Thanks for taking the skill out of dogfighting

Discussion in 'Vehicle Discussion' started by NoXousX, Nov 20, 2012.

  1. I haven't had time to create my "First Impressions of PS2 Retail From A Casual Gamer" thread yet, but I thought I'd go ahead and chime in on the A2A Lock On missiles:





    As a casual gamer that's reached a Battle Rank of 20 through flying the NC Reaver fighter aircraft almost exclusively, I have to say that I'm undecided about whether A2A lock on missiles are a GOOD or BAD thing for PS2.

    On the one hand, using A2A lock on missiles is incredibly FUN. It's great to hear them as they're launched and see the way they arc gracefully through the air as they accelerate towards their target. Their smoke contrails are amazing to watch as they dissipate over time and distance.

    I also think that the PS2 developers did a GREAT job in setting the missile's effective ranges, limited maneuverability, and lock on times (although the re-arming / cool down period seems to be rather quick for my tastes and could lead to rapid-missile firing).

    But on the other hand, I can see where the use of A2A missiles will be SO pervasive that TRUE dogfighting will cease to exist. Air combat will consist of scores of aircraft throwing A2A missiles at each other as flares light up the night sky in response.

    So, I'm torn about A2A missiles and flares as a whole.

    Thanks to the PS2 developers and PS2, I can finally re-live all those action sequences that I saw in the movie "Top Gun" as I fire my A2A missiles at enemy aircraft. But I will ruefully and sadly miss the day when all the great, exciting, intense, furball dogfights between fighters firing only their cannons at each other during the early days of PS2 give way to a less exciting A2A missile and flare spamfest between fighters.

    IF I had to pick just one option, my vote would reluctantly be to remove A2A lock on missiles from the game and force aircraft to dogfight each other once again. As "Jester" said to the Top Gun class during the movie "Top Gun", the US pilots' kill ratio was 12 to 1 during the Korean War, but then dropped to only 3 to 1 during the Vietnam War because of over-reliance on missiles.
  2. I use rockets, because with enough practice, even hitting an enemy ESF with them is easy/reliable enough.
  3. Flares are there to provide you the time to turn the dog fight in your favour, not completely negate another ESF's A2A missiles.

    If youre being locked-on by missles your first reaction should be to fly low and near cover.
  4. I wait for a bit before using those flares. Even if someone gets a lock, sometimes they don't fire. Even then, I prefer to use terrain.
  5. As I've already stated A2A is less reliable than your nose gun. It's only good against bad ESFs or people that get caught out in the open. If a good pilot gets on your tail even without the A2A you are going to probably die anyway. A2A is actually quite decent but in no way OP against ESFs (you can counter it with maneuvers, terrain and even counters like flares and stealth exist in certs) and only against ESFs. Liberators and Galaxies, A2A? Ha ha ha why would i want A2A against libs and gals when i can just vaporize them with wocket pods. So as you can see A2A missile specialization is very narrow in that it's only decent or good against ESFs. Nothing wrong with a weapon existing solely to take out one type of target and being decently efficient at it. Planetside 1 had A2A with a wasp, although it wasn't fire and forget and you did have to keep your target in your crosshair to not lose the lock on but that game had different flight mechanics, map design and etc so it was possible to keep your target in your crosshair.

  6. To say that our pilots were over-reliant on missiles is a bit of a mis-statement- The original version of the F4 Phantoms used in Vietnam were designed without a cannon... A decision apparently made without consulting any actual pilots. The planes would run out of missiles, the missiles of the time being particularly unreliable, and have nothing to defend themselves; whereas the MiGs could use their guns to finish the job.
  7. If this happened Air would require heavy handed nerfs all across the board due to how rare it is to get teamwork to handle air currently. Adding another layer that won't ever happen except in rare cases would warrant massive nerfs on a scale your lacrimal glands would explode.
  8. I don't understand your post, perhaps you misunderstood mine. I was talking about A2G missiles, not G2A.
  9. Imo we need A2A missiles to counter A2G ESFs.

    There needs to be some incentive to NOT use rocket pods.
  10. Must have seen it as G2A instead of A2G.
  11. You're absolutely correct.

    The wunderkunds in the Pentagon thought that A2A missiles would dominate any air battle and thought aircraft gun cannons were going to be useless. So much for theory v. practice.

    I think that A2A missiles in PS2 will make things easier for casual gamers who want to fly and have a chance of shooting down enemy aircraft. The problem is that A2A missiles will make things EVEN MORE easier for expert pilots in shooting down casual gamer pilots.

    Let's face it. Most casual gamers freak out in the air whenever the "Lock" warning indicator comes on in their aircraft HUDs. It's almost like shooting fish in a barrel when it comes to using A2A missiles against casual gamer pilots. Asa a result, casual gamers give up flying and possibly playing PS2 altogether.

    It's already happening, as I'm seeing the same "ace" pilots up in the air time after time again now (e.g. GravityVS (VS) and Colt45 (TR)).

