[BUG] Tomcats or A to A lock-on

the third and more typical choice is to log off. in the past when game mechanics forced this type of choice they were eventually rebalanced, because something had to be done for the health of the game.

1) That may be one way to look at it, but my understanding of the A2A game is much different from your perspective. I do not separate the 2 items but rather place them together and see which playstyle it would fit in.I view load outs for the ESF in a more simpler matter as broken down below:

Rotary + coyotes = Master in CQC: ( LA with a Shotgun ) this play style is the most used as it is an easier entry level to the air game. Your main objective being in closing the distance to your target, unloading your arsenal in point blank distance and not creating a large distance enough for your opponent to retaliate.

Rotary + Tomahawks = Master of Long distance (LA with Sniper?) this play style is at the intermediate level where your main objective is to keep distance from your target and shooting from afar. Obviously this level takes a little know how of your plane and leaning the target to get the lock in place.

Rotary + Afterburner = Jack of all trades (LA with Rifle) this play style is the expert level where you have the skill, knowledge and mobility. At this level you can close the range against the tomahank user and disable the lock with your quick mobility. Again with your mobility you can increase distance between you and the coyote user to render his missiles useless.

It may be a "weird" view but for me that is how i currently understand it.

2) agreed

3)agreed but I still think its expensive for paper with wings

1) I can't promise I wont this up as I do not agree this is off topic

2) Then I shall bring up the counter argument as how do you purpose to give a fighting chance to new players against said "elite pilots"

3) I believe my original response was towards your quote "Nose guns are the #1 option for Libs, because everything else forces you to get too close and risk getting daltoned/walkered" which you just proved that to be wrong since the #1 option for libs is as you say "A rotary + tomcat combo would out DPS a rotary by itself". A person at the same skill level to dodge dalton shots could ultimately
do the same with the default afterburners provided by the aircraft.

5) so you want to discuss in the view of new pilots or in general?

2) A counter argument would be a statement or argument that refutes mine. You are starting a new topic of discussion. I've already made proposals in the "balance esf" thread on how to lower the skill ceiling and raise the skill floor.

3) Nose guns are the #1 option for libs. Stop being facetious, "option" is a far cry from "load out" in the context of this discussion. Nose guns > missiles against libs. Even as a load out Nose gun + AB is better than Nose gun + tomcats in certain situations.

A person at the same skill level to dodge dalton shots could ultimately
do the same with the default afterburners provided by the aircraft.

This is patently false. The whole reason to carry tanks is to have more hover bursts. You literally get more amount of dodges with tanks. We're not talking about dodging 1 dalton shot, we're talking about dueling a lib in a fight.

5) In general, but your complaints about it not addressing "new pilots" is not true.

removed

3)....Nose guns > missiles against libs... I am not debating on the fact that Nose guns (primary weapon) does more dps than just firing solely tomcats (secondary weapon) at the LIB. You are clearly misleading this point as an option a pilot would pick 2 weapons to cycle through to kill an enemy faster...By decreasing the amount of dps you are placing onto the LIB, you are essentially increasing TTK and therefore giving the lib pilot more time to shot at you....it is indisputable that providing your enemy with less chances to fire at you is the best option..

At this point I do not know why a vocal minority is still asking the the removal of the secondary weapon, after the coyotes placement of over a year ago, the tomcats and lolpods since launch this is obviously not a viable option...realise that this is not going to happen please...

Weird. Because there are several pilots on my server who can easily hand me my lock on missile using a.s.s any day of the week. So maybe YOU are the problem after all.

I suppose HAs should also choose between equipping a RL or an a LMG?

No, if you've followed some of my LA threads you should have known that it's a class ability.

HA: Rocketlauncher, Overshield (LMG's+Heavy Weapon uniques)
Medic: regen/revive device, AOE heal/shield regenerator (AR's Unique)
Engineer: Repair tool, ammo pack, turrets, most explosives available (AV mines unique)
Infiltrator: Hacking, stealth, recon tools (sniper/scout rifles unique)
LA: Jetpack... and that's it.

