[Radical Suggestion] Nerf Skyknightside

Wooooo deterrence! Such fun!

You know, I think it's only fair to let air in on all the fun that AA is having. They should also experience the joy of deterrence. I propose that a single aircraft can no do no more than 60% damage to any single infantry or ground vehicle. As soon as that aircraft has done 60% damage, then their damage against that particular target is reduced to zero until that target is either destroyed or completely healed/repaired. This means that aircraft now have to work in teams to kill anything on the ground, and pilots to can have fun being able to damage but not kill a single target.

Nerf the air to ground game, you make the air pointless, buff the ground to air game, you make it impractical for big operations. It's a hard balance, but is achieved through making a diverse amount of loadouts for each type of fighter. An anti infantry fighter doesn't move fast air wise and can't kill tanks well but mows down infantry, air to air barely affects the entire point of the game; ground combat. There is no air objective, no control node in the sky, you simply kill other esfs designed to do other things. A anti vehicle esf is mostly only good for tanks, hornets take a long time to chip a sundi down and don't kill infantry efficiently but shred tanks.

So what happens if you nerf the air to ground game? Air becomes less visible than tanks, more tanks are pulled, less dogfights happen and for those who just want to fly get pegged by anyone with a rocket lockon and stop flying, then esfs become pointless, entire section of the game closed because it serves no purpose.

Much like tanks before the construction update, they served and still very little serve purpose in the game, a tank before revolved mostly around the anti vehicle game, only targets that were worth shooting at were sunderers that pushed people up in a base. While tanks I feel have small impact in the game, have a much better standing for entrenched positions and moving in on bases.

We all understand that the game is primarily infantry based, infantry with teamwork can take on literally anything in the game for free, an esf is simply a pool for resources to be used in combat and only in certain situations that it is designed to be in. A shift in situations like a esf designed for anti air when there is no air makes it pointless, same for vehicle and rarely infantry.

The point is, nerfing esfs going anti ground makes esfs less viable for doing that, making less esfs and making an entire group of players unhappy that they put so much into dogfighting.

That's funny : for me, what is broken is the overpowered AA ( as soon there is AA, you can't use an ESF, which become useless) and the overpowered Liberators (can one shot any ESF and infantry, are immensely resistant, have speed, can fly on the back...).

The ESF can even be destroyed by a single branch or antenna ; no other vehicle in the game has such fragility...

There is nothing wrong with the current state of the air game. Once you get half decent, its not hard to actually blow up the air. It just requires you to actually do it BEFORE it kills you a few times.

I definitely appreciate anyone taking the time to type out a well thought out post, but what I never understand is why these same people would then throw all of their hard work out the window by dropping 'blanket statements' such as:

I think too many people let emotion trump common sense, and then they apply their own personal experience as being the same for everyone else. Instead of attempting to look through all the different eyes of a multi-player game they can only see through their own, and then they want or expect this to apply for everyone else.

I do not find them 'useless' at all. They may be underpowered against AV vehicles but they should be, they're AA vehicles. Skyguards can slaughter infantry quite easily at close range and I have killed numerous Sunderers with my Skyguard. I have even on occasion outgunned poorly piloted or sheer extraordinarily bad luck Lightnings and Harrassers. It is quite pleasing to finish off any vehicle, especially MBT's with the lowly Skyguard, and at least for me it is not a rare occurrence. It's quite tasty indeed.
I readily admit though that they bear no semblance whatsoever to the original Skyguard which was a legitimate air killer and feared and respected by many pilots in PS1.

I won't comment on AvsA because frankly I suck at keyboard/mouse flying and I'm jelly.
I don't have issue with A2G at all.
I do feel Liberators need some tweaking though.

Air Superiority should be just that in my opinion. Superior. If you control the skies, you can more easily dictate and control the outcome on the ground.
I hate that fact because I refuse to learn to keyboard/mouse fly so I'll never be one of the Ultimate Cheesers, but I can also accept it and still function just fine scurrying about on terra firma.

Bring back Sparrow and Starfire MAXes and tweak the Burster and give it back to the TR, and AA MAXes will once again become legitimate air killers, instead of more often than not relegated to being general nuisance/deterrence/annoyance/pesks. (This is sarcasm and wishful thinking).

