[Vehicle] ESF hover mechanic. How it should actually work.

ESF pilots hating the idea that the ESF mechanics are problematic?

No... did you even read the thread or just let your negative opinion towards ESF mechanics cloud your judgement about the quality of a person OP is?

OP is not rational, he's ignored people / playing dumb.

I can't honestly ask for the reverse maneuver or the helijet flight model to be removed, just because our long time pilots would be stranded. To be fair, it's kind of the next step in aviation evolution for a helicopter and a jet to have a baby.

The REAL problems are actually flight control (for newbies, it would be easier if they could switch to PS1's hover mode, despite how extremely limiting to mobility that would be) and that the option of boom and zoom tactics are generally moot as the racer airframe is only a marginal speed boost that non-racers can keep up with more than long enough to shoot the fleeing B&Z down before it's way out of range (stock mossy chasing a racer/hover reaver? Consider it dead even.) Plus the game doesn't quite recognize physics/gravity as long as there is someone in the pilot's seat, so elevation over another ESF isn't even a major advantage in terms of speed during the approach.

All in all, dogfights don't work in PS2 because the same tricks you might use in Warthunder most definitely do not work here. At best, DGC could introduce an NS fighter (because what we need are more NS vehicles and weapons right?) that brings more firepower than any other ESF but must be moving at a certain speed before it can use them, however stupidly jarring a rule that might be. In the nearer term, improving the racer speed is an option, but er... server lag means warping, or changing the physics model on ESF such that a diving ESF actually gains a boost of speed that doesn't trail off in an instant once leveled out.

Otherwise, we're stuck with our dancing helijets, which is admittedly a step up from PS1's circling duels (which looked even dumber and far less impressive) even if it's leagues harder for nuggets to learn and adjust to.

I wanna get into flying, but losing my flyer within seconds of running into a hostile puts a real damper on that. Also - *beep beep beep beep beep.* Alternatively - *chakchakchakchakchak...* I fly over enemy territory as the only flyer, everyone and their cat is packing AA. I'm on the ground and there's enemy aircraft everywhere, I'm the only one bothering to fire flak into the sky. Blows. My. Mind. But at least I have to power to decide who loses an alert merely by logging into their side.

Neither you nor kristan are yet to make a valid point why flight mechanics are problematic and classic style would be better.
I gave up on changing you guys minds but at least understand that it's not gonna happen because of development process and resources it would take.

Seriously am I the only experienced classic mechanics pilot that foresees these changes would only make the game worse since engine can't handle it And would take a big aspect of the game.

I haven't even been active on this thread.

Just pointing out how pilots feathers are very flustered right now.

You talked about this before not necessarily in this thread.
What evs I got enough answers for my physcology presentation due to 2 days later thanks ^^ Also I killed u a couple of times on emerald.

Its the pilots atwmt to defend the RM, saying silly things like there can be no other way. Despite people flying imPS2 just fine without it when the game was first in beta until it hit YouTube and became popular. It turns flight into a twitch experience, with a steep learning curve.

Uggghh. That's what makes me angry. I haven't been playing since beta but even without rm Planetside's aircraft doesn't act like a real plane not even close to bf which is semi realistic. Hover dueling gives diversity to the airgame it would be **** other wise. I explained why it couldn't be done a lot of times but yeah you won't read it anyways.Not only u probably don't fly in this game you probably have never flown in any other classic style game. You are just commenting on a topic you don't know about

Except that the data shows that games like Warthunder with "traditional" flight mechanics are more popular than PS2 with it's "sci-fi" flight mechanics.

This suggests that if PS2 were to adopt "traditional" flight mechanics and physics, it would be accessible by a greater number of players.

Would current players who enjoy the current "sci-fi" system be left in the dust? Yes. But supposedly the overall game would improve for the greatest number of players.

Warthunder is a well made flying game. Ppl will not come to planetside just to fly.Any pilot would rather fly with a half decent physics engine instead of turn your mouse faster to win kind of thing.

I'm not sure that makes sense. If you made PS2 into a better flight game than Warthunder, wouldn't people play PS2 for the airgame then?

If you make it, they will come.

I say you can't make it to a better air game. Soe/DBC don't have resources to do. And anyone who has ever flown even for a couple of hours will understand the difference between removing hover and making an actual realistic dogfighting game.

He isn't the only one who would love to see hover done, I'm in that list.

WT arcade is exactly as PS2: arcade. I only play simulation there, and I'm not asking to implement sim here. But the hover fight is horrible and just what I want to see removed.

But let's compare:
WT have ground and air, PS2 too, with a plus: infantry. PS2 should be much better than WT in the fun quesite, but it isn't, except for the super loyal playerbase (the sames who "roar" against any try of change the game): few ESF players, few Tank players, a "good" number of Infantry players. Other than that is just new players who will leave as all the friends who I tried make play this game. However PS2 lose players day after day, while WT just grow. PS2 have 5,5 times less players than WT, so we can affirm: WT is more fun than PS2.

As I said in another topic, I have ~60 Steam friends, none play PS2 besides me. WT for other side, I have a lot who play (and none play sim, besides me).

