I have no concern with what happens on the ground. I don't kill infantry or ground vehicles unless there are no aircraft for me to deal with. Generally my playstyle revolves around removing the enemy air threat and letting the ground guys do what they do best. However recently it doesn't appear to matter in the slightest whether I attempt to remove the enemy aircraft or not in all but the smallest of fights. You see, ground units have a scaling factor that cannot be applied to aircraft. The recent trend of making G2A increasingly abundant and effective has had resounding effects on the atmosphere of the game. Let me explain. Imagine for a moment that we have one double burster max, and one A2G equipped aircraft. A decent pilot will kill the max in a couple of passes, even if the max is an equally skilled player. The aircraft will have moments of deterrence, but can always repair and come back. In this scenario, having A2A Aircraft is useful, because it is the most effective way to deal with enemy air. However lets increase the amount of maxes to 6, and add a couple of engineers in the mix. Suddenly the TTK on the aircraft is so low that even passing over head is a prohibitively dangerous business, and likely to get you killed. Could you get 8 aircraft to all charge in, specially equipped, to remove the flak encampment? Sure. Will it happen realistically? No. The amount of "skill" and coordination required to effectively handle more friendly aircraft in close proximity is vastly greater than it is to do the same with ground units. As you increase the amount of ground units, air units become more and more irrelevant. This is further compounded by the recent trend of Annihilator use by Heavy Assaults, and the addition of effective G2A platforms on every vehicle. All of this was meant to stop the relentless farming of infantry by air units. A problem which I must agree did exist, and for the most part has been "fixed". At the cost of removing any real influence aircraft can exert on a larger fight. Perhaps my pilot's goggles cloud my vision, but I don't believe that this was a good way to go about balancing air and ground. It condemns an entire playstyle into obsolescence. So what actually caused these problems? 1. Rocket Pods: Very Short TTK against armor from behind.Equally effective against infantry2. Liberators: Doing what liberators do. SOE's response seems to have been "Wellp, air is effective against ground, so we should make ground more effective against air". The problem with making ground a highly effective counter to aircraft in all situations is that aircraft quickly become obsolete due to scaling properties. What would I have done? Simply put, I would have made the boundaries between the different roles aircraft can play more concrete. Liberators I feel should be a powerful A2G platform, but require friendly A2A support to be effective. Because of this I'll only be addressing ESFs, which I feel are the root of the problem. Instead of simple being "A2A" or A2G, you end up looking at the situation more like this: Specializations: A2A: Light Air:ESFsHeavy Air:Liberators/Galaxies A2G: Light Ground:Infantry/FlashesHeavy Ground:MBTs/Lightnings/SunderersNow that we have different roles you can fulfill as an aircraft, the weapons need to be tuned to more precisely fit that role. Light Ground: We already have anti-infantry weapons in game, but the recent trend by SOE has been to make them more general purpose. I would go against this precedence. Decrease the effectiveness of all other ESF weapons against infantry and armor, and do the same for the AI primaries against other sources. Similarly the A2A Primaries should be more geared towards the units they're designed to fight. The default gun should be a sort of jack of all trades - master of none scenario. Heavy Ground: Rocket Pods make anti-infantry primaries fairly obsolete. They should be made into armor piercing rockets with minimal to no splash damage. The ESF A2A and AI primaries should have their effectiveness against armor decreased. Light Air: ESF vs ESF combat. In large scales this currently boils down to who brought more A2AMs to the fight. It's a stale resolution to what could have promoted high intensity combat. I would gear the A2A Primary towards being the ideal weapon to engage ESFs. In order to make a stronger distinction between A2A ESF and an ESF that has Rocket Pods and an A2A primary equipped, Extended Fuel Tanks should have their abilities expanded with useful certification lines. Heavy Air: As Pandora's Box has already been opened, and lock-on weapons are commonplace in the game, I feel they should be geared towards dealing with more heavily armored, less maneuverable targets. Decrease their maneuverability and make them consistently dodge-able through directly outmaneuvering the missile. Yes, this would make them fairly useless against highly maneuverable ESF, as they should be. However, their damage dealing abilities should be increased to make them far more effective than rocket pods against Liberators and Galaxies. Now that we have ESF roles sorted out, we need to address G2A roles. Compared to A2A, G2A should be a relative deterrence. It is the only way to not put aircraft out of a job. However this does not mean that you are defenseless, nor should you be. Light Ground: Lock-On Missiles:In general these should be geared towards dealing with the less maneuverable heavy air, and have little effect on all but the most oblivious ESF. Burster Maxes:Increase CoF, decrease projectile velocity, give them some recoil, leave damage the same.Burster Maxes should be "close range" AA units, geared towards dealing with A2G Specced Light Aircraft. Due to render/visibility issues, this is the role the must fill. Anything else makes the other G2A units comparatively useless.Heavy Ground: Skyguard/Stationary AA Turrets:Decrease CoF, Increase Projectile Velocity, Decrease Explosion Radius, Leave damage the same(Possible increase)These are the one G2A unit that I feel should not amount to a simple deterrence, but they need to be designed in such a way that they have a particular role to fill. These units, unlike the infantry-based Lock-On Missiles and Burster Maxes, are easily visible at long ranges. They are larger targets and have movement restrictions.They're also predictable. They can only be obtained at certain locations, and can be dealt with. Where infantry-based G2A platforms can appear at any sunderer or general infantry spawn point, these have far more restrictions to what can be done. If any ground unit should be geared towards denying airspace, it should be these.Other G2A Vehicle Mounted Platforms:These should be balanced on similar terms to the Burster, as a deterrence. Give the primary air denial job to the Skyguard. And there we have it. We promote different playstyles, give everyone their own unique job to do, and allow the game to have a more dynamic environment for air combat without completely destroying ground combat.