I have shot down countless ESFs. Not so much Libs or Gals, because they take a concerted effort. If I see air wrecking my team, I pull anti-air. Welcome to a team game. Stop thinking about your KDR and your SPH. It's a combined arms, massively multiplayer game. YOU HELP YOUR TEAM WIN.
My KDR goes down when I'm infantry, partially because I'm not a top tier player (Oh no, that dude outshot me. NERF HIM, IT'S NOT EASY ENOUGH), and because I focus on support. If I'm an engineer, I will spend the next half hour doing everything in my power to keep that friendly tank that's spearheading the assault alive. If I'm LA, I flank the enemy. I destroy enemy AA, I hunt down maxes and Infils. It's that simple.

When I'm in the air (Usually) I will generally use Hornets as my secondary, but if I'm facing a zerg, I pull out the lolpods. Why? Because I'm trying to break up the enemy offensive. Two missiles and 70 rounds does little to deter a large group of players... the wrath of the Gods raining from the sky makes them break and run. If they don't die, they're softened up and the guys on the ground mop up. If AA get's bad, I bail until AA is lessened. By infantry/vehicles that want that air support back. I've watched entire zergs stall because they lost their air.

Of course, I will also always focus on enemy air, before ground. Which brings me to my next point. When I'm in practice, I'm a decent A2A pilot. My biggest weakness is I'm not overly skilled at the RM. I can do it, but I don't utilize it effectively. Despite that, I still win many air duels. I play smart.

Everyone screams about the skill ceiling being too high in the sky. You know what happens if it is dumbed down? The skies get filled with pilots. Noobs at first... noobs that practice, get better, and suddenly the skies are filled with lolpods.

The way it is now, is that you've got Ground Pounders/Hover farmers, Skyknights, and A2A/A2G pilots.

The Skyknights, infinitely more skilled in A2A than their counterparts, control the population. They fly for the joy of shooting everyone else down. Often never taking a single shot at the ground. Yet still they're targeted by the ground. Torn to shreds.
Hover farmers. Yes, they are a pain. They can ruin fights... but so can tanks camped outside a building. So can infantry camping a spawn. So can Battle bus convoys, rolling through an entire army of MBTs, and winning.

It's all about knowing what to pull for a fight, knowing when to concede a battle, and regrouping for a better chance next time. This is a game that requires communication and teamwork. Not just upscaling COD or Battlefield.

I disagree on the range: the Skyguard has an insane range for instance.
For all the rest yes, AA is probably the most frustrating experience for me so far. Btw I've been playing without interruption since beta and I have the Skyguard since day 1.
The Skguard has very long range but even in its niche it feels quite poor as it deals ridicolous damage to flying objects. In at least 90% of cases aircraft manages to just fly away by using the afterburner. Getting some kills with that is a mere question of luck as experienced pilots will always avoid being hit.

it sucks being so specialized but don't get kills.

The fight feels even more unfair considered the Skyguard is next to useless against against any ground vehicle. It's bloody hard even to hit infantry. In my eyes the air game is a total mess with Valkyries still useless (weapons still clearly inferior to any other in the game, still relying on constant repair to survive), Galaxy best logistic vehicle in any situation, Liberator clearly OP since months and in general a clear asymmetry between A2G and G2A.
Because while fighting air from the ground might be a very frustrating part of the game, on the other hand for unknown reasons A2G weapons are extremely powerful and flexible. I don't get for instance why a soloable vehicle like the Liberator must be fast, tanky and OHK vehicles while the supposed-to-be-best-anti-aircraft in the game is treat by devs like a specialized deterrent so you need 2 or 3 focusing fire on the same target to achieve anything.
I'd like to remember once again the Liberator is the only vehicle that allowed a player to get the "1 man to farm them all" achievement: he killed 570 players without even dying once. How that vehicle escaped the nerf hammer (even the upcoming air changes) is still a ******* mistery.

Here here sir!

What would y'alls thoughts be about maintaining most of the aspects of AA as they are, but increasing the RoF of the skyguard?

From my perspective, this would maintain its balance vs. targets that are fleeing or wisely bugging out, but punish those who insistently loiter in an area, as well as making it more effective vs. meaty targets such as libs and gals. It would also make it more effective vs. infantry and light vehicles.

