[Suggestion] Upgraded Lightning AA Systems

What a novel idea... it'd almost be like making the Skyguard into almost every modern SPAAG in existence.





The main problem is that gun-based AA is pretty ineffective in our day and age of fast-moving aircraft, so for many gun-based systems we augment them with SAMs. In fact more and more you're seeing AA vehicles ditch the guns altogether and opt for missiles instead.

Why that's not in PS2... I really have no clue. I mean it's not like "switching weapons in a 1-person vehicle" is impossible or even OP... ESFs can do that, and Lightnings are essentially ground-ESFs.

I mean just keep the Skyguard as is, add on the Tomcats (even the ones where you have to track the enemy in your sights for the lock to be maintained), and there you go.

what is an ESP hacker? BF3 gave me plenty of experience with different flavors of hackers (while it was constantly punkbuster kicking me and crashing for no reason), but i have never heard of ESP.

planetside 2 i have seen exactly 1 case where i was legitimately convinced someone was hacking (an aim bot), and i started in closed beta so PS2 is doing pretty well as far as i am concerned.

It stands for "Extra Sensory Perception", same thing that we call psychics. It pretty much means that they know where you are at all times, can see you through walls, etc.

oh, i always just thought those were called wall hacks.

In modern combat, the use of high velocity flak guns is mainly used to combat helicopters which fly at lower speeds. What's interesting is that despite the setting in PS2, all air vehicles are much like Helicopters in a way despite being VTOL in design. Their speeds are lower than a propeller aircraft though this can just be for render reasons.

Something that should be added are more offensive attachments, lock on missiles, remote TOW rockets, turret mounted coaxial weapons. Something that can be added on but not be an actual weapon.

Mmm.. Yes. More lock ons. That's what this game ******* needs. More lock ons. Lock ons for everything.

Just give me aimbot. What's the ******* point when computer can do everything for me.

Right?

hnnggh THISSSSS!!
It doesn't make the tank MBT-bulky or look like an OP weapon but makes perfect sense with the size and movement of the cannon.

Well with the incoming tank shell gravity/velocity nerfs, maybe PS2 will get built-in artillery!

+
x2
_________________________________________________________________________
Result?

Pure, unadulterated awesomeness!



Though perhaps a touch overkill.

What about the x2 I mentioned?

I could agree with this if and only if the turret has full elevation meaning no camera blind spots to compensate for aircraft using terrain to loose LOS.

as for lock-ons there should be different missile types and lock-on systems.

e.g
delayed tracking missiles (fires in a straight line then seeks the locked on target)
radar tracking missiles
proximity acquisition missiles
laser guided missiles
heat seeking missiles
etc.

aircraft should have to cert for defense against specific types of missiles. some should not give the pilot immediate warning and precise mini-map direction data on the direction of the missile in flight.

You... weren't being serious about that, were you?

That wouldn't be too difficult to implement in the game, since we have most of those already.
Tomcats are currently "radar tracking", in the sense that the shooter has to keep their aiming reticule on target until impact.
Coyotes are your example of proximity acquisition.
The Engineer AV MANA Turret, Ravens, or Hornets are examples of laser-guided missiles.
Heat seeking would be your old-school Tomcats that were "fire and forget" types.

There's also:
The Phoenix, which is a camera guided system.
Falcons and Rocketpods, which are dumbfire rockets.

IRL most "heat seeking" IR missiles won't give a strong indication that they've achieved a lock because they rely on passive systems rather than sending out any signal themselves. But planes can still spot them visually or with their own IR systems (seeing the heat of the missile in the same way the missile sees the heat of the aircraft). I would also assume that camera guided missiles don't reveal a lock, and some laser-guided missiles may not as well.

On the other hand IR flares really only work against IR missiles, and would in theory have little effect on Tomcats or Coyotes. And firing off flares only grants a probability, not a guarantee, of foiling missiles.

So the tools in PS2 are there to make all your suggestions come true, but it's just a question of whether it would be a good idea or not.

What i meant by radar tracking was e.g aircraft has equipped scout radar, HA pulls radar tracking rocket launcher aims at aircraft and locks onto the radar signature produced by the radar pulse emitted by scout radar and homes in on it.

pilot receives a delayed warning about the missile due to the missile not being directed by a radar pulse detection to the aircraft(standard ground to air lockons) but by the radar pulse of the aircraft itself.

Well I think the pilot would get a warning... that it was being pinged by some sort of radar. It just might not know when a missile is coming its way, as the targeting radar would be pretty constant.

Aircraft do have other ways to track missiles, but of course as you point out these would be delayed warnings within a certain range of the aircraft.

