Should the ESF Reverse Maneuver be removed?

I realize that this bit of advice will never really be taken by the majority of the "elite" pilots and groundpounders on mattherson, but making patronizing, arrogant and insulting post will never convince people of anything.

I'm sure it makes you feel good, so there's that i guess.

On topic: While the idea of a fast moving jet in the game is nice, the reality is that assets in the game simply do not render fast enough or far away enough for that to be an option. By the time you rendered an enemy to fire at, you would be ontop of them and then past them in a matter of seconds.

As for the reverse maneuver and its derivatives, it would be best if ESF controls were inproved and control over thrust vectoring was improved and standardized between the 3 ESFs.

Indeed, I'm sorry I've somewhat "hijacked" thread for just removing AB from vertical thrust. I totally agree, a more pure jet (having amongst other things a much higher topspeed) wouldn't suit this game at all - cause of the rendering. The game just cant keep up with units moving at even higher speeds. A NS "all-faction" helicopter I am open to, more mobility in all direction - but less top speed and more bulk. Or less firepower and less bulk. That would be a balancing issue.

The basic ESF mechanisms works great as it is tbh, as they are VOTL machines - and its a computer game after all. It might not be realistic or comparable to any of the 2013 flying machines, but it is an arcade approach to a future flying machine.

The only "gripe" I have with the current situation is the AB working with only vertical thrust the excact moment your ESF is stalling - and how the airgame is suffering cause of it, after a full year. At launch it was entirely another story. Removing it would still enable you to stop, turn and even reverse as you can today - just not use AB without moving nose forward.

Have to admit ESF dog fighting is very boring. It's just reduce speed and see who has the highest mouse sensitivity.

and what do you think will happen when we remove the reverse manouver?
It'll be about who can fly the slowest and has the highest mouse sensitivity
Don't believe me?

That's right. When, not if.

Reverse is cool, AB + reverse is an anomaly.

AB+ reverse is cool, because reverse = AB

Yes! All kinds of turbos and speedboosts deviced since man walked the earth, was ment for moving backwards with style.

The air game would get very boring if the "Reverse Thrust" move was taken out. Dogfights would degrade into who can circle tighter/slower than the other. Been there, done that... booooooring.

It's already boring, is just a fight without gravity.

What will happen is the increase of air combat, the mechanics we have now is a fight without gravity, sometimes you can even see where your enemy is, you turn right left and can't see it, this is wrong.
The mechanics of reverse maneuver will stay, but with another vehicle more able to suit this kind of mechanics, making this would only improve the game in my vision.
But this is a game of thousands of players, the battles could be just incredible horrible with the flight straight mechanic, we could and we should, at least, test this mechanics, the devs should put this in the Test Server and say "let's finish this talk now, go to the test server, play with the new vehicle, play with the updated ESF, and give us feedback".

I don't recall ever saying I liked battlefields air combat.

i never said you did

well, then do you expect the devs to compleatly redo all aircraft flight physic? If they just got rid of the RM, they would have a hell of a lot of work to make aircraft fun as there are a lot of things missing to make forward flight air combat halfway decent and not a even worse than BF3 version of air combat.

It would also help if the visual clues players use to determine transition were standardized.

Let me get this straight.

You already find it boring but think by dumbing it down even MORE it will be better? Are you even listening to yourself? Flying as slow as you can to say behind your target and having to pull left and right over and over to keep them in front of you are you both go in circles has been done already in other games.. go play them.

Oh come on, be reasonable, a separated driver and gunner for the MBT would make it a better combat vehicle with team work, its not a limitation in that sense. I would argue that the Harasser and Sunderer in the right team's hands can be far more effective than a MBT due to the driver being focused on defense and the gunners focused on offense, Battle Sundies and Harassers with the right gun for the gunner's style are a thing after all.

All unrelated, silly, and irrelevant references to "real life" aircraft aside, the thrusting maneuvers are the only thing that add depth to the air fighting in this game.

The common misconception is every air battle turns in to a thrusting match, which isn't true unless we're talking MLG PRO duels. The other common misconception is it's only used in dogfighting. Great pilots use it for everything ranging from gaining altitude to maneuvering behind objects, to maintaing a visual on a target while repositioning. It adds more depth to this game than ANYTHING and the air combat would frankly suck without it. I think it was well established back during the PTS how bad of an idea it would be to get rid of it.

For those that hate you need to first of all learn how to do it (it isn't hard), then learn to embrace it. Because like it or not, the thruster physics in this game add more depth than most people can even imagine.

Fixed.

Unrelated question: What role are ESFs suppose to have? Are they fighter jets or attack helicopters? They can't be both.

I personally couldn't tell you what roll ESFs provide, but like with anything in any game, players will mold something to their advantage and playstyle. I personally love supporting the ground troops with mine. Nothing is more satisfying for me than saving my buddie's *** with a last minute precision gift from above then turning back to do it again. Others like flying around at 1000m diving on other ESFs. ESFs are unique in that they are broad range high skill-cap platforms that can be deadly or comically bad depending on the player and/or situation. But my favorite part about them is they are the least rock/paper/scissors platform in this game. What I mean by this is I can equip rocket pods and still perform at 90%+ of my capabilities against other aircraft without having an A2A loadout. Others hate that. But I'd say my favorite thing about ESFs is they are all about raw experience and skill. I hope they never take that away, because the second hard-counter rock/paper/scissors setups come out, I'm done with this game.

Well I think people would be less pissed off with ESFs if one out of three things were to happen:
1. It becomes a sole A2A aircraft
2. It will require a second person to operate (although it won't be as fast as it is now)
3. It becomes far easier to learn. So much so, that it you can just pick up and play like nearly everything else in the game.

The reverse burn shouldn't be removed... but, the particle trails that happens when going forward should be added in when going backwards. It's a bit of oversight on the dev department that you can reverse burn at high speed backwards without the same wing trails you get when going forward at the same speed... and really, that's what puts a lot of pilots at a disadvantage in the sky with the reverse burn. Your opponent can shoot out of your view without giving you a clue to what direction they went... because I use stealth, I use this to my advantage all the time. If I'm close enough to my target, I reverse burn and my enemy often has no idea which way I went... where as if I went forward, there'd be particle trails for them to find me.