I don't want to assume, but from this statement (which I am not attacking by the way) I'm guessing you never played PS1.

The Skyguard in PS1 was similar in design to the Harrasser of PS2, but strictly a highly mobile AA ground buggy utilizing a crew of 2, the pilot and the gunner. It was a legitimate and lethal anti-air killer. It was feared and respected by many pilots. A duo or trio were outright air-murder, but they were more than capable killers on their own as well. A far cry from the lackluster anti-air performance of the current Skysharted.
I would even further your suggestion and say it likely needs more than just a RoF buff.

I would further your suggestion again by reminding those who know as well informing those who don't, that in PS1 each faction also had ES AA MAXes in addition to the ES AV and AI variants. These ES AA MAXes were quite deadly on their own against air (I must admit I always felt the TR's AA MAX being non lock-on was always the weakest by more than a narrow margin). The NC and VS both had lock-on MAXes, the Sparrow and Starfire respectively, and the TR AA MAX was the Burster. Yes the Burster used to be ES to the TR, not the lackluster boil-over version currently faction-wide.

On a side note even though I rarely played VS in PS1 I miss the sound of the Starfire MAX...

Which leads me back to my broken-record-like summation of all things wrong with PS2.... give us back Planetside with PS2's graphics. Thank you.

I loved Planetside... but it was flawed as all hell. Rosy glasses are not accurate representations of the game.

After taking a break for a pretty long time, I was thinking of trying this game again. I left because air was OP and this same exact argument was going on then. I see air and AA were never brought in line and one player who likes the flying game is preferred and elevated above many players who like to slog around on foot or drive. So I'll keep waiting and see when footsloggers stop being second class citizens. Meanwhile, have fun playing with yourselves flyers, and savor the sweetest kill of all: the game itself.

I'll add to this, as a person who was a very successful reaver pilot in PS 1 and also a very successful AA player, I could shoot down most pilots because I understood how air worked and knew how to ambush them, something not possible in this game by inherent design. As a pilot, I could almost always escape AA players but when I encountered someone using AA to deny an area I had to call in ground troops to keep him busy so I could continue my attack, in all except a few circumstances (certain areas of the maps that had heavy tree cover and the right configuration of valleys would let me use pop up attacks to neutralize the AA and then continue my rain of terror).

In PS2, I can AA all day, set anti-air ambushes, or do anything I please and it all has the same effect, they can always escape and often stay out of range of my weapons and harass me with rockets until I am dead, or just kill me over and over while ignoring my weapons, knowing that the only way they'll die is if they fly point blank into a full barrage of flak and hover while I reload.

Tasking one person to mildly annoy one air player while that air player is picking up full kills the whole time is bad design.

If you want to fix fighters, give them a gunner seat. Then it makes sense to need teamwork to kill them. If you want to keep single seat fighters, take away all of their ground attack ability and make them sky knight only. Let the flyboys play grabass all day while the people on the ground actually enjoy themselves.

I reiterate, I was going to come back, because I like the ground game, but since flyboys are still running their apartheid kingdom I'll check back in in a few months.

I tell everyone I see with a heavy, the first thing if not the third thing to buy (first med and repair tools) is an AA lockon, grounder, hawk, nemesis, whatever, if two people, just two heavies lock on rockets and both hit at the same time, the ESF is usually dead. If he has flares then he's only going to stop lockons for a few seconds, if he onows what he's doing, he has stealth too, but flak easily counters both, he might as well run nothing at all. If flak is mot available, odds are if he's running a air to ground build, he's running the anti infantry nosegun and is terrible at fighting other air.

People need to learn basic flying before calling op on everything situational. Like HE tanks against AP tanks or archer verses max

Are you implying that an A2A ESF is just as vulnerable to a Skyguard as a Skyguard is to an AP Lightning?

You forget that unlike a Skyguard/HE tank against an AP tank, ESFs have the ability to run away. This means that it can easily escape and elude its counters. A Skyguard or a HE tank generally does not have a sufficient speed advantage to shake off an AP tank.

