AA is Completely Broken at its Core

You're asking for a change to a core mechanic based entirely on a subjective point of view. Not to be snide, but good luck getting support for that one.

the core problem of anti-air is that flak and lock-on infantry can reach aircraft while they dont even render for the aircraft. this is especially annoying when piloting a liberator: you dont even see any targets on the ground and yet enormous amounts of flak are already hitting you and you already get locked on from max range

I never expect kills with flak. It's a deterrent. Probably why you get ground to air xp for pilots that don't get the hint.

Yep it would end up with a similar problem.

Er... no.

Again (as usual) it's all about game balance.

Which seperating the ESF into two fighters A2A and A2G would improve the game for everyone (pilots and everyone else - it would allow A2A fighters to be actual A2A fighter and A2G fighters to be modified into that role).

Currently either AA is always going to be too weak (leaving the ESF as the master of the sky and ground - as it was before AA improvements and lolpod nerfs), or it is going to be too strong, or percieved as too strong by pilots (at least when massed).

Because it is a very blunt instrument being used against the most versitile vehicle in the game, which makes balance almost impossible to find.

So the only sensible solution is to change the dynamic........ and by happy coincidence we already HAVE something that works........ the PS1 air model, with a seperate A2A and A2G fighter.

Highly speculative claim considering no opinion poll has been done on the subject.

What is with this double standard that air should be perfectly capable of operating alone when tanks and infantry need support to do anything.(aside from infantry in biofarms)
Don't expect to farm platoons when every 1/5 person is scanning the skys for your skygod charriot.

Tdlr:lone aircraft should not be useful in large fights:

The first thing you need to do balance ESF is to make them decide whether or not they want to be AI, AV or AA. But they can only be one.

Who thought it would be a good idea to give quick, nimble fighters rocket pods that damage anything they hit equally? If a fighter has equipped Vehicle Pods, then it should take more than one clip to kill a Heavy Infantry. It's not fair that we all have to play a massive game of Rock Paper Scissors while ESFs can be pick all three.

Edit: This also applies to all Heavy Assault AV weapons except for the Decimator (Which I think rightly has decent AI capabilities)

I disagree with the part about "it's not fun for anyone". It's fun for me, especially after seeing the word "peasant" thrown around by self-styled elite players that payed a few hundred resources for an aircraft and fashion themselves like some kind of royalty.

De-throning those narcissistic punks is always a fun time.

"Sky Jouster" post detected.

Give it a break. Especially after all the lobbying you guys have done not a lot of us are excited about giving you your own very special can-not-interfere corner to chivalrously joust at each other.

Did any infantry invite you to interrupt their fights? Nope. How about those tank columns blasting each other? Nope.

my two cents on the matter is that AA should be slightly less powerful, but more effective against infantry. More players would use a skyguard if it could kill infantry well.

I enjoy lockdown dual-burster max because i know it makes some lolpodder rage

If you were skilled at it your score/min would fall somewhere near the very top out of all weapons in the game (similar to my own list I posted earlier in the thread.) That's where it naturally ends up in the hands of someone with reasonably good aim, trajectory, and prediction skills.

If you were skilled, it wouldn't change our position, but this thread wouldn't have existed. You would know the weapon is quite capable, highly rewarded, and creates a massive no-fly-zone for the enemy team.

It actually can kill infantry pretty well. You're not going to drive up some huge hill to engage them and you're not going to face down huge squads of enemy infantry, but a handful are in the open or even behind cover that's surrounded by relatively smooth terrain, they don't have a chance.

the skygaurd really isn't as good at killing infantry as it should be given that it is a 4 barrel flak explosive firing tank. The barrel bounces like crazy and the damage is minimal and rng based.

Actually, this is incorrect, Phrygen. I use the skyguard a lot and sometimes against vehicles and infantry. While it isn't exactly the 'most efficient' use of the Skyguard, given the Lightning has no M12 or M20 gun (In PS1, the basic Lightning had a 12mm gun, and so did the Skyguard Buggy), your only other ranged infantry engagement beyond the Python HEAT and HE cannons, is the Viper. The HEAT and HE cannons are extremely inefficient as you need to engage at range and hope for grouping, otherwise, 1-2 rounds for hitting infantry with a low ammo pool, versus maybe 10 to 20 rounds out of 70 for the Skyguard or 1-6 rounds from the Viper is still much more effective, in my opinion.

You're so right that it's not fun. The idea that specialisation is bad, or that we should remove the only unique mechanic in PS2 though, or that that would change ANYTHING about the current balance is a nonsense; sorry.

No you shouldn't

In what category does my 150mm VG AP fit? It simply deshtroischs efferisching!

I mainly play HA but am "trying" to learn to fly and I am enjoying it all in equal measure. So I disagree with post from the start.

^This so much.

This:
https://forums.station.sony.com/ps2...-evolution-of-a2g-in-ps2.161426/#post-2309215

and this:
https://forums.station.sony.com/ps2...sly-flight-ceiling.155180/page-2#post-2218425