[Guide] ANTI-AIR what is best counter, the balance, and WHY is ground anti air is OP

Don't comment on stuff you obliviously don't have a clue about.Every major NATO army has dedicated AIR Defense Battery's.

Ha, you do realize that you slit your thread's throat before you even gave it a chance, right? Of course, the rest of the poast is nothing more then counter-"whining" because you are not able to fly in a solopwnmobile and destroy everything in the sky, and on the ground on your own with your 1,000 certs/700SC. I mean its okay because its YOUR 1,000/700sc, not that of someone else that dared to do something other then what you want to do, which is to defend against people with your mentality who believe that the game is balanced because You and others like You can easily smash tanks, destroy air units, and snack on infantry like they were grapes. SOE forbid, please, anyone dropping the same amount of certs, or cash to get something that is actually decent at countering the unit it is supposed to counter.

On one hand you want to dominate everything with your 1,000 certs/700 SC.
On the other hand you think people are whiners if they simply want to counter just air units with their 1,000 cert/700SC AA weapon.

Yes, how dare they ask to be able to do what they are supposed to do according to the description and the type of weapon that it is. How dare anyone challenge your rockets' ability to dominate not just the infantry that they are supposed to be good against, but their ability to dominate armor and liberators.

I can see that you think nothing of your ability to zip about the skies in a hurry while a burster max is barely able to outpace someone on foot. I also see that you think nothing of your ability to run off, land, and repair on your own all the while the max user needs to hope that an engineer will actually bother repairing him instead of running off to play unlimited ammo rambo. I also see that you do not understand how great it is to be able to pop a flare and make sure that you are not being hit by lock on AA as you run off to safety, all the while the max in unable to pop flares to have a magrider round fly off to the side instead of slamming into him. Also, you can have flares and upgrade your armor against flak and small arms while the max can use certs to buff his armor against explosives OR small arms, instead of the ability to help counter both types of damage he is going to get nailed with.

Yes, it is our tactics that is the root of this problem because it is extremely plausible to force players to fill a role by spending their certs and or cash in which they cannot even counter their intended target. Last I checked, the rifles work against infantry and maxes. The AV for HA works against vehicles. Tanks can choose either standard rounds that are average all around, or specialize in armor penetration or killing infantry with a high explosive turret. Yet, somehow playing in a AA capacity is the only role that has been handicapped to the point that it has been a bow and a nod to the aircav player to let them know that for some odd reason they are supposed to be the dominant players for their 1,000 certs or 700SC, while all others who spend the same are to be on a lower tier.

The problem is that SOE made a critical error and has spoiled some players into thinking that they should always have such omnipotent weapons for the same cost, and should never be challenged either in the logic behind the weaponry that allows them to smash everything and everything, but also make them untouchable in game.

SOE took a step in the right direction by realizing that pilots doing stupid things SHOULD pay the consequences for their actions by allowing AA units to actually have a slightly increased chance of destroying their intended target over the slight chance that they had before. What they need to realize next, and implement, is a 3 rocket type system in which you need to choose and buy the rockets that are either good against infantry, but weak against everything else; or a rocket that is good against vehicle, but is weak against infantry. By that I do not mean a *wink, nod,nod, wink*" its supposed to be good against infantry , but only average against vehicles" *wink, nod,nod, wink* rocket system. I mean only good against one or the other as though it were any other class or role within the game.

The way the game has played has been mutilated by their error with the rockets and it will not be a balanced game until they force aircav to focus on one target type or the other. SOE has far more at stake then the small segment of the playerbase that feels that they are entitled to such imbalanced weapons for the same price as the supposed counters that do not counter a damn thing. If PS2 is barely getting started and SOE hopes to increase the populations, which means increased revenue by players purchasing weapons they need to make sure that all of the weapons are balanced. Right now, rockets are still imbalanced, which is a separate issue from balancing AA weapons. Both of those issues need work, but the rockets are revealing the segment of the playerbase that will threaten to leave the game if they have their weapons really fixed, but that same small segment is also threatening to run off significant parts of the larger portion of the player base, but also run off any potential customers that SOE could pick up as the game goes on.

