Why are AA maxes FAR more effective than their Vehicular Counterpart?

Discussion in 'Vehicle Discussion' started by Spadar, Nov 23, 2012.

  1. Nobody here is arguing that ESF's are balanced, and you don't fix something thats overpowered by overcompensating in other areas.

    And you never made a point, you had a strawman that I rejected. Did you roll your eyes when you typed "i'm special" too?
    Maneuvering a vehicle with flaps, rudders, and thrust is factually more challenging than turning left, right, and pushing forward.
    You refuse to recognize this. The same justification is used to balance sniper rifles, rocket launchers, and tank rounds when it comes to justifying their high power.
    Rockets and tank cannons without bullet drop? Snipers without sway?
    Sure, why not, right? Might as well because those don't take any skill either I suppose.
  2. ROFL, what are you talking about? Flying ESF in this game is about the easiest of any game with combined ground/armor/air forces I have ever seen. You arent skilled because you can fly an ESF in this game, dont kid yourself.
  3. So basically you're saying that the largest threat to aircraft is running into mountains? Yeah, totally nothing wrong with AA at all ;)
    • Up x 1
  4. It's easy to fly aircraft. Just because it's harder to use in some ways compared to driving a tank doesn't mean that aircraft should be more powerful than tanks. ESFs are more fragile than tanks because ESFs are fast. Sniper rifles have less bullets per magazine and slower firing speeds because they deal so much damage. Not everything is balanced based on difficulty.

    I honestly believe that it's inane to turn ground vehicles into a helpless shooting gallery for aircraft. There are G2A weapons for vehicles ingame, and that's how it should be.
    • Up x 1
  5. 2&3) Considering ESFs, there is no escape. You can repair a land vehicle during combat.

    I mean I could go on, but you just keep talking about ESF's, failing to consider liberators. They were designed to counter your beloved tank. They have a far greater risk to ESF's than ground armor already. At least ground armor CAN be supported by infantry, air vehicles cannot. You won't just be screwing over ESF's if you make the skyguard as good a an AA max, you'll be screwing over the entire purpose of aircraft, but everyone is so blinded by the overpowered state of ESF's that they can't see that what they're asking for is world of tanks.
  6. I don't talk about Liberators because most people prefer to talk about ESFs, because that's the easiest air vehicle and the most accessible air vehicle. Personally, I'm kinda sick of hearing people talking about how ESFs should be the bane of ground forces, when the Liberator exists. And in this context, the Liberator should be a very scary enemy to tanks.

    Just because infantry can move near ground vehicles, doesn't mean that you should remove vehicular AA capabilities.

    Skyguards should have something that makes them situationally better than AA Maxes when it comes to shooting at them. Right now, the only benefit you get is speed.

    Base Turrets are also ineffective compared to AA Maxes, and probably even to Skyguards. Sure, they're free, but AA turrets are inaccurate, and can be taken down easily and constantly due to their fixed position.

    Right now, I'm telling people to only use AA Maxes for anti-air. I want to be able to tell people that using a Skyguard or base turret is viable.
  7. Despite the ESF either taking skill to be as effective as a tank or not, there is a definite difference in how ground and air power should be balanced. Compared to ground power, barely anyone flies. At any mildly contested base, there will be a dozen or more tanks with dozens of infantry. In the air? If you're lucky maybe a handful of ESFs and one Liberator. The fact is air zergs are a lot smaller than tank zergs (I'd say it does have to do with the difficulty in flying). Air is special, and so is armor. You should never balance air the same way you balance tanks, and air should never be equal in effectiveness to tanks (that is, 1 ESF should always be more effective in killing power than 1 MBT).

    It's just the way air combat works in FPS games. Air has always been the "high risk, high reward" type of gameplay while ground pounding was a much easier, but lower rewarding way of playing. I'm not saying air is better than ground, they both have different objectives during skirmishes, but when balancing air and ground you never want to take away the dynamic that makes air special.
  8. Most people would be ok with this IF there was high risk. Which is the problem atm.