And naturally shooting down the aircraft with the targeting radar would probably neutralize the missile (which is always a problem when the radar isn't on the missile itself).

I haven't read the entire thread, but I would like to add my own Lightning options by simply improving the Skyguard.

First off, add 3 firing modes to the Skyguard. The first mode is standard mode in which you fire as you would now. Press 'B' and you will go into a slow-firing mode. Having perhaps only 50% of the original firerate your cone of fire is reduced tremendously, allowing you to fire at long-range targets with accuracy. Press 'B' again and you go to the last fire mode, you almost double the standard firerate but also your cone of fire. This is meant for ESF that are close or Liberators and Galaxies that are filling your sky.
Alternative: instead of pressing 'B' you 'switch' your weapon.
You can switch firemode without ever having to stop firing, so you can smoothly take aim at a nearby target at high-speed, then as he goes farther away you can switch firemodes to a slower version for more accuracy.

Additionally you can have multiple ammo types to equip before an engagement.
1: normal flak rounds
2: High-speed flak. Deals less damage but makes it easier to hit targets at range
3: Buster rounds. Deals more damage at the expense of speed
4: Piercer rounds. A two-stage bullet is fired, the bullet first penetrates armor and then breaks apart for maximum damage. These do not have the flak component but are high-speed and deal great damage, making this a skillful weapon to use with good payout.

While I agree that these changes would greatly increase the effectiveness of the Skyguard (which I would personally benefit from), it would also create a weapon platform that would be effective at close, medium, and long range. Essentially a "one size fits all" unit, and I'm not so positive that it's a good thing in that respect.

As an analogy, consider infantry small arms. We have different weapons (shotguns, assault rifles, sniper rifles) that are effective at different ranges. Each of these weapons is generally split among classes, or at the very least the same person isn't carrying primary weapons that are effective at all ranges. This is to encourage teamwork and the proper use of tactics.

In the same way, having a Skyguard that could "switch" to be effective at all ranges would be like an infantryperson who could carry a shotgun, assault rifle, and sniper rifle all at the same time. Sure it would make them effective at all ranges, but you do have to wonder about fairness and balance.

So is SOE isn't going to add specific vehicles for short, medium, and long-range AA work, then I guess the next best choice is to modify the Skyguard so it can be effective at all ranges. But at least in my mind it would be ideal to introduce other AA vehicles for a layered air defense.

It wouldn't be completely 'one size fits all'. The long-range capabilities would be able to cash out little damage since it's firerate is reduced tremendously, never forget that you need about 32 shots at CLOSE range to annihilate an ESF, assuming you hit. It would make the Skyguard more effective.

Considering the cost of Lightnings I would argue that each AA class get another role as well, be it anti-tank, spotter, anti-infantry, minesweeper or whatever. AA rarely makes up 10% of a battlegroup, while anti-tank can take up 90% easily when facing even a small tank-force (especially with Heavies capable of attacking infantry effectively at the same time). Tanks can't easily switch regions, aircraft can. Aircraft can say 'too much AA here, I'll be over there'.
Having multiple-layered AA sounds great, but this is a game. Needing multiple AA layers coordinated by multiple people takes too much effort for, in my eyes, too little reward. You either clear the skies, after which you won't be seeing any aircraft in your area soon and your tank will be collecting dust, or you scare them off to another area and you are collecting dust again, assuming you get that multi-layered defense up and running. If you don't get it up and running the air itself might annihilate you by filling in the gap. No long-range? I'll bomb you. No short-range? I'll hover nearby and bomb you.

As an alternative, you can still have your medium, short and long range variants. Instead of all fire modes being existent on the Skyguard at all times, you would be able to equip only one firemode (fast, normal, slow) each with their own fire-rate. Add the option to choose a specific ammo type and you are set for a multi-layered defense without differentiating from the Skyguard.

I would stress that in the alternative it would be good to allow the player to ALWAYS switch back to the standard firemode, since the close/long range variants would be too much a niche-weapon where the slow-speed variant is barely capable of destroying any aircraft due to it's slow fire-rate and the high-speed variant barely capable of killing anything that's at medium range or longer. The biggest differentiating factor would become what ammo you use. Small bullets (no flak) with high ammo count and higher fire-rate? Large HE flak blobs with slow fire-rate? Small non-flak explosive shells (against Liberators and Galaxies mostly)? Magnetic darts that have a small homing advantage when aiming? Options enough in just a tank-mounted machinegun.

saw this looking for an old thread great idea

Bump for blender and PS2 awesomeness.