[VIDEO] ESF reverse maneuver changes on the Test Server (Video comparing PTS and Live)

QRY isnt the only group disliking this, dont dillude yourself. Anyone who has bothered to put the time into learning how to dogfight better in planetside, dislikes this change.

I used to fly exclusively a2g, I was nervous that I'd suck at a2a, but I was wrong. Not only is it more accessible than I thought initially, its really fun and quite satisfying. When I do actually get in a good hover fight with another pilot it's a great way to improve my aim, handling, my control of the craft and my skill overall.

I learn from each of those kinds of fights, adapting to counter the other ESF's strengths as I learn them.

None of this learning really happens when Im simply running down a low rank guy trying to corkscrew in a straight line, who inevitably crashes himself on a cliff trying to escape. I dont fly to "hunt noobs", I fly a2a because their are enemy air craft and I feel confident that I can deal with them.

These kinds of things wont suddenly come to newby pilots when the skill ceiling is lowered, instead they will know there isnt much to shoot for.

When the skill ceiling is high, you stretch to get there, when its low, you regard it with apathy and ignore where you could be, since its not worth your time.

I am proof that the above statement is true, Flight is high skill cap, so I literally went out of my way to practice dogfighting and maneuvering in the VR. I practiced aiming as well and still do. These are things you simply cant give away, they must be earned and learned.

Damn Shin, you can do a lot when you put your mind to it! Hehe

Not sure how you're getting "QRY is the only group who doesn't like this, let's single them out!" out of my statement. Just to clarify, they're crying and it's funny. Other people are crying too but their names don't exist to make fun of people who cry about ESF play.

Irony. It's funny. Let's have a laugh, together.

Realism is bad. People who promote it literally need to FO and play ARMA. What most people mean is they want the game to have internal consistency. This is a good thing. It's why people who play a military style shooter get annoyed by bunny hoppers and the idea of Santa Claus hats.

In PS2, they've got a world that generally mimics the normal world's physics system. Bullets drop, you fall and get hurt, things with wheels use a traction stat to drive around. Some folks disliked the reverse maneuver because it make their inner physicist freak out. It is internally inconsistent with the reality being presented by the developer.

If you like, you can call it contextual realism but, for the sake of not making idiots freak out about the R word, just stick with internal consistency.

This is a plus for liberator pilots and gunners. IMHO

When the 'aircraft' are more helicopters than traditional aircraft - not really. We've just replaced the rotors with more compact jet engines, that also feature the ability to change their thrusting angle (which gives us access to significantly more power in an angle of choice).

If anything, the quirk is the lack of drop when you don't have any thrusters angled to counter gravity.

Can't say I've seen an aircraft of any kind accelerate against its own engines on a curve and then, when vertical, have their horizontal momentum just kinda vanish. ABs act sort of like directional thrust but, at the same time, the simulation is broken in a number of places. Primarily as it relates to the inertia of the ship. The lack of drop -is- another and is part of why the reverse works at all.


It feels like ESFs are subject to gravity but the majority of their motion comes from the thrust simulation unlike ground vehicles which have a ton of inertia with which to deal.

Like I said, it's making my inner physicist freak out because it's inconsistent with the real-analogue as presented.

Tho, dude, if you can find a video of something doing this IRL, in atmosphere, I'd love to see it.

So they feel that reverse maneuvers are inconsistent with the "reality" proposed but not being cloned from nanomachines yet still using guns that are basically one thousand year old technology? There are also harassers, probably weighing multiple tons, getting flipped over simply because they bumped into a small ATV aka the Flash. The reverse maneuver is hardly the most deviant point of the contextual realism presented in this game.

They culled inertia ages ago. When we had inertia, the reverse was even more fearsome than it is now. Heck, its even why it got the name - because it you would often end up with more reverse inertia back then from the initiation stage.

If you want an example - take a helicopter, and maintain your cross-hair on a set target as you ascend. (Which means continuously 'aiming downwards') When you are applying downward force, and then changing your poinging angle continuously downward - the previously applied downward thrust will eventually become (some) rearward momentum due to the change of angle. Rolling doesn't change your inertia. Eventually it is all lost to gravity and friction.

To all the 1337 reverse-hooverjerking-so called pilots:



This change will make room for a lot of players in the skies - if you are so 1337, you'll learn to kill them soon enough. So why whining? If you are not that 1337 and you'll suck after this comes live - well, you're a crybaby.

These changes won't bring you the BF3 circlejerking becuse there is almost no pure 1on1 in PS2. Someone will come either from the air, or from the ground and finish your "duels" soon enough. So insted of muscle-memory-based reversing it will require active teamplay and tactics to safely win most of your engagements. Yes, a wingman. A teammate. No more lonewolfing.

Yes, that's pretty much means you'll have to socialize and communicate to have a buddy - and it may really look scarry after a year alone in your cockpit.

Tech evolves in different directions. There was this futurist who wrote a sci-fi novel about these cadre of elite spies who, in the year 2020, had fantastic devices that let them talk to each other and access a web of information. I read about this on my phone in 2005. And, yet, I still can't jetpack to work. There's plenty examples in fiction of societies where tech evolved in ways totally different from our own. Hell, the movie The Invention of Lying is about a society almost totally like ours but that never even thought about something as simple as deception.

What gets me more is the fact that PS2 is about killing at all. If people are immortal, the goal isn't to kill people, it's to make areas temporarily uninhabitable. I'd take my invisible soldier, throw him out of a drop pod and, when he's outside a spawn room, have him detonate the corrosive/toxic gas bomb he's had all of his nonessential organs replaced with. And that's just off the cuff. In a world of invisible, immortal demigods, war would be far, far worse than what most people would be willing to consider.