Hover isn't fun for the majority of players, as tha tank gameplay. If it was, we should have a game with a stable playerbase. PS2 had 29k peak one day, now struggle to sustain 2k. You all should open your minds to new features to save this game, the unique which we have in this category, instead of this you guys (the fanb... the super loyal players) insist in keep the dumb features the game have just for ego or idk what.

PS2 is dying, and the air is one of the big reasons. I remember how air was crowded in Jaegar in early days, when hover fight wasnt possible because you had enemies 360º. Today you have 10 air unities in a super merged server.

Improving the tank game would be a huge bonus as well. World of Tanks had a record number of 1.1 million players playing at the same time.

PS2's record? 1,158 from the world records match? And maybe who else was on the other continents? And of course most of those players were not sitting in tanks.

Making the airgame and tank game better can only help PS2. It's proven that in both cases things are dumbed down significantly so that players who really want to play as aircraft and tanks are chased away. You're left with the smaller number of people for which PS2's vehicle systems work.

So would we rather have a huge air and tank population, perhaps not equal to Warthunder or World of Tanks but close? Or stick with the smaller number of air and tank players that we currently have?

Development is too far from putting in an actual flight mechanic, mainly because they fear they're going to lose the 10% that actually like this games air mechanics. If you came for some good dogfight action that you'd find in War Thunder or such, you are in the very, very wrong place.

If they replaced the air mechanics in this game that mimic actual aircraft, i'd actually consider playing as an ESF...as would the few hundred other pilots that are always bloodied up by the "2Leet4U" pilots.

This ******* thread has 7 pages now,

lock it down
******* lock it down already

Your assuming Warthunder's success and PS2's shortcomings are related to just flying? You may have missed the massive performance issues, glaring imbalances that took over a year to fix, poor base design, atrocious new player experience, and a much steeper learning curve then any other significant shooter out there, but you can blame air if that makes you feel better. But I do agree PS2 could have created a traditional flight game to make it more accessible to the masses, that does not mean it would have been more approachable or even enjoyable, your simply assuming it would.

To be perfectly honest flying in this game is incredibly easy to do, mastering basic flight controls takes the least amount of time in my experience(learning to aim is the real hard mode). That isn't what makes the flight aspect of PS2 unapproachable, any window licker can get an aircraft into the air on common sense alone, why A2AM are so effective these days, they literally just have to look in your general direction. What gets people is the massive amounts of threats that await you once you step out the warp gate, It's the shear information over load of all of the potential threats a pilot needs to take into consideration as they choose a fight to deal with. Players must master identifying AA positions, checking for enemy air, always looking and listening for threats, and knowing when its time to fight or run away. The list of things you need to be aware of is quite daunting, and it has created an incredibly difficult aspect of the game to master.

In the end of the day the same people would still be good at this game even if the flight mechanics were a copy paste of any sim oriented flight game of your choice,from personal experience most of the Aces in PS2 are usually exceptional pilots in any game they play. Situational awareness is what makes this game hard for the average joe, no amount of flight mechanic alteration will change that. Your assumptions that changing the flight mechanics to a traditional setup would improve anything is nothing more than conjecture, not to mention its a request that will never be acted upon as we barely get balance changes done in this game, let alone massive mechanic overhauls.

Stop talking to this guy

I like this idea. Buff noseguns so we have an A-10 Warthog-esque craft.

BRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRT!

Of course it's true that what I'm doing is conjecture. A completely hypothetical what-if scenario. I might be right. I might be wrong.

In my experience flying in Warthunder is more fun than flying in PS2. I spend more time in Warthunder than I do in the air in PS2 (not counting Galaxy passenger time). This is because the Warthunder flight model is both more intuitive yet more challenging than the PS2 flight model. Thus it is easier for people to get in an aircraft in Warthunder and do basic things with it (as most people have a basic intuitive understanding of physics), but at the same time there is much more skill involved at improving your flying skills in Warthunder.

PS2 on the other hand makes it sort of confusing to start flying (so many rookies crashing in the warpgate), but also has a lower skill ceiling than Warthunder (flaps? what flaps?). This makes for a poor airgame for those who are new and those who are experienced. That's why PS2's airgame is poor and is in need of improvement.

Is it realistic that PS2 can implement the necessary physics model that Warthunder relies on? Probably not, because that's a deeply-rooted aspect of the game in the engine. But it is important to note that the failure of PS2's airgame is precisely because of early decisions made to create a "new" flight model (perhaps necessary due to design limitations) instead of investing more time into proper physics. This made the airgame unrewarding to new players as well as to experienced players who excel at other flying games.

As for your counterargument that sensory overload is the problem with PS2, I disagree. Warthunder has AA tanks, boats, and emplaced flak positions shooting you as well, in addition to the other pilots in the skies (more numerous than in most PS2 air engagements). Arguably in Warthunder there are more threats at any given time for a pilot to worry about in most cases (I suppose in 48v48+ fights PS2 might have the advantage). Yet Warthunder is infinitely more approachable because most people understand how to fly and aren't fighting their own airframe.