[Vehicle] A Banshee balance suggestion

@ OP:

I have no gripes with improving the Banshees AA properties while reducing its AI ability, that sounds reasonable in principle. I think that even direct (AI) hits should kill slower than they do ATM, too many Banshees swoop in and drop MAX units without fear at point blank range without emptying their mags.

Sorry, but if the rest of the game gets "slow" TTKs then ESFs should have slow TTKs (AI) too, especially against their counters.

I think this has some merit, but for the ESF it's more complicated than that: their target types are too narrow.

1) ESF are not good AA Platforms
ESFs are not good vs. Libs or Gals (except in large numbers of ESFs). ESFs are good vs. Valks.
(NOTE: on a scale of "very good">"good">"ok">"bad">"very bad")

2) ESF have 2 Wingmount A2G options, but these options are only a niche A2G platform
#1 Hornet: good vs. (non-Skyguard) Tanks; ok vs. Infantry
#2 Rocket Pod: good vs. Infantry; ok vs. (non-Skyguard) Tanks (not sure how they do vs. Harasser)
(NOTE: in contrast, the AI Noseguns would be "very good" vs. Infantry)

So removing the AI Noseguns would make 3 types of ESFs:
1) very good vs. ESF/Valk
2) good vs. Valk; good vs. (non-Skyguard) Tanks and AV Base Turrets; ok vs. ESF; ok vs. Infantry
3) good vs. Valk; good vs. Infantry; ok vs. ESF; ok vs. (non-Skyguard) Tanks

The weapons are all better vs. stationary vehicles, or ground vehicles that are by themselves very far away from any allies. And also good vs. Flashes (like everything else).

The problem is that the A2A and A2G options are only effective vs. a few specific units. An A2A ESF really only shines vs. other ESFs. And an A2G Wingmount ESF will focus on farming mainly Infantry or (non-Skyguard) Tanks. Which means the ESF has less targets, which makes it harder to find targets... and those targets feel they are being oppressed by ESFs. Which will more infuriate (non-Skyguard) Tanks and less infuriate Infantry (since for Infantry it would still be less oppressive than the AI Noseguns being used on them now).

This becomes an even more complicated issue when you bring in the problem ESFs have with large battles and AA there. It further pushes ESFs into farming lower pop battles and singleton units away from battles. Which makes the ESF more and more of a monster to those target units in those types of battles: ask MBTs how much they like Hornets in small battles? Ask Infantry how much they like ESF farmers in small battles?

Partial Damage XP does help ESFs vs. Libs/Gals in terms of giving ESFs XP even when they do just do a hit and run away. Also, Repair Tool XP is a major source of XP for ESFs that are unable to engage targets and take damage trying to. So adding partial XP for Damaging Ground Vehicles and Base Turrets would help reward an ESF for spending more time on targets it can't actually deal with conclusively (busy Sunderer, Skyguard, AA Base Turret), and take less pressure off targets ESFs specialize in.

Just because were the RUSSIA FTW faction thought I'd put this in for our beloved ESF
http://www.last.fm/music/Basshunter/_/Russia Privjet
The siren though.

yeah totally, an anti infantry weapon that is complete trash at killing anything but infantry needs to be nerfed because it kills too many infantry. It's a main gun on a air vehicle, it's supposed to be strong. It's not like it isn't completely 100% hard counterable. People just don't like to adjust their play.

Hey pal.
First of all, I would like to tell you that my whole argument was only about LPPA A2A capability, nothing else. Therefore I will ignore the parts of your post that had nothing to do with yet; but still, I read them. I just don't feel like discussing them right now.

But I think your argument is flawed. I really don't know how you got the idea that that is remotely fair.
Yes, at AI it is in a decent place, by a very small margin better than air hammer in my opinion. I acknowledge this. But matter of fact is that with air hammer or banshee you're better off at air to air combat.
Just because you can compensate a weakness with a secondary weapon does not make it fair. If of three weapons of the same category, two weapons are decent at AA and one sucks badly at it, doesn't mean it is fair just because you can equip a secondary. As a good banshee/air hammer user you don't need an anti air secondary and can run rocket- or fuel pods, therefore gaining further advantage in loadouts with AI primaries.
Light PPA should be made just as good at anti air as banshee and air hammer are. The argument that it is an AI weapon and therefore doesn't need to be is flawed. Make them all equally viable! In the same way I would have complained about air hammer vs. tanks. They used to eat heavy tanks rather quickly. And again, "just equip rocket pods if you are not nc" does not balance things. That's why I agree with the air hammer vs. tank nerf that took place.