To answer your question directly: I think we're using bullets because they wanted to make Sci-Fi Battlefield. Pew Pew!

Good example of another engine problem.

It's not the most, no, but it is one. Just because other problems exist doesn't mean they have to all run rampant forever. Dev didn't like it. Dev changed it.

With that you'd still have to deal with the continuous "upward" thrust from the rotors which would propel you in an arc. There'd be rearward moment, sure but not a smooth backwards slide like we get here. However I see what you're saying. The issue, for me at least, is that slide. It shouldn't be there but, as the jets are more of a vector related to the world instead of the ESF body, it is.

The A2A game has been established since release and a change like this was not needed. The good pilots flying around dominating other pilots are a result of hard work patience and practise. I'm sorry but if you aren't doing well its because you simply aren't trying hard enough and that doesn't mean that the devs should baby sit you.

People just need to come to terms with the fact that these are not jet fighters and are not like anything employed in today's armed forces and that is fine.

Which is exactly what happens in PS2. You just have better control over how much power should be applied and when. The big thing being that you can apply very high amounts of power in one second, and very little the next.

If you maintain the same power output - you'll arc. If you don't change your facing - you'll fly in a straight line: your flyer's "up".

It's not going to bring BF3 circlejerks because you have VTOL, you can stop on a dime and turn around.

And stop pretending the reverse takes skill. It literally takes 2 minutes to learn.

I have to laugh at all the aces crying about it. If you are so good, you can dominate the skies no matter what. I really hope this goes live.

Yes, I do understand this point (especially the part about the internet). However you have to realize that military research drives most civilian development. Weather radar came from the WW2 British Air Force. Space shuttles? Rockets capable of leaving Earth's atmosphere were first designed for intercontinental ballistic missiles. Even the development of the internet can be linked to ARPANET, which was the United States' plan for a information highway system through computers in case of invasion. It also presents a massive gap between technological levels. The Terran Republic's military uses cloning and nanomachines like second nature, but they don't have guns any more advanced than our modern day ones? It takes the concept of suspension of disbelief a little bit too far.

I hardly see offering a unique gameplay experience that rewards improvement as a problem. A system like the air combat in this game creates longevity and inspires continued play to improve one's abilities. That is why games that offer both unique gameplay experiences and higher skill ceilings typically last for years after their competitors vanish. Some great examples are games like DotA, Counter Strike, etc.

You may see it as a problem, but many of the dedicated pilots love it; I sure do. The flight mechanics of this game have kept me playing this game. Without them, I would have quit playing months ago, and I probably will if this change goes live.

so many good QRY jokes to be had...
so many bunny jumping jokes to be had...

/popcorn.

No one is saying the reverse takes skill. AB hover dodging while keeping the aim on your opponent (who is also AB hover dodging) takes skill. Extreme skill. It is the hardest thing to do consistently in an ESF. This is what they are planning to remove.

Yeah, we can. But it won't be as fun as before and we wouldn't have anything more to master. They are nerfing something that is extremely hard to do for the 5% of top pilots. It won't effect anyone else. And these 5% never asked for a change. That's what's so ******* ********.

What do you mean?! This change completely changes dogfights, and makes them more skill based. I for one can't wait until dogfights will involve weaving around trees (Hossin <3), biolabs etc trying to shake my attacker, rather than just getting to the nearest cover and pulling a reverse. I can't wait for some high-speed chases, and real maneuvers, like immelmans, scissors etc. It's not removing skill. It's just replacing one skill with another. Or in this case, a whole lot of others. Dogfights will now be really action packed, with terrain becoming very important, and maneuvering skills other than pulling a reverse, and strafing left and right to dodge bullets.

Interesting you bring up this %5. Because this %5 you speak of, seems to be the best at dogfighting with the current mechanics. It's no wonder they want it to stay the same. If they are actually good pilots, they can adapt.

You missed the point, that part was aimed at the first I quoted, which said "I just realized this is probably to put it more in the range for the console kiddies rather than balancing between the ESF's." . There's no arguing that the current flight mechanics are arcadish and thus more suitable for the consoles crowd.

Also, I was only talking about the flight mechanics, not the weaponry or anything else. Don't you think there's a realm between pure arcade and pure simulation? Because the game is not fully realistic, does it mean that I have to accept the silliness of the current flight mechanics? I'm advocating for much more traditional ones, which can be implemented without having PS2 turned into LockOn - MAC (in which an A10 gets obliterated by any piece of DCA).

You've heard it before. But there's other games for that. ESF combat in this game is unique. That's why I haven't quit this game completely yet and it's the same for many others. There's nothing skillful about old school dogfighting. If a good pilot gets behind you, you're dead. With the reverse in its current state if a good pilot gets behind you there's still a tiny chance you can do something about it. And they aren't removing the reverse, they are nerfing the speedgain with afterburners.

Of course they are the best. They are dedicated pilots with +500 hours in an ESF. They should be the best and they still will be after the change. It's just that it drastically lowers the skill ceiling for them. If they have mastered everything they will quit.

I already do this to shake people, and people do this to me trying to lose me.

No, it isn't replacing skill. It is completely changing the way air combat works. If you want to play a game with more traditional flight mechanics, than go do that. The current game offers a very unique and rewarding experience you can't find in other games, and it would be a terrible mistake to get rid of that.

Yeah.... I played a crap-ton of Ace Combat and other traditional flight games for years, and I don't want the change. If I wanted to play a game with those mechanics, I would go play one. You should probably stop assuming things about what people want/play.