By the current logic behind the rockets I have to ask SOE what is the logic behind the bursters being unable to do any damage against ground vehicles? Why is it also a poor weapon against infantry if the rounds are supposed to cause aircraft turbulance, punch through their armor with a direct hit, and also send either shrapnel or submunitions as the round explodes if the round is within proximity of an aircraft instead of a direct hit? Also, if an aircraft, of all vehicles, were to get upgraded armor how is it not heavier and have it's maneuverability modified to represent the heavier armor that is either heavier in weight, or bulkier, or some other components sacrificed to make space for the additional armor, regardless of what type of material is being used to armor the aircraft.

As for aircraft being the best counter to aircraft, that is actually kind of a flawed way of thinking of it. Aircraft are good at countering aircraft because they are like systems, but they are not focused upon destroying other aircraft, unless they are designed to do so, but only can they do so with some trade offs. Right now a rocket equipped fighter is just as maneuverable and fast as one that does not have rockets. The primary weapon is also the same. This means that you can just keep stacking good on top of good without any drawbacks, unlike the tanks that choose to be mediocre or good against only one type of target while being completely worthless against aircraft.

You could pick up a history book and look for the difference between Egypt's ability to fight with and without a AA umbrella against the Isreali Airforce to get one of the most modern examples of how powerful anti-air systems are when both sides are nearly balanced, technology wise. This has nothing to do with politics, incase some mod is antsy, it is merely about a prime example of how AA SHOULD work, unlike how it has so far, and the OP wishes it to return to.

oh and ..just in case you didn't realize it, I'm not here to argue with you or others that think as you do, this is more a post towards the DEVs, but also other players that are tired of the ones that feel they should automatically dominate because they spent the same amount of cash.

Op is comparing his ESF to being a predator on the top of the food chain and saying it is ok. I lol'd.

Troll?

Don't worry. Aircraft is in the process of being removed from PS2.

Just saying, but AA guns shot down far more aircraft in WW2 then aircraft. Roughly 65-75% was shot down by AA weaponary

AA in PS2 is a fluke. The phalanx AA is the one thing that protect bases but at the moment is such an inaccurate joke. Any aircraft can kill it with ease.
As for the Dual Burster AA, in one way i agree with you, but on the other hand, its completly useless against ground troops.

What PS2 lacks is a form of heavy anti-aircraft artillery. A large calibre AA gun with decent rof, good damage and low bullet drop. With as drawbacks not very fast turret rotation and rather quick heat buildup if they do not watch there ROF.


Because atm, planes can come in, fly slowly, aim like a sniper, deliver payload easily and then fly off

Yep, in every encounter, the air will have the option to retreat at any moment (survival is an other story), and strike when they want, i am considering this as a huge advantage and only way for ground to have chance of denying air any access is by deploying several anti air. A single burster max will scare it away, put 8 and it will kill on sight, what i hear on forums is request to increase anti air

This is much like infantry crying that tanks are killing them left and right and they have to put up several HA to takeout a tank before he can backoff to repair. Then you look at the picture and realize the guys just been pushing as infantry while enemy also been using tanks.

Only thing is you dont see a scenario where tanks cant see the enemy that is shooting them, this is where the draw distance comes in. Tanks fight in ranges where they can render the enemy, most air fight happen between ground where aircraft cant render infantry
You cant do damage to things you cant render even if your shots are hitting them directly

This is an issue and i notice how everybody that claims Air is OP is neglecting this fact.

Air is not OP, people are idiots.

Because atm, tanks can come in, aim like a sniper, deliver payload easily and then move back

Do you realize how stupid that sounds.