R.

Do you mean the parts where I talk about my suggested nerf to the Banshee?

I've worked as a Game Designer, and I've incorporated some of my process in looking over the AI Noseguns. I'll review what I'm looking at, and how I made my decisions. (NOTE: please don't read any of this with sarcasm, the intended inflection is sincere)

We are looking at:
(1) "Empire Specific" (different+unique+themed) Weapons
(that are mounted on)
(2) "Empire Specific" Vehicles
(and can be augmented with)
(3) custom Loadouts

#1 and #2 create a very complex situation. Not only do we want to make the Weapon itself good, but we have to deal with it being "stuck" on a specific unique ESF and all the baggage/traits that comes with that ESF. We can tune the Weapon itself and we can select from Loadout options to best augment the full Weapon+ESF+Loadout package, but we don't have the flexibility to tune each ESF or the powers of each loadout (without having severe consequences on the performance of all the OTHER Weapons and roles of the ESF)

My focus is NOT looking to obtain 3 AI Noseguns that:
(a) matchup on most individual Stats
(b) conform to the same specific style of Play

My focus is on overall
(a) usability (ease of use, depth of learning curve, etc.)
(b) effectiveness (does it provide a good unit)
(c) fitting a good niche: (1)what player is it for, (2) what role does it satisfy, (3) is that role within the "AI" and "Nosegun" theme; and does it do all 3 of those well)

And my conclusion?
1) Banshee needs a nerf
2) Light PPA is in a "good spot": it works well for the user, but the opponents don't cry for a nerf
3) Air Hammer is not in a spot I like as a Designer: it's (1) not something the average player can use well and (2) it gives the skilled players a *kinda* OP unit... BUT (1) there is currently no major outcry by users or victims to change it, and (2) some people really love it how it is (kinda OP for high skill players), and (3) those players who can't stand using it can still use the Mosquito or Scythe (or other Reaver builds) to do AI instead. So I'm just on the fence if it *needs* a change given the culture of what the game/SOE/players want in/for their game (ease of playability, health for unit-vs-unit ecosystem, etc.). Giving the option, I'd probably make it easier to use and get results with for the average player, then tone it down as needed to avoid being OP for the higher skilled player: it's silly to have a unit that is only NOT considered OP because not many can use it, so its OPness is not that prevalent.

I know it's *weird* to think in terms of the Light PPA being fair when the specified usable Loadout *has* to sacrifice their Wingmount slot to address A2A defense vs. enemy ESFs. But the package holds up. Much like an Air Hammer or Vortek Rotary user really wants to use Fuel Tank so they can make sure they can keep up with enemy ESFs so they can get into the short ranges needed for those weapons. Or how Scythe Gank Squads really wants Tomcat A2AM because the Scythe is slow and so the Scythe runs the risk of their enemy ESF prey outrunning them; aso Tomcat A2AM works very well in a Gank Squad to tackle individual targets with good Dodge skill.

As a frequent Scythe Light PPA user, I am HAPPY that I have a version I can use that:
1) is usable
2) is effective
3) fits a good niche and does it well for me
4) isn't currently considered OP and in danger of a nerf

The Scythe Light PPA currently sees a LOT of unique users, and a healthy amount of hours played. It currently has the #1 Unique Users for Noseguns after the Banshee (and it's only used 14% less than the Banshee). And the hours played for the Light PPA falls between the Banshee (more) and the AH (less).
source: http://ps2oraclestats.com/monthlystats/
Now you can argue that VS are dominant, and that if/when they lose that dominance that Light PPA will slide. Fair enough.

Also, to be clear, I am not totally AGAINST buffing the Light PPA to be "bad" at A2A vs. ESFs instead of "worthless" (as it is now). I just think it's already on the edge of getting eyed for a nerf and that buffing it's A2A vs. ESFs (something I as a Light PPA user don't need) might move it closer to getting nerfed. If I didn't need Coyote in the Wingmount, I could run Hornet, and a Light PPA + Hornet Scythe could be a pretty big monster.

