from a pilot: your all going to die.... allot. - Page 3

kertvon · 2012-05-23, 10:09 PM

While I am not a fan of vehicle regen, I certainly hope that air vehicles are harder to take down with AA if flown at high altitudes. If you can't take them down from the ground then send up some pilots to bring them down. If the devs maximize the ceiling cap to cater to air to air battles, high altitude will be an entirely different battlefield; even to the point of enabling air vehicles to fly above the clouds to conceal themselves from ground units while traversing the continents. Think of the layers of progression air ops would have to consider.

1. High altitude travel towards target objective.
2. Air cav/scouts fly ahead of support aircraft to overcome enemy air to air and gain air superiority.
3. Additional reinforcing support fighters escort in the gals and libs and provide cover.
4. Fend off the waves of reinforcing enemy aircraft.
5. etc. etc.

These tactics are limited when ground units have just as easy an ability to take down air vehicles(minus flak weapons which have always been high altitude capable).

Yes, I agree, people will die a lot to pilots, but it is certainly not exclusive to pilots only. Once aircraft come into the "common zone" below high altitude where they are more vulnerable, between flak, MAX's, and any Ground-to-air equipped vehicles, there will be plenty of pilots getting punished.

Crippling the skies by making Ground-to-air weaponry more efficient is counter productive to air tactics. It's not like defending factions can't defend the skies with aircraft based defenses. If, however, the advantage is solely in reference to regen, then obviously that should be addressed. I think repair pads, as someone mentioned earlier, are the most practical solution.

IMMentat · 2012-05-23, 10:14 PM

Originally Posted by Stardouser

Just curious...why are people so quick to get upset about not getting a kill for a pilot that bails, but they are satisfied with not getting a kill while a wounded aircraft flies away for a couple of minutes to regen health?

Basic logistics.
A pilot that bails on top of you essentially has a full new life to screw you over with (most games don't limit pilots to a flightsuit and a pistol, which makes them a double-threat).
A pilot that runs away is out of the fight until he bails or repairs, this usually takes longer than a respawn would.

TrenchcoatNinja · 2012-05-23, 10:17 PM

Originally Posted by Rbstr

I don't see a problem with having a module that regens vehicle health when it directly conflicts with what's likely a major survivability tool: the flare. Especially now that infantry have a stinger-like launcher.

Yeah already I feel the dilemma of what to pick, but like most other options available it's for whatever situation you plan on, of course.

Stardouser · 2012-05-23, 10:18 PM

Originally Posted by IMMentat

Basic logistics.
A pilot that bails on top of you essentially has a full new life to screw you over with (most games don't limit pilots to a flightsuit and a pistol, which makes them a double-threat). A pilot that runs away is out of the fight until he bails or repairs.

I think that's only true if you carry AA weapons that allow you to bail and then immediately open fire on the enemy pilot that forced you to bail.

And frankly, while I think we really need to limit pilots to flightsuit and pistol(maybe a repair tool), at a bare minimum they should be limited to light assault and assault rifle, they should definitely not be allowed to carry around heavy AA/AV as a pilot. BF3 montages where you bail out of your jet and shoot the enemy jet in the face with an RPG in mid-air need to stay in BF3.

Death2All · 2012-05-23, 10:36 PM

Originally Posted by Serpent

Actually mate, I don't think it'll be as bad as that. If you look at the Night Ops footage, as TB gets in a Mag he shoots down the CEO with extreme ease. Even if he had been getting hit before, that Mag rider easily took it out, and that gun isn't even the most effective AA weapon in the game.

I think the balance is ok so far

Since when is a corporate ranking system proportional to player skill?

SoNaR · 2012-05-23, 10:42 PM

Originally Posted by Stardouser

It seems an explanation of BF3's disabling is in order. In BF3 a vehicle gets disabled at about 50% and they then burn to zero. You have to repair all the way to 100% to stop it.

When was the last time you played? Patch 1.0? You get disabled at 34% now, its been this way for months....

Originally Posted by Stardouser

Disabling at 20% or so would be OK(and disable should end after you repair to 30%, you should not have to go to 100%), but disabling at 50%, combined with the burning, makes for very irritating vehicle play in BF3.

I agree with you here, there was a system like this in all the Battlefield games before the Frostbite engine (Battlefield games after 2142 sucked, with the exception of Hero's) and it was a great way of handling disables.

Rbstr · 2012-05-23, 10:47 PM

Originally Posted by kertvon

While I am not a fan of vehicle regen, I certainly hope that air vehicles are harder to take down with AA if flown at high altitudes.

Unless there's an incredibly high flight ceiling, it makes more sense, and would provide for more interesting/difficult piloting if it were better to be closer to the ground.
For instance, up in the sky, there aren't many line-of-site obstructions making it easy to target you.

This goes for my feelings in preferring the Lib as an attack gunship and Galaxy as something that acts more like a transport helicopter rather than a paratrooper transport.

CutterJohn · 2012-05-23, 10:48 PM

Originally Posted by Stardouser

Just curious...why are people so quick to get upset about not getting a kill for a pilot that bails, but they are satisfied with not getting a kill while a wounded aircraft flies away for a couple of minutes to regen health?

I played much AA. I didn't mind people getting away. Thats just part of playing the game. Didn't get him, better luck next time.

The bails, otoh, were one of two things.

1: "*%#*& you AA n00b, you're not getting kill exp!", where the pilot bails out to spite whoever was killing him, knowing they'll land somewhere they will be completely worthless.

2a: "Whatever, I'll just AB over to the tower and get a couple kills before I die", where the pilot gains a magical second life and virtual immunity to the AA that was just killing it.

