I've come to realize air can't be balanced.

You think that G2A missiles need OHK because aircraft can escape so fast. However that's not the only solution. What you want is a weapon that can kill an aircraft before it escapes, so as long as the weapons available can kill the aircraft within that time the weapon works.
This means you can use a magazine-fed rocketlauncher or other weapons that allow the player to hit the aircraft multiple times as it tries to escape. This gives the aircraft the time and space to react and try to escape or dodge your shots, but doesn't guarantee their escape like it does now.
Also I'm not just talking about lock-ons, I'm talking about all G2A weapons on MAX's, various infantry classes (not just HA), Lightnings, Sunderers, MBT's, Harassers etc. Introducing only OHK weapons would be terrible for the gameplay. Aircraft would never feel their death was fair, but pure bad luck. "I just happened to fly in the wrong direction so I couldn't dodge and was insta-killed". If the one doing the firing requires multiple hits, and you can make it harder to hit you while doing evasive maneuvers, then it will feel more fair for both the pilot and the G2A user regardless of the outcome.

I do think what you're proposing would fit the role for most AA in the game. But I still think Lock-ons have to change. I'd be fine if they all had a Striker mechanic, but I think true lock-on mechanics would be even better. I picked up Arma 3 on Steam sale and hopped right in to flying, and it's awesome. I Planetside took half the approaches Arma did, they'd have absolutely packed servers. Take the Arma lock-on mechanic for example. Ground has to lock you, then you get a directional indicator showing where the missile is coming from, then you turn to fly perpendicular to it's path and launch flares as soon as the missile is close. If you fly straight towards or away from the missile then you get hit, flares or not. And flares are ammo based, so they're a tool used for emergencies and not for farming. A2A missiles are very noob friendly but far from a guaranteed kill. You have to maneuver behind a plane and he still has a chance to dodge them if he has flares left. It's just about perfect, and exactly what I was proposing for Planetside. PS2 is much less glitchy, but as for an overall game, it just doesn't hold a candle to Arma.

Why not?
It's used in most games with G2A weapons, although there are differences ofcourse. Regardless, giving G2A weapons small magazines but the firepower to kill off enemy aircraft before they escape would work well.

There's lots of reasons not to use the current fire-and-forget lock on mechanics. And besides 'true' lock-on mechanics there's dozens of different game-based lock-on mechanics that would be better than

I would rather have G2A missiles not be based on 'fly perpendicular=miss, fly straight=hit". I would rather use leading, accuracy and missile speed vs direction changes, aircraft speed and terrain knowledge to determine if it is a miss or not. It would be especially annoying in PS2 when a miss is determined on how you are positioned, or how agile something is. "Don't bother firing at ESF, they can change directions fast enough so you'll never get a hit", or "I got hit by a G2A lock-ons just because I was going straight for it when it locked and my aircraft can't possibly turn fast enough to dodge". It again means that (bad/good) luck determines if you hit the aircraft or not, or it's based on the aircraft's superior maneuverability that allows him to never get hit at all.

I agreed with you. I think 70% of our current AA should be replaced by something similar to what you've proposed.

I honestly think it's impossible to have worse missiles than Planetside.

It's not up to luck though. Just like real life missiles aren't up to luck, or the life-like missiles in Arma.

Ah sorry, working on a teeny tiny laptop, I read "don't" instead of "do".

Yes they are terrible. They are even worse than the idea of deterrence flak. "Point in the general direction of the aircraft, hold it, pull trigger, start reloading", not even a requirement to actually aim close to the aircraft, nope just aiming in their general direction is fine, then it's fire-and-forget all the way.

So... How isn't it up to luck in Arma? The aircraft is locked on when it's going straight for the lock-on. If he is capable of always getting in a perpendicular direction from there then the pilot skill determines if the missile hits or not. Considering the skill, or lack thereoff, required in PS2 to start moving perpendicular it would once again come down to "aircraft need to do one thing to prevent getting hit by Lock-on". There's not much luck involved in this scenario, with the exeption being the luck of having a low-skill pilot who doesn't react in time.
The alternative version is that when you fly straight at the lock-on user, you can't turn to a perpendicular direction fast enough and get hit no matter what you do. This is highly likely with aircraft like the Liberator and Galaxy. This comes down to pure luck, "is the aircraft flying straight towards the lock-on user? it's a hit! Is the aircraft flying enough in a direction that it can turn perpendicular in time? It's a miss!".

What you should want is that the skill of the Lock-on user has to go up against the skill of the aircraft user. The end result should be that one was more skilled, causing either a miss or a hit. Then the next shot is fired (or is already in the air) and the skill vs skill battle starts again.

If it's a perfect shot from close range then you're pretty screwed. The other thing is that aircraft behave much more like real aircraft in that game, so making a quick maneuver to dodge a missile could leave you without enough airspeed to pull up. A quick maneuver also screws you if there's a second missile before you can break line of sight or get out of range, as you more than likely won't be able to maintain airspeed after two crazy maneuvers. You're able to lock on to vehicles, so those aren't too much of a surprise, you usually know what you're getting in to. Random infantry missiles do suck, but they're relatively short range and really only get you when you're farming infantry. Anyone can equip an AA launcher, but the game has stamina, and lugging one of those things around really slows you down, plus you have to lug around those heavy *** rockets, so it's not like PS2 where half the ground troops are HSa and they all have rocket launchers with infinite ammo. So getting rockets spammed at you from infantry is rare, unless you're seriously farming, then you get wrecked, but then your infantry can mop them up, so things kind of balance out. Another thing is that planes aren't hover turrets, so unless you have ground targets spotting for you, you've got to fly at you're lowest possible speed with flaps down to have any chance of spotting your own, which makes you a sitting duck to AA. Helicopters can really dish out pain using thermal optics and HE rounds without infantry spotting for them, but they're made of paper to counter that firepower they can bring. I just think it's so beautiful how everything fits together and everyone depends on someone else. I just got done running close air support in an A10 while snipers just sat up on the hill and designated what they wanted my nosegun to make go away. It's just such a better air/ground/infantry interaction than anything else. Certainly better than ESFs LOLpodding helpless infantry until a Skyknight comes and murders that group of helpless ESFs. Oh!!!! They have your gunship! They don't use real vehicle names for copyright reasons I guess, but they put AC-130 guns on the side of an Osprey, it's pretty sick. It handles like a beached whale, but it just lays down the pain. I could go on and on, I don't know if I'll be able to go back to planetside. I really wish devs came in here to share their thoughts.