When will this game get AA?

There are a number of poor design decisions...aircraft killing with near impunity...... is just one that caused this game to fail.

I say double the flight ceiling WAY beyond the range of any ground based weapons. Then buff all forms of AA to absolutely murder aircraft.

That way they can have their uninterrupted Skyknight dogfights or whatever they claim they want to do, but come close to the ground and you get just blasted with little warning.

Best AA = Dalton lib with TB

And thats why I just can't take those air2stronk and buff AA guys and threads seriously.

A Walker deals 130 dmg per shot in 50m and still 85m at 400m+.
Given that ESFs have 3000 HP and a resistance of 35% against AA MGs and composite armor, which only reduces FLAK and infantry fire, gives no damage bonus that means at WORST you're gonna deal 55,25 damage per shot.
3000hp / 55,25 dmg/hit = 54,29 = 55 hits.
The Walker fires at 600 RPM so 10 shots per second... your TTK at 400m or more against an ESF with your claimed 100% accuracy is 5.5 seconds. Less when its closer.
The shortest TTK an ESF has vs an MBT or Harasser is 4 seconds + missile flight time with Hornets.
IF he manages to hit the MBT in the rear armor.

Conclusion: Either you have no idea what the hell you are talking about, OR you suck in the game on a level I can't even begin to imagine....
Or you somehow managed to rip a Walker off its sponson and used it as infantry guy or somehow mounted it on a flash.
Which would be cool, but unlikely

OP this isnt a troll reply, its a serious one. Rare around here i know.

Try a dual walker sundy with as much armour as you can afford.

If your defending your base then shield sundy works great, takes a lot of punishment and has to be constantly damaged or shield will rep, giving you time to rep the vehicle.

If you providing AA to an armour column then as much blockade as you can manage.

For really dedicated solo pilots who wont leave your small tank squad alone, try ambushing the ESF with a cloaked sundy.

Never has a truer word been written.

Worst part is, even if Jamie there managed to get within range, his explosive of choice would be ineffective at killing the lib anyway.
Perhaps his new meme should be......
''When in doubt.....
C4.......
unless its a lib''

As a combat veteran, in real life... my view on this game is simple but overlooked by, well, everyone in this thread so far.

A bit of imbalance in the game accurately recreates the stress of combat.

For example: In real life combat, you are a grunt pinned down behind a wall, taking accurate sniper-fire from an unknown location. You are in deep trouble. This sniper is "OP." He has capabilities that give him a distinct advantage and give you a hole in the head if used properly.

Until... you locate his position with thermal imagery or overhead drone, and order a CAS strike on the sniper POS. Now the sniper, formerly "OP," has been wrecked by a force completely out of his control.He cannot counter an A10 strike. Ever.

The Air is now "OP." Until the enemy force hops into an AA gun, then the Air books it.

Don't you get it? War is not a rock paper scissors match. There is no such thing as balance. True balance is an endless stalemate.

The key to victory is using and coordinating what you have in a way that defeats what the enemy has. This is a game GAME, where you literally get infinite lives and resources, and your faction has literally the same gear as the other 2. Each piece of gear SHOULD NEVER be balanced with EVERY other piece. Instead... you should man up, accept that your deaths are the result of bad tactics and bad situational judgment. Thats what gets you killed in real life.. and I personally enjoy this funny little cartoony game because that's what gets you killed here too.

TLDR: In PS2 Balance is not the answer, it is the problem.
Whiners and ragers making a ruckuss on the forums and hounding the devs to "balance" ruin the thrill of overcoming odds, being creative, and FIGHTING. IF YOU DIE, RESPAWN and try again.

/rant

Longsword Bravo out.

And btw, I kill libs often. In ESFs. They are also require a decent 2-3 man crew to effectivly engage targets aswell as heal quickly.

No one man weapon should be able to take them down.

For a dedicated AA platform that useless against everything else? That's terrible! 5.5 seconds is an ETERNITY in this game. And as you say, that's assuming PERFECT accuracy!

Let's give ESF's a 5.5 second TTK against targets, and watch the freaking tears and gnashing of teeth take place...

