Upcoming adjustments to Air vs Ground balance

Discussion in 'PlanetSide 2 Gameplay Discussion' started by Higby, Dec 5, 2012.

  1. Dubious

    The better choice would have been to nerf ground vehicle damage, cause this "lock-out", nerfs AA too
  2. Metsuro

    Works in real life. Why can't it work in game?
  3. Cias13

    that feature should have never been there to begin with. its a ground to air launcher for a reason, not to hit tanks/infantry with.
  4. Bags

    Yeah, that probably woulda been better.
  5. Root

    Fair enough, if that's the way they want it, it really should have been changed sooner. Before selling it to people.
    • Up x 4
  6. 3Jane

    While I like most of the changes I have to weigh in on the side rallying against the functionality of a weapon being altered. I have both the lock on launchers but would have purchased neither if they were presented in the state they are proposed. Heavy assault should be a versatile class, this change reduces it to a one trick pony.
  7. Cias13

    to be honest, i bet if people filed a complaint and asked a refund, they would do a one time deal type thing for it. they already do it for people wanting to switch factions, don't see why they won't for this.
  8. Knocky

    I will assume you thought I was talking about a A2G missile and not the Skyguard which I failed to add to my post.

    Therefore I will not tell you to go **** yourself sideways with a cinder block.

    That being said, the Skyguard was described as the premier anti-air vehicle.

    It is obviously is not.
  9. Griz

    I bought it so I could be a minor threat to planes while also being able to dumbfire it at ground targets for reduced damage with much better sights than the default launcher. if it's no longer able to dumbfire, why would I ever pull it instead of the default launcher or burster max?
  10. Metsuro

    Why? The engineer doesn't need to spec into using a repair gun that only heal ground or air. Rockets in real life can do both. Nothing wrong with the class mechanic of heavy working as it should have.

    The lock on rockets take 4 rockets to kill a tank with. Or 3 for an esf. Thats all they carry.
  11. Artorius

    Before nerfing air to death you should fix the draw distance issue first. Getting shoot by invisible aa max´s and heavies isnt that funny...
    • Up x 1
  12. Flarestar

    If this change goes forward, one of two things needs to happen. Either the two lock-on launchers (ground and air) need to become the same weapon, or the third point in that quote needs to not happen.

    As it is, a HA already ***** their anti-ground capability pretty badly by taking the anti-air rocket launcher. It does terrible damage to ground armor compared to the dumb fire launcher. But at least it's something. These changes, taken as a whole, would effectively force the HA to choose between being able to fend off air attacks or fend off ground attacks, but not both. That would be a massive mistake. Lock-on AA launchers are damn near required thanks to the current state of the game, and I don't see any of the rest of the changes you're proposing changing that fact. That means you're going to severely cripple the anti-vehicle capability of infantry - something that's already a problem when facing more than a small number of vehicles due to the tendency of armor to mount the anti-infantry cannons.

    You need to rethink this before you put it live.
    • Up x 1
  13. Flarestar

    Also, this. What happened to Smedley's stance of "render distance is our top priority once we get a few more stability issues resolved"?

    Air vs. ground balance is a trivial problem compared to your game crippling its own players in large fights.
    • Up x 1
  14. Cias13

    because we don't know how the new changes will effect it. the increased range and what not might make it a very effective weapon vs air.

    why can't fighter lock on's dumbfire? because making them be able to lock on to air yet still hit ground is absolutely silly.
  15. ColCuddleyBuns

    Came here to say my purchase of the SKEP Launcher (Anti Air) was based entirely on it's versatility. It works perfectly as a deterrent to air but also does a good job against tanks. But by removing half the functionality of the launcher after I made my purchase makes me feel that the reasoning for buying the SKEP Launcher has been invalidated entirely.

    Introducing a new and separate launcher that has a faster reload, firing speed, and exclusively fires with lock-on would be fine!

    I would even be fine with a statistical nerf to my current AA launcher.
  16. Root

    True, they have been alright about refunding on stuff. I wager with this change they'll be asked for one by some, though not all. Will be interesting to see how it plays out.

    Edit: I'll try it before I do ask, if they're that dead set on this change. Assuming I even do, I'm still sitting on a Lasher and a bunch of other stuff I bought and decided I didn't like for various reasons.
  17. Maximilious

    Ground always had the advantage of render distance vs air, I could be flying 150 - 200 meters flyby a cliff and 15-20 ground units would appear below me destroying me in less than 5 seconds.

    Then they add this buff to guided missiles but no adjustment to the current flares OR fix render for aircraft?

    • Up x 1
  18. Metsuro

    What fix is needed? You lol burn thrusters and now dont worry about the rocket. Or you turn slightly to the left as the rocket zips by. Or just eat the hit and land for repair. Because a single AA launcher cannot kill you.
  19. L33T-T3CH

    just give enginers an auto turret that shoots flak out limit them to like 3 at once or something 60m appart from another or so
  20. Xenthian

    I just bought one of these today, and had tons of fun with it, destroying tanks too...

    Please loose the requires lock on to fire, if this weapon had this quality 12 hours ago I wouldnt have purchased it.

Share This Page