I'm very curious. What did you have mind to change with the Light PPA for A2A vs. ESFs? I think the main problem of the current Light PPA vs. ESFs is it can't get shots to land on target, and what it does hit with doesn't matter: #1 the projectile speed and #2 the speed of the Scythe and #3 the damage of each shot. The projectile is so slow that it's hard to either aim (lead) or land a shot, and the Scythe is so slow that it can't rely on closing distance to minimize the negatives of the slow projectile, and the damage is so light (relative to the low number of hits) that what does hit doesn't matter. What would you change about the Light PPA properties that would fix that for A2A vs. ESFs, but that wouldn't radically change how it worked vs. other targets (would you boost the damage of each shot that hit? Like a mini-Dalton effect that would deter ESFs from pestering you?)... or would your change be a major one that affected how the gun functions vs. all targets?

I do think another area the Light PPA struggles with is it's Weapon noise specifically for the Pilot (and maybe nearby allies). It's loud and ongoing, so it makes the pilot unable to hear the very important sounds of the enemy: the engine/burner of nearby enemy ESFs, the whoosh of the missed enemy Dalton shot, the garble of the Vortek volley, the chug of the AA Base Turret, etc. The Light PPA could really benefit from a noise for the Pilot user that was the same in terms of loudness or uniqueness to others, but that left the Pilot user able to actually hear other things around them.

For most players, the Air Hammer is not viable. It take too much Aim and Movement Control skill to do AI quickly and efficiently from close range, and also to be a threat vs. ESFs. Pilots with less Aim and Movement Control skills will dawdle dangerously over AI targets and get fewer kills, and be beaten in ESF duels where they can't stay close and lined up with shots on target. The Light PPA sees more Unique Users (896 vs. 636) and more Hours Played (217 vs. 185) than the Air Hammer.
source: http://ps2oraclestats.com/monthlystats/

The Banshee is about to be nerfed, so while the Banshee is being used more currently, we'll have to see what happens with the nerf. Also, the current Banshee would not be as good on a Scythe, because the Scythe lacks the speed and slow nose down fall of the of the Mosquito, which would be a problem vs. AI (in being able to drift slow and strike quick on the attack, and then exit quick) and vs. ESFs because the Banshee needs speed to be able to close with targets so its Bullet Speed and Bullet Drop don't negate the attack at range.

I think the Light PPA and Banshee and Air Hammer should all be made as good as each other when each is viewed as a total Weapon+ESF+Loadout package. And that they should all (at least in part of their whole) fulfill an AI theme.

I don't think it matters that one beats another on a particular stat in isolation. Or that one requires the use of a slot and the other does not. What I think it comes down to is the total Weapon+ESF+Loadout package in how usable they are for the pilots using them.

I use the Banshee and as a Pilot I like the Banshee, but I think it needs a nerf vs. Inafntry. I don't use the AH, and I don't like it as a Pilot, but I'm ok with it because I can use others AI ESFs instead and I know some people love the AH and nobody is complaining that much about it. I use the Light PPA and as a Pilot I like the Light PPA, and I don't think it needs a nerf... and I don't see the point in buffing it, especially in ways that I think might then make it need a nerf.

if the Banshee is nerfed to AH levels of AI, the PPa becomes the best AI aircraft nosegun, so it doesn't need buffs.

I'm going to have to disagree with this one. A DPS nerf against maxes could work, but the Banshee is an AI weapon, Maxes are infantry, and getting direct hits on a small target is pretty skill based. Plus, MAX's already have enough response time to dash back into safety.

This is my other primary disagreement. The AH already performs at about 80% of the banshee's kph, and that's despite pilots of it being far more likely to engage aircraft. Meanwhile, it outperforms the banshee's AKPH by about 100%. Any nerf to the Banshee's AI capabilities should be reciprocated with a buff to its AA capabilities.

Aside from that, I more or less agree with your other points, as well as your overall balance theory. A reduction to AI dps is probably the most necessary change to the banshee.

This isn't quite true. In most of the game, if you have a close-range weapon that emphasizes positioning, you can get fairly fast TTK's. See: Tank rounds and daltons against ESFs, direct hits with heavy shells, shotguns, tankbuster, SMG's, etc. I'd also like to point out that a Banshee ESF is the direct counter to a MAX (maxes are infantry), as much as a flakmax is the counter to an ESF.