Oh and if the TTK is 5.5 seconds against and ESF, which is SUPPOSED to be a lightly-armored strike craft, imaging using a Walker against a Liberator or Galaxy. Yeah that's really fun and rewarding, right?

It's not meant for single players on the ground to take out aircraft alone. When they're close enough to be a threat to ground units, they will likely be exposed to all nearby ground AA. I'm not saying it's easily fun or rewarding for individual players though, current AA guns may be a bit boring and makes it feel more like a chore if anything.

I think something like AA version of Phoenix(not necessarily as rocket launcher) or another kind of engaging weapon could help making the AA scene more interesting. Currently it's just point and hold with relatively low amount of damage and dependency on player numbers

LOL

Ah yes the "because it takes more players it shouldn't be countered by its designated counter vehicle".

That same argument was used involving Blockade Armor sunderers back when they had that broken rear armor.

Crazy idea:

What if the Skyguard had an alternate fire mode that switched to the flash version of the Kobalt? So you could toggle between AA and AI duties. Just like the Skyguard in PS1. Each weapon would have its own ammo pool, optics, and cert upgrades. Hell you could even make unlocking the Kobalt secondary itself cost certs/DBC.

Sure vehicles would still murder the Skyguard, and that's fine. It wouldn't be a massive buff to the Skyguard's AI abilities either, just a modest one. Nor would it cause the Skyguard to replace HE tank cannons for infantry farming. It would make pulling a Skyguard a bit less situational and, I think, a bit more fun.

As for AA... give the Skyguard a projectile velocity buff and call it done. Maybe a slightly larger magazine.

The coaxial Kobalt seems like a good idea, although it sounds to me like you're underestimating it... a lot. Its a really effective AI weapon.

As for the velocity buff... no, just no.
The skyguard can engage and hit any target that is even close to himself and his fight easy enough, any velocity buff would just make it easier to hit targets that simply have nothing to do with the fight and could be several hexes away.
A larger magazine? I dunno about that. I didn't crunch the numbers, but personally I have no trouble to wear down any aircraft in my vicinity, so I don't THINK it is necessary.

As much as I disagree with the OP on the AA issue, I have do disagree more with this. An unbalanced game is mechanically poorly designed and unfun. The more evenly balanced it is the better it's longevity will be. Less, and it will die sooner if it doesn't get fixed (which is probably why there are so many back and forth patches since launch).
Balance takes precedence to realism when it comes to game design, the problem is most people on forumside have a extremely strong bias towards their faction and playstyle, so a "C4/Air/[Insert Faction here] is OP" post is going to come up every couple of days.

I see your point

I agree, neither buff is really necessary. But if people are going to scream for an AA buff, which I don't think is needed, then velocity or magazine size are about all you could really give the Skyguard without breaking air.

I am quite aware of how good the Kobalt is at AI. Most people just don't realize how good the Skyguard is at AI already. A Kobalt on the Skyguard would yield a moderate increase in AI killing power and range so it would give the Skyguard more flexibility and capability at something it can already do without affecting its main role or natural counters.

I find that claim worth exploring.
Skyguard: total kills, uniques, KPU, vKPU, aKPU, KPH, vKPH, aKPH.

Using approximations and basic subtraction (Infantry KP* = KP* - vKP* - aKP*):
It appears that the Skyguard's pure Infantry KPU is less than even its vKPU and most of its kills are made up by aKPU.
It appears that the Skyguard's pure Infantry KPH is less than even its vKPH and most of its kills are made up by aKPH.
Are you implying that the capacity of the Skyguard against Infantry is actually an untapped source of combat potential? (Edit: what I mean to ask is whether you think the Skyguard does not get fired at Infantry in the current game?)

But see RL AA is actually effective.

If only flack detonated on impact, rather then just plinking against things, it would be. I know that the topic is an undead horse by this point, but I still think the Skyguard should have a Coaxial Kobalt.

On a random note - I've downed more random sunderers with my skyguard in the last 48 hours than with AP shells - I keep finding the things abandoned in the middle of nowhere. Skyguards drop vehicles with surprising effectiveness when you can place the barrel directly against your target.

That's because NAR hasn't been invented yet.