G40-F Ranger (Anti-Air) is OP.

So infantry gets a hard counter to air (Striker and spawn room bursters). Armor gets a hard counter to air (Ranger Harassers). And air is left with essentially now answer but overwhelmingly massed numbers and resources, basically zerging, and that's OK? That's not the way a combined arms game should be, especially if it's a simple shooter like PS2 and not a simulator like Arma. So now we're left with the reasonable argument that air should have a hard counter to armor, useless against air and infantry, that would be a match (manpower and resources) to a dedicated AA platform. I just don't see that, or any of this, as a fun direction to take this game.

That's the biggest reason I'm against such rock-paper-scissors balance in a fast paced fps. A Walker-type weapon should be the premier AA weapon, and Flak, if it has to exist, should be a low skill and ineffective option for girlfriends trying out a FPS with zero ability to aim with a mouse. But even then I'd oppose such a weapon. They need to shift away from this mentality that a gun should wreck infantry but be worthless against anything else (Kobalt), or a gun that's mediocre against armor but worthless against infantry (Enforcer). It's just bad balancing, and completely unfun when you spend the majority of your time in game with nothing to shoot (Skyguard/Bursters/Ranger).

Seriously, consider how few players like to be the Skyguard in an armor column, or the Ranger in a Harasser squad, or the Burster in a spawn room. Those roles don't need to exist, and shouldn't, not in this game anyway.

Easy now. Don't straw man me, and don't exaggerate.

The infantry counter to air is not rockets. It takes teamwork for that to do anything and teamwork is OP by design.
The other infantry counter to air costs more than the air itself.

The vehicle counter is indeed the walker/ranger/skyguard. Those dominate air in the rock-paper-scissors. Conversely what dominates them is basically anything else in the game that's non-air. Heavy infantry, light vehicles, heavy vehicles.

But I think your concern is, "well what the heck about air? what does it get to kill?"
Well... basically *everything* except what was just mentioned.

It's frustrating to find your target surrounded by AA. But at least you get to run away.
What's more frustrating? Not having AA and having aircraft find you. That is waaaay more frustrating, and no, you cannot run away.

In 1:1, a LOLpod ESF is fairly well matched to a 2/3 sundy with a ranger. With some care and respect for the danger, the ESF will win. When things expand to larger numbers, yeah it gets messy. At some point you may need to rely on the AA killing your teammate so you can get through! Things are no better on the ground. More than a few aircraft overhead can get overwhelming particularly since they are so hard to coordinate focus fire. Heaven help them if the other teams ground forces engaged in any SEAD.

Not sure I entirely agree with your view. I do like a certain rock paper scissors aspect to the game. Without it, weapons tend to get "sifted" into the good ones and the bad ones and then the bad ones never get used.

The drawback though is real: You get stuck holding scissors and there is no paper around? You're bored or terrified, nothing inbetween. It would be nice to allow "re-arm" stations for both vehicles and air.

In any case, circling back to the OP... I think the Ranger is right where it needs to be at the moment. Deters at good ranges. Kills the stupid at close range, chases off the smarts ones for repairs. Bad, bad tradeoffs vs infantry and ground, including that elevation.

"I can fight 3 Mosquitoes or multiple Liberators at the same time"

ummm, no you dont..even one lib with good players you cant do a ****..