So there's no reason for the HA to choose for either the rocketlauncher or LMG, as it's it's class ability to wear one at all times.

Vehicles however are a different matter. You buy something for a price and expect something in return. The Lightning is a cheap (350 resources same as ESF), lightweight vehicle. You know you won't be able to go full-frontal with most MBT's. You need to use it's low frame, speed and large loadout option to make it work. The loadout options are selective: You can pick dedicated roles to engage either infantry, tank or aircraft. Or you can choose an intermediary option that's good against both infantry and tanks but it can't match the AI/AV dedicated weapons it can choose.
Harassers need speed, maneuverability and preferably slightly rough terrain to avoid it's enemy fire while a gunner fights for them. Similar to the Lightning it can't choose to be a multi-role attacker, and needs to either specialize or take an intermediary weapon.
ESF only need their speed and maneuverability when being engaged by AA or other aircraft. It carries 2 weapons instead of one, both available for the pilot, it's got an auto-granted afterburner vanilla and if you replace it you keep a lower power afterburner, it has the highest DPS weapons against aircraft (that can reliably hit), it has some of the highest DPS weapons against tanks and infantry in Hornets and AI nosecannons, and has the highest versatility in unit engagements as it can engage aircraft, infantry and tanks well in one loadout without sacrificing a lot of firepower.

It's not just ESF that have strange imbalances compared to ground units you know:
MBT: 450 resources, 2 seats, one secondary weapon and one primary
Liberators: 450 resources, 3 seats, 2 primary (if Tankbuster equipped) and one secondary specifically designed against aircraft or infantry depending on loadout. It's health and resistances mean it can take more punishment from weapons "designed" against aircraft than the MBT against weapons that are designed against tanks. 75% damage reduction vs the Walker anyone?

I understand that you look at the 2 weapon systems as one thing, as you have both available. Which is exactly what I mean. I'm not just talking about A2A here, but A2G as well: ESF get some advantages over other vehicles and there is simply no justification that they get them. 2 weapon systems? auto-granted afterburner that stays when you select another weapon? DPS on the weapons that rivals or even outperforms that of ground equivalents? The last one would be based on aircraft needing quick bombing runs to deal their damage and get out, but the game has fairly few places where it works like that and usually they can hover around dealing tons more damage than vehicles ever could.
Then there's the stuff that makes flying aircraft a pain: you can't just play the game to learn the air-game, you need to spend several hours at least in the VR training on some maneuvers just because there's 2 flying styles that trump them all: Reverse maneuver, an ability gained due to a strange flight mechanic, and Hover fighting, a fighting style capable solely due to the way nosecannon fire follows the reticule when going up or down with space or C, probably in combination with the latency system somewhere and how hitboxes follow the frame of the vehicle.

Let's go over the course of this conversation. You started this ball rolling with: "vehicle that is paper thin and is meant for scouting, picking off low health liberators, tanks, and infantry with our nose cannon"

My response is: "All the elite pilots want only noseguns & extended burners. Nose guns are the #1 option for Libs, because everything else forces you to get too close and risk getting daltoned/walkered."

In this context, it's very obvious that we are talking about the effectiveness of nose guns. You demeaned the nose gun to only be useful for picking off low health vehicles & infantry. I countered that argument. Now you are twisting my words to make it appear that we're talking about "load outs".

Even with your twisted context of "load out", this argument is STILL true. Tomcats force you to be within 300m to guarantee a lock. Against a shredder/dalton/walker lib, that's close enough to shoot back. Default nose guns /w extended tanks lets you fight the Lib at a much greater distance.

The vocal MAJORITY wants ESF to be changed. Elite pilots are the ones who want missiles removed, because it makes A2A fights boring. Infantry hate how "farmy" and hard to kill ESFs are, not to mention BORING to fight against with G2A. New pilots give up on how ludicrously high the skill floor is to even pilot an ESF. Removing missiles is only a part of the suggestions to balance ESFs. There are many options, but until something is done, there will always be these type of proposals.