The problem with aircraft is that they're not situational enough... meaning that they can't be easily killed by their counters before they can escape. To remedy this, they require either a durability nerf or an AA buff, or possibly both. Pilots need to die significantly more to their ground-based counters.

Situationally, ESFs can't run from other ESFs unless they spec specifically to run away and peck down people with just the nosegun, even then the locust guns are accurate enough to peck people down even at long range and running. If you are an esf in an open field without covering fire or friendlies, you are vulnerable to other esfs certed out to kick your ***. If you are a tank out in the open with no cover or friendlies to cover you, you are vulnerable to tanks certed out to specifically kick your ***.

Cover and teamwork are important factors, the fact that esfs can close distance easier than other vehicles is moot if they cannot be effective in that area. A single skyguard deters a sniping esf, the point of learning to fly is to know what it feels like to have a skyguard on you, learning the movement and counterplaying accordingly. It will take a ground only player a much longer time to learn what to do against an esf than a hybrid player would. If there was anything I'd like to be tweaked, is the exp value for detering aircraft, even if it's not killing it, it's a tempo game where you simply stall them out in effectiveness. Another tactic most pick up is to not instantly shoot an esf at 700meters+, if he is coming for you and not vice versa, then you can wait for him to build momentum towards you, get the reading in, and as soon as he enters to sweet spot where all shots on him will detonate flak as you aim ceter mass then you can gank him, he will have to rebuild momentum, use afterburn and since you wounded him and made him very visible to everyone from the 50 explosions, he's a prime target for friendly esfs to peck a few shots ar him.

Thing is, it's called a sky GUARD, not a sky NUKE, you were never meant to outright kill an esf from the get go unless you had put skill towards it. Lock ons and skyguards is not skillful, using the base or deci launcher is and usually rewards 1 shot kill. Going up there and kicking his *** with a a2a build is skillful, tank shells is skillful, however there is the quality of this game called teamwork. You could be a player slaying god but still lose to a 3v1 gang up due to the sheer time to kills of weapons. Same for skyguards in sneaky areas. Same for a lot of things. If you really want to counter the air game or get revenge, take it out on the empire, go near the warpgate with stalker infils, go to a term, get skyguads with friends. Most don't expect the spainish air inquistion

deterance ...
A word people seem to throw around like crazy here.


I know it will be tempting to just skip most of what i write here, but please try and read it all.
I promise i have a point hidden somewhere in there


Now a few facts:

First the advantages of flak

Fact is almost all forms of flak in the game have in a 1on1 situation a 3 seconds or less time to kill.
3 seconds ttk, vs any other 350 nanite vehicle would be met with an overwhelming outcry of rage and nerf calls.

Not only that, but it's extremly easy to use.
True there isn't much room to improve here but i ll get to that in the disadvantages section.

As if all that wasn't enough, the flak explosions(bullets ...) themselfs have a range far greater than even vehicle render distance.

And ofc flak is widespread, it is avaliable for free in any major facility (usually with 4 or more turrets, even tough in case of the towers they don't overlap as well as let's say a tech plant) and thanks to the construction system even the few "blindspots" can be covered well nowadays.


Facit of the advantages:
If this were all there is to flak it would be so horrenously overpowered, it would alone shut down any form or air-gameplay.
Be it a2a or a2g, galaxy drops and so on, a weapon system like flak, without the disadvantage it has would put an end to all this with ease.



Now the disadvantage:

It's just ONE, but a big one.
FLACK IS UNRELIABLE AND UNPREDICTABLE
The spread is so random and even tough not exactly wide, once you take the range and speed of an esf into account it results in a weapon system that hardly ever is capable of reaching it theoretical time to kill.
Regardless of the skill and experience of the user.



Now this is BAD!
It results in this akward situation, where a skyguard, a vehicle focused on fighting aircrafts can only hope to ever kill esf pilots if lag or inexperience of the pilot aid it.

And at the same time, once you add 2 more sources of flak, you overcome the random nature of flak and suddenly have a weapon combination that can AND will completly dominate any aircraft that dares to enter render range.
No matter what the pilot does ... basically the same as before just reversed.



This is, just bad design!



Now don't get me wrong, this game NEEDS an easy to use weapon that can cover and deter air over a long range.
BUT it only should ever be the stationary turrets!