MAYBE, they are able to do so, because someone thinks infantry is the best way to go around open land

This is not a guide.
It is a rant based on personal opinions.

Nothing specifically wrong about rants on the forums, but labelling your post as a [Guide] is misleading and egotistical.

There goes this guys credibility.

If this game had a food chain like game design I'd expect the cost of ESF to go up to 750 air resources and a cooldown of 30 mins added.

RULE 1# ... AIR IS OP!

RULE 2# ... Expect the air unit to come back at 300 KPH a few seconds after you repel it with G2A missile or flak.

RULE 3# ... Spend 2000 certs so rocketspamming kills you in 1.5 seconds instead of 0.75 seconds.

RULE 4# ... I don't even know what I'm talking about anymore, but I need 5 rules so I'm going to write nonsense!

RULE 5# ... AIR IS OP! So don't bother trying to play while the enemy has air superiority.

I still stand by the food chain analogy ... As ESF i will hunt down enemies that are not putting up a fight.
And you know what is the most funny thing, When we are on ground, i see no ESF shooting us with rocket pods ... do you wonder why ?, because we run combined arms, we dont keep air clear by use of maxes, we use AIR. Much like we roll tanks and grind trough infantry and then make a tactical entry when indoors.

Food chain applies, if you want to turn the game intro 1 inf vs 1 tank equal odds or 1 inf vs 1 air equal odds, then i am happy to inform you that this will never happen

read again, i said requires more man power ... much like infantry vs tank ... But i guess you like to pick and chose sentences.
And do you honestly think that this is for organized fights ? lol

as outfit when we are pinned by aircraft we make mix of AA from ground also, that is if we have important ground assets to protect also. organized HA fires easily take out any air in range if they dont start pulling off after flares.

• You need several dual-burster MAXes to kill a single aircraft before it unloads and flies away.
• At that time dual-burster MAXes are only effective against air while air is effective against air/armor/infantry.
• Both MAXes and aircraft cost resources, and have a spawn timer.
• Air can land and repair itself, MAXes can't (need an engineer).
• Air can pick and exit fights at will, MAXes can't.
• Air has much higher XP/hour gain than MAXes.
• MAX is the only effective G2A option right now.

How is G2A overpowered? You must be a troll.

I swear some "pilots" won't be happy until they can take off and just left click to kill everyone on the continent.

The word "balance" is completely alien to their mentalities.

Some good posts in here of people that do understand it though.

The pilots say its realistic that air should be op against ground.
If they want realism, lets have aircraft shot down or severly crippled in one aa or g2a missle
lets have aircraft lose performance when they lose hp

The only thing that should counter scissors is scissors?

I just love how all the PS2 dedicated pilots keep saying they are not OP as they rack up kills, then come and brag about it. Then say something stupid like AA ground units are just noobs and don't know how to play right and I'm so pro at flying, bla bla bla.

I really hope the developers just go overboard now with the nerfs and buffs so we can listen to all the dedicated pilots whine about how AA takes them out in seconds and it's not fair.

Seriously though tweaks to the balance of AA and Air is going to happen because it is pretty damn clear from all the whining on both sides that something is wrong.

Are you seriously saying air is fine because you can always spam air and the skygods get to farm ground plebs forever just because? You know no one enjoys being a perpetual victim that's why you're seeing a ridiculous proliferation of air at the moment. Keep at it and the skygods will have no one left to farm!

As a player who has tried to make piloting his focus in this game, the OP isn't saying much, and some of it is kinda ridiculous. The only thing i agree with is that Air vs Air needs to take longer. I don't enjoy the a2a missle design, and i don't like the current ESF balance at all.

It is very dificult for ground to actually kill air.

Go do a 6 hour play comparison of the following: take a good pilots K/D from an ESF or a lib gunner with a good pilot, and then compare that k/d to a buster max or skyguard user. Guess which one is going to have at minimum 20 times the cert points and an extremely high k/d ratio, and which one is going to have barely anything.