    There is little risk and little skill involved right now. Feel free to hoverspam and unlock flares / composite so you can completely ignore AA.
  9. I do agree with you on that. I absolutely hate how hoverspam dominates not only air-to-ground strategies, but dogfighting as well. There definitely needs to be some more advanced physics involved with these planes.
  10. Arguably, the high risk involved in air at the moment is some friendly ESF colliding with you. Nothing grinds my gears more than having the Liberator I'm escorting get downed by some nugget who doesn't know how to avoid a flying whale. Or worse, taking me out. Especially in a dogfight.
  11. I hate getting hit by a Pod Drop. Every have that happen? What are the damn odds right?
  12. Yeah the risk level in order of priority is...

    Friendlies crashing into you > Enemy aircraft > Terrain > AA :rolleyes:
    • Up x 1
  13. Much less than the 5 ESF strikes I recorded yesterday. Reaver struck me head on as I was tailing an enemy Liberator from 1 o clock high (obvious blind spot on my monitor). Team Mossi struck me in the rear as I chasing in a dogfight. My Lib took two ESFs, one of which, once destroyed, fell onto my Mossi and destroyed it. I've established that the most dangerous anti-air weapon is human stupidty.
  14. raw

    every noob and his dog plays ESFs currently, and why wouldn't you: unleash a fury of carnage with the press of a button. no user input required.
    • Up x 1
  15. Bursters were originally supposed to be an unlock with MAX units only having an AV and AI weapon each, but after a wipe during beta SOE realized (after players whined about it) they had no way for new players to counter air because they hadn't and still haven't implemented the AA/AV turrets for engineers. Some people farmed auraxium until they got ESF rockets and since only very few people had access to any kind of AA, these players got huge amounts of auraxium and dominated entire continents. This led to all the other continents being farmed by people in ESFs with rockets, the dominated continents yielding ever higher supplies of auraxium, large outfits thinking "F#@k that" (rightly so) and swapping servers, leaving the dominant faction alone on their owned server. They wiped again and gave everyone a burster by default but said it was only until new-player-AA was put in. Then the game launched.

    I can see why they made this decision. Implementing a whole new way to do AA and balance it (there were already major balance issues with air) is more work than leaving out some content they can implement and balance later and giving everyone a small part of the mechanics that they were trying to balance in the first place so they could test them wide-scale while not waiting for people to unlock them.

  16. No, the skyguard wasn't balanced. 1 skyguard meant that the skies were guaranteed clear for the hex and surrounding hexes to where the skyguard was located. I fully exploited the skyguard as I tend to use lightnings over MBT's and it was just asinine how easy it was to clear the skies as a single skyguard.

    They took the nerfs too far, I agree.. but the nerfs weren't undeserved.
  17. This got glossed over but I"m quoting for truth.

    SG is a pile of garbage. Burster is fine as it is but the rendering thing is a problem. AA needs range to deal with high altitude bombers AND to stay a bit away from enemy armor, nothing like taking shells to the side of your face when you are looking up.
    • Up x 1
  18. While it is an issue with the game engine, it's still a balance issue. You can never properly balance an enemy that cannot be seen or damaged by its target. That's why I would like a shift towards weaker Infantry AA platforms and more powerful Vehicle AA platforms.

    Even at the height of their strength, I didn't fear Skyguards much. I still fear AA Maxes more than I ever did Skyguards. I can see and avoid a lightning on the ground, I can see their projectiles streaming from their vehicle. A pilot cannot do this against AA Maxes. If they have enough force to kill you, you won't know anything about it until it's already too late.
  19. my stand point on AA is
    Max Units, 1 duel AA max can down a fighter if they land all the shots from each clip. i done it many times.
    HA G2A, really. lock on shoot. not hard at all. lacks the dmg of Max AA but makes up for it in easy mode.
    Skyguard. Hard to aim. large target, lack of dmg. it should be worth 2 max units. but atm it's worth 1/2 a max unit with it's hard to aim weapon and easy to kill frame.
  20. I totally agree. Nerf Burster MAX to be how Skyguard is atm (- the tracer) and buff Skyguard to how Burster MAX is atm.

    Also, buff Walker.

Share This Page