Being honest, I'm against Vehicle AI nerfs on principle. That being said, vehicle players are nearly worthless as a lobbying group since infantry players drown us out, so I'm trying to propose a solution that infantry players would accept without taking the fun out of using the banshee.

I would suggest that it be changed completely. The Banshee removed and replaced with the Harrassers AI weapon that lets you launch arcing high explosive grenades. This would also dampen its ability to be used heavily in AA combat. Much like the Light PPA.

As it stands now, I don't think the banshee has its damage reduced when it fires on a fully certed flak max, Because the Banshee can still drop the max in a single clip. Or about 3 seconds.

As it stands now, Only one other weapon can kill a certed flak max faster than the banshee, And that is the TankBuster.

Please, no. This is exactly the kind of ridiculous overnerf I'm hoping to avoid.

Sadly, I feel this is the way all AI weapons are headed. The Banshee is no exception. *Hands a bottle of lube*

*Meekly prepares anus.*

Lol, air Marauder, sounds silly but I'd love to see that.

I don't mind the Banshee killing soft infantry targets so quick, what I DON'T like is the fact that it's nearly as good as a Rotary in A2A.

I'd rather see its damage against MAXes and other Aircraft reduced.

Tbh it needs a ROF nerf. Does too much damage too quickly. COF and reload nerfs are also a valid balance change as well, but I would go easy on the former as COF is an easy way to piss a lot of people off (see: PPA, PPA-H). Probably increasing the TTK to either 600 ms (~50% increase) or 800ms (~100% increase) would be good enough and satiate the masses who want it nerfed.

It doesn't need a redesign like PPA did, because it is not fundamentally broken like PPA was (AI weapons should not have that kind of range and have splash, except on aircraft lol).

You mean the LPPA?
(Which is WAAAY more accurate than the Banshee...)

Eh, the Air Hammer is the only one no one really complains about, because it's a jet mounted Shotgun...

AHHHH!
The Banshee needs more BRRRRTTT!!!
PERFECT!

BRRRRTT for the BRRRRTT GOD!!!

Seriously though, I can't see how anyone can get these insane killstreaks with the thing...
The Default Magazine size is TINY, like 25 rounds or so.
It doesn't have the laser accuracy of the LPPA either, so you end up landing most of your shots AROUND the target, which is further exasperated by the tiny Mags.

The only thing I can guess is that they made the actual explosive rounds a bit TOO good at exploding, leading Top Pilotos to fully upgrade it and use it like the OLD Rocket-pods...

Uh dude, they GAVE the Valkyrie a Banshee!
It's called the CAS 14-E.
Hell, they gave it a damn Vulcan with the Hellion G20...

I can easily agree to this, because I honestly think the Banshee is trash in all but the BEST hands, and if the biggest complaint is how quickly it can take down Burster MAXes...

Except that the thing that is supposed to hard counter it is decimated in <2 seconds. Burster MAX's leaps and bounds more effective than skyguards and lockons. That's my 2 cents there. I wouldn't be opposed to an AA buff to all AI weapons if they keep moving in the direction they seem to be with AI weapons. Keep them close range oriented. This is good, if you want to farm infantry you should have to put yourself at risk to do it. Even rocketpods give infantry a more fare chance against them than the banshee.

And as far as the Valk goes. Anyone trying to defend it's weapons hasn't flown one for very long. The general consensus is that just about all of the weapons save for the default are garbage if not flat out broken.

No, the biggest complaint is how it silently kills entire groups of players in fractions of seconds and then can skit off again with no ability to counter.

Reduce excessive lethality.

That is the aim according to the devs, Banshee is not excluded.

The problem is (currently) that it is way better AI-wise than its other two factional counterparts and that it is ridculously good at killing AA MAXs.

Whilst dying to the AH or PPA is sometimes highly frustrating too, almost always there's some aspect of "well I could have done that and not been killed there", with the Banshee it is pretty much the only weapon where it is a case of "well whatever I did I would have been killed there", because even when you're fighting against it super-conservatively it is good enough to just kill you outright with a decent pilot.

Not with the LPPA...
Same god damn playstyle as the Banshee, PLUS it is way more accurate thus allowing it to be used from far father out...
The only thing the Banshee has over it is projectile speed and it's apparent lack of firing noise!