This way, you have a stationary defense, that in a very simple fashion reacts to the threat air currently poses.
A single person hopping in, will shut down a2a combat for the most part and put a2g esfs on a timer.
If more than one person decide that action vs the pesky aircrafts is needed, the danger skyrockets for the esf pilot and he either runs or risks getting instagibbed as soon as another guy looks into the sky.
Even with only one person manning a turret, the pilots efficiency and the amound of pressure he can put onto the battle go down.

Keep in mind those turrets are free, easy to use and usually multiple facilities could at least in theory cover each other.



Now what needs to change:
The skyguard as well as the burster maxes need a completly new weapon system ... get rid of the flak mechanic as we know it.
A skyguard should be a precision tool, something you learn and grow with and once mastered become deadly.


Burster maxes, well i would love to say that they would need the same but then you would have to get rid of the whole hide behind a shield and shoot trough thing.
And they can change loadouts, so they probably should be somewhere in the middle or stay with what we have (altough should gain more mobility ... like with fuelpods on esfs, give the burster max a faster and longer sprint while it has burster arms equipt)







Tldr.:
*Flak is currently spread over too many weaponsystems to allow for a simple, MAKE IT DEADLIER fix.
*Flak as we know it, works lovly with the free of charge turrets
*Dedicated AA sources, such as the skyguard and the burster max need to get a reliable BUT precision focused weapon mechanic.
*A skyguard (and a burster max to some degree) needs to be something you learn to use and master over time BUT once mastered become deadly with.

Dude, I can't count the amount of times this happens. They just sit there and watch ESF's/Libs/Gals **** them. The same applies to a mobile armor.

I will admit that Air is a major problem for the ground. I play both. Air mostly.

However. Everyone cries about deterrence.

You know why it's not an instant kill? Because there's usually 1 ESF for every ten players on the ground. They are insanely outnumbered, and their only advantage is being a fast glass cannon.

People claim that "Oh, tanks don't have deterrence" etc. They have rocks, they have trees, there's usually a larger concentration of them, in addition to infantry and sunderers and every other ground pounder in the game. They are massed, they have more obstacles to hide behind, and unless they're lone wolfing or blundering into enemy lines, fire is spread out between them.

In the sky, an ESF is a single target in wide emptiness. People start shooting... you can't miss. We turn, we run. If we bugger up, or the player exercises a bit of trigger discipline and aim, we die.

The entire aim of the Air game was always to have multiple people firing at it. Ground will almost always outnumber air. Which means combined fire.

What went wrong is that no one communicates. All they care about is their own KDR. They see an ESF, shrug and figure either someone else will deal with it, or figure there's no point shooting, because it will escape.

IF YOU ALL START SHOOTING, WE DON'T ESCAPE.

I've gone from full health to dead in less than a second, because a Sunderer and all those little people started shooting me. I crested that ridge... and blew up.
I didn't rage, I didn't complain. I didn't run to Nerfside to claim that AA is too powerful. I let go of my mouse, leaned back, and applauded them. They actually did what was intended. They all fired at that single target that has the potential to completely obliterate them if they don't.

You could all learn a thing or two from these players. You see an ESF? You have a puny little pistol? Start shooting. Spot it, keep shooting. Every single weapon in the game has the ability to damage an ESF. Stop complaining about AA being underpowered, and use that massive arsenal of ESF pingers to shoot us down.

Well written and I agree with you until I got to:

...and I stopped reading.

Then someone said "great points especailly #2", so I continued:

Which says it should play not like the way it was designed but how I want it to and it's very difficult to be effective and yet it 'lacks depth', which I don't understand how you mean.

As for AA, I will agree with you on this:

Depending on the upgrades an ESF are running, a Phalanx turret, Skyguard and other things are deadly to ESFs.
AA deterrence works because ESFs FEAR AA. Hence, it 'deters'.

Rosy glasses? I have know idea where you gleaned a 'rose colored glasses' description from any of that but please do tell lol...

I don't believe anyone, including myself, ever said PS1 wasn't flawed. But flawed as all hell is quite a stretch I feel. But PS1 was far more strategic and tactical by design than PS2 ever will be. You seem to want to make it sound like PS2 was an improvement...