    If you remove A2A missiles from PS2, what the casual gamers will lose in terms of easier kills is more than compensated by their increased survivability.
  12. I just posted this in another thread then saw this one and figured I'd repost:

    I mostly agree. This is supposed to be a skill-based game right? It's mostly skill-less to lock on and fire a missile that is way too maneuverable and can only be countered once every 40 seconds with flares. I've seen missiles pull ridiculously unrealistic feats of changing directions on a dime. The real fun in dogfighting is using guns and outmaneuvering your opponent.

    I won't go to extremes and say that the missiles should be cut altogether from the game, but what I would like to see is some skill put back into the receiving pilot's hands. What I mean is the ability to dodge and juke the A2A missiles. They shouldn't be able to turn directions and accelerate instantly.

    For a perfect example of what I mean take a look at the G2G guided rockets. In beta they were highly maneuverable and would usually score a hit. Now they are limited in their turn speed and will often miss if not fired right or if the vehicle is traveling too quickly.
  13. Actually we don't. When rotary machine guns actually did a decent amount of damage to enemy aircraft (up until late beta), enemy ESFs were you biggest threat by far, even more so than now. When rotary damage was nerfed, that's when air dominance really started to pick up. TTKs for ESFs significantly increased. The day this patch went live, ESF piloting turned into an absolutely farm. I and many other people were consistently holding 50:1 K/Ds or higher, and getting killstreaks over 100. It was all initiated with the rotary gun nerf.

    Flying around now you'll often times see friendly ESFs killing ground targets and completely ignoring enemy ESFs that are doing the same thing. This was an extremely rare occurrence before because if an enemy ESF got behind you, you could get shredded. You couldn't ignore enemy air like you can now.

    A2A missiles don't fix that. They just ruin the dog-fighting potentials that still exist. And when there are for example 3 A2AM users up at once, it's just a cluster ****. All you can do is hide behind a hill and turtle until you can leave. At least before you could put up one hell of a fight and maybe even out play all 3 of them.

    This skillless crap is ruining A2A fighting. I can't stress it enough.
    • Up x 1
  14. Full time pilot here... BR25 or something now just by flying (and all of beta).

    ESFs... A2G rockets.. and A2A rockets are the best they've ever been. An ESF with A2A rockets should have a major major advantage over one that doesn't, why? Because the A2G guy has a major advantage over everything on the ground. One A2A setup ESF can quickly start to clear the sky and/or force the others to re-equip with A2A.

    Dog fighting is the best it's ever been. The TKK is slower than beta which is nice using the nose gun. There's more 2v2 3v1 1v2 situations which are awesome.

    Not to mention skilled pilots can avoid A2A with somewhat good success most of the time. If you fly around at 400-500M all the time you're probably not going to have a good time. Get low, enjoy what's going on and you can avoid lock on and A2A rockets mush easier.

    Skill level is top, good pilots are good, bad pilots complain about A2A missiles.
  15. Given the heavy implications expected in removing what has become a fairly appreciated item in air-combat, I'm inclined to agree with this guy.

    The logistics of it all doesn't add up anyway, which is something I should talk about now, because people are simply reposting the same thread to make the same points after they were countered in the previous topics. So, here's some fresh meat for the grinder...

    Even if the Air-to-Air missiles were considered for removal, the chances of such would be diminished rapidly upon discovering the given investment into them. People want them, people sometimes even need them, and they certainly do a good job of complementing the air-central playerbase. That means there's been a countless amount of certifications and Station Cash purchases of these missile systems. Now, imagine having to refund all of that with the explanation of 'Sorry, some people didn't want it.'

    It's not likely.

    There's not only the risk of alienating a chunk of the playerbase (don't say that you speak for the masses, because until five thousand posts appear in here quoting you as their opinion, it's just you) due to the removal of something they've grown attached to, but it also eliminates a few other parties with particular interests, namely the modernized fighter-combat pilots and newcomers wishing to pursue a more dedicated air-to-air setup.

    What's worse, is that it won't be the end either. There's a written footnote in the experience of managing MMORPG's, and it's a simple 'Don't give them what they want, give them what they need.' and as shameful as it is to believe, it's both true and necessary. Nevermind that we're a vocal minority on the forums, proven by the registration counts compared to the account statistics of the overall game....we're also the rather volatile mix of opinions that could ultimately ruin the game simply because we haven't elected to pursue acceptance and adaptation. If we don't stick to that and elect to subject any others to a loss for personal gain, then in the end we'll simply be committing to the stereotype that we don't know what's best. We'll just be the mob that complains when something annoys us, justifying that the only way to fix it, is to remove it alongside the other issues that follow shortly after it.

    So no, this is unlikely. It's logically difficult and unwarranted so long as it's proposed by the people who would find more comfort in World War two games.
  16. Watched NoXousX's video from a bit earlier, and I'd love to see that kind of TTK from Rotary cannons ingame. That'd be a huge boost to gameplay I think.
  17. You do realize you can have rotary and rocket pods equipped at the same time?
  18. Everyone did, its just AA was very powerful during this time so it wasn't much of an issue.
  19. haha you must be bad at flying, no pointless AA missile will destroy my ESF
  20. Just shot him down IG with A2A missiles, get laid.

Share This Page