2b: Where they AB over you and gain a magical second life and transform into a unit designed to kill you.

I'm fine with bailing as an insertion mechanic. Hotdroppers were a valid emergent playstyle players developed. But it should require a very lightly armed/weaponless variant of the fighters, imo, not something you instantly transition to out of a solid A2A or A2G aircraft when you get into trouble that you can't run away from.

I mean, imagine if that bailure drops on to an AA max with AV at the ready, and that AA max pilot bailed out with an AI weapon. It'd be ridiculous.

Rbstr · 2012-05-23, 10:50 PM

Part of the bailing problem will likely be dealt with be providing exp on vehicle kill, not just player kill.

Stardouser · 2012-05-23, 10:52 PM

Originally Posted by SoNaR

When was the last time you played? Patch 1.0? You get disabled at 34% now, its been this way for months....

I agree with you here, there was a system like this in all the Battlefield games before the Frostbite engine (Battlefield games after 2142 sucked, with the exception of Hero's) and it was a great way of handling disables.

Uh, 3 weeks ago maybe.

The only thing is, even if they tinkered with the disable percentage, don't Javelins still disable in one hit even if they don't take you to 34%? Also, you still have to repair ALL the way to 100% to stop it, right?

SKYeXile · 2012-05-23, 10:55 PM

Originally Posted by CutterJohn

I played much AA. I didn't mind people getting away. Thats just part of playing the game. Didn't get him, better luck next time.

The bails, otoh, were one of two things.

1: "*%#*& you AA n00b, you're not getting kill exp!", where the pilot bails out to spite whoever was killing him, knowing they'll land somewhere they will be completely worthless.

2a: "Whatever, I'll just AB over to the tower and get a couple kills before I die", where the pilot gains a magical second life and virtual immunity to the AA that was just killing it.

2b: Where they AB over you and gain a magical second life and transform into a unit designed to kill you.

I'm fine with bailing as an insertion mechanic. Hotdroppers were a valid emergent playstyle players developed. But it should require a very lightly armed/weaponless variant of the fighters, imo, not something you instantly transition to out of a solid A2A or A2G aircraft when you get into trouble that you can't run away from.

I mean, imagine if that bailure drops on to an AA max with AV at the ready, and that AA max pilot bailed out with an AI weapon. It'd be ridiculous.

we saw a resource cost on those aircraft, depending on that rate and how they're earned, less effective people or people that are using them only for transport could be raping themselves of resource gain, and they may run-out of resources to spawn a vehicle if they're not using the vehicle for killing. Imagine 30 people all wasting 30 resources bailing on a tower, killing 3 defenders and flipping the tower, how much resources between them do you think they will get? (im still under the impression resources willbe earned at a tick rate based off your xp earned per hour, in relation to others, its the only fair way)

Biscuit · 2012-05-23, 10:59 PM

question:

on timeline 4:22 - 4:24 there was a added, radio like voice in the background while TB was talking.

was that ingame? a macro/emote per se?

Stardouser · 2012-05-23, 10:59 PM

Originally Posted by SKYeXile

we saw a resource cost on those aircraft, depending on that rate and how they're earned, less effective people or people that are using them only for transport could be raping themselves of resource gain, and they may run-out of resources to spawn a vehicle if they're not using the vehicle for killing. Imagine 30 people all wasting 30 resources bailing on a tower, killing 3 defenders and flipping the tower, how much resources between them do you think they will get? (im still under the impression resources willbe earned at a tick rate based off your xp earned per hour, in relation to others, its the only fair way)

Oh, you just gave me a thought. Everyone gains resources, right? 3 questions:
1. Will there be a resource sharing system?
2. Will playing as infantry classes be significantly cheaper than using vehicles?
3. The tie in question is; if there's a resource sharing system, won't that mean that an outfit's infantry can share their resources to its pilots, allowing them to use wasteful tactics a lot longer, perhaps even indefinitely?

Note that I am not suggesting a sharing system, I'm just anticipating an issue. Maybe if Hamma was able to cover the Resource system during his visit, we'll know enough to decide if this is a worthless question or not.

CutterJohn · 2012-05-23, 10:59 PM

Originally Posted by Rbstr

Part of the bailing problem will likely be dealt with be providing exp on vehicle kill, not just player kill.

That and the requirement for ejection seats. Hopefully pilots don't have easy access to repair pads either, so being a jump troop isn't a given. Or, hopefully it'll be hard to land as a jump troop unless you're relatively low and slow.

SKYeXile · 2012-05-23, 11:04 PM

Originally Posted by Stardouser

Oh, you just gave me a thought. Everyone gains resources, right? 3 questions:
1. Will there be a resource sharing system?
2. Will playing as infantry classes be significantly cheaper than using vehicles?
3. The tie in question is; if there's a resource sharing system, won't that mean that an outfit's infantry can share their resources to its pilots, allowing them to use wasteful tactics a lot longer, perhaps even indefinitely?

Note that I am not suggesting a sharing system, I'm just anticipating an issue. Maybe if Hamma was able to cover the Resource system during his visit, we'll know enough to decide if this is a worthless question or not.

most F2P games dont allow the sharing of resources because of RMT, once you earn it it would expect it to be yours, outfits could perhaps earn or tax resources to redistribute or use them, maybe... this is pure speculation.

from what i understand with infantry you have to pay to change your equipment loadout or something and purchase new unlocks,(this is the same with vehciles, but it seems you have to pay to get the vehicle) but to go back to that saved loadout it costs you nothing, i would expect maxes to cost resources.

come to think of it, i do vaguely remember something about a base model vehicle with no upgrade been free, but one with better weapons on it would cost resources to pull.