Your face ate my bullets yesterday ;D

Whether something is boring is only their perspective. They can always unequip lock ons if they fine it boring. I find lock ons interesting and essential in any modern warfare or Sci fi warfare game. In other words, I find it interesting. What do we do to cater to both? Leave it as it is. People like me can use the BORING weapons while skyknights can continue handicapping themselves or play by whatever way they like.

You don't understand. "Skyknights" find YOUR use of A2A lock-ons to be dulling the air game. It's a legitimate complaint, because a part of the user base doesn't like the mechanic. This doesn't mean A2A lock-ons should be removed to satisfy a portion of the user base, but looking at the overall case of ESF pilots, nobody is happy.

Ok, were they looking for a WW2 or WW1 game? Because lock ons have existed in every game that has a "modern" or "futuristic" theme. They KNEW what they were going to get when they played a game with sci fi themes implied on the title. They knew what they were going to face, before they created an account. It isn't fair to change or remove something because THEY found it dull.

How about I find it interesting. Since it's only "a part of the user base", meaning not EVERYONE finds it dull. Why should we change it? A skill required to fight a war is to adapt. Skyknights should really improve their tactics. This isn't WW1 anymore, where everyone uses noseguns. This is a futuristic war where everyone uses lasers, plasma bolts, missiles rockets and etc.

If that's a legit complaint, how about approximately one third of the player base hates the guts of the VS/ NC/ TR. Instead of finding ways to counter them, we ask to remove them.

We're talking about balancing PS2. It serves no purpose to compare/contrast with anything else. It's entirely fair to change or remove something, because a part of the userbase finds a problem with it. All complaints are legit, but may not be acted upon.

In this case, almost the entire userbase of ESFs have a problem with the system, where it is skill ceiling, lock ons, poor handling, G2A and etc. It indicates a problem and something needs to be changed.

G2A needs to be buffed, yes, but since when are A2A missiles OP? They are as you and your fellow knights said: they are BORING, not OP. Boring or not has nothing to do with balance whatsoever (unless you want to balance fun? like non Skyknights are having too much fun, so we must nerf their fun).

IDK about you, but if I find the game boring, I leave the game instead of trying to spoil other's fun.

Boring, because they can be OP. Pilots are leaving the game, as is everyone. The player base has been dwindling.

IMO, instead of buffing G2A, A2A needs to be buffed. A players first reaction to enemy air, should be to pull air, not G2A. Not only is it more fun to dog fight instead of operating G2A lockons/flak. It's much easier to balance air versus air and not have to include G2A as well. If the skill floor of ESF is lowered to the point of a tank, then we can make G2A a 2ndary AA ability.

You say you just need to charge at them and use the nosegun to kill them and stay at close range so it's harder to get a lock. You are assuming the pilot using lockons doesn't know how to use the nosegun, you can't balance a weapon based on who you think will use it. If you used that tactic against a top tier pilot you would get destroyed once you get in close because guess what? he also has the nosegun.

You can't look at the stats based on kills around a weapon and say they are fine only based on that. You are forgetting pilots bail and that if you land 2 locks and finish it of with the nosegun it doesn't count to that stat.

The charging does however work most of the time but only because most lockon users aren't that great pilots and thank god for that. If all the top tier pilots started using them it would be a whole other story.

I have zero idea how you find A2A lock ons OP. Care to explain?

I'm afraid I can't understand because I get killed by noseguns all the time during engagements. Maybe noseguns are the OP ones.

There is no twisting involved here, I took your exact quote and rebutted it...if you want to think otherwise sure go right ahead...if we are not talking about Load outs then there was no need for you to mention extended burners.

I did not state that the Vocal MAJORITY does not want the ESF changed.. I said the Vocal Minority want the secondary weapons removed....I have no idea how to managed to read it another way...seriously...

Ok yes removing missiles is only part of the suggestion, yes I understand that. What people need to understand is that this option is not viable and pointless to bring up in the first place...simple