS race is so massively in favour of the Valk that even a AP Lightning that can land its shots will struggle(and lose) the DPS race if the Valk is above it.
I think there's a misunderstanding about the role of the Skyguard. It's a SkyGUARD not a SkyObliterator. It's supposed to be an air deterrent, hence the reason the Lightning directive line objective is called "Air Deterrence". You're not supposed to single handedly destroy every aircraft on the continent. If you're worried about getting jumped by an aircraft, try running vehicle stealth and sitting near cover. I also find it weird that you think a single person vehicle should be stronger than a 2 person vehicle. If a Lighting required cooperation between a gunner and a driver, then sure, it should be strictly better than a Valk or Lib because it's a specialized anti-air gun. But, in a game where the devs are trying their best to "balance" everything until the only determining factor is population size, there's no way 1 person is going to beat 2 people (without a considerable gap in luck, skill and maybe some hacks).
