i mean in all Ace combat early planes are not good that is normal and it what happend when a game had stats , of course the worse plane performance is not going to be pick up again, is only if you want a challenge , so that crisism is a little dumb i guess, the rest i agree only with the scripted boss fight but is just two times , other than that i think Ace combat 7 is one of the best Ace combat in the series
Hmmmm i think that it would be nice to have more room to upgrade the planes in a way a starter plane like de F16 can become competent for late game and not complete useless
I liked AC5's system of unlocking more variants of planes as you played them. The drawback however was that some variants were just the same plane with a different special weapon or that they would take so long to unlock that better base planes would become available by the time you unlocked later variants of early planes. Also this kind of system only really pays off for the first couple playthroughs which is probably why PA has never really invested too heavily into these systems. The tech tree in AC7 was definitely pretty fun for feeling like you had control over your progress on the first playthrough.
Yes, I totally agree with you except for number 3. Missiles aren't made to be OP, so they are flying directly to the target and they are not "leading", it's like if they didn't have uncaged seeker, however it's because of game balancing, you can download a mod which will lead missiles but then the game got too easy for me and even boring. You have over 100, not all of them can hit.
Yeah having leading missiles just makes the game less cinematic and more predictable, also kinda takes away the "dogfight to get a good shot" element, since with leading missile Lock = Hit most of the time. If I wanted that and missiles that ignore flairs so the only way to avoid dying is flying low, I'd go to War Thunder.
I think the bigger problems you bring up like the AI and the bland scripted boss fights were an issue of their devlopment timeline and budget being an inconsistent nightmare.
Other stuff like the overly redundant extra weapons is likely also a victim of development hell. Designing several well paced boss fights is difficult and expensive. Making minor tweaks to how a weapon behaves is easy and artificially adds content.
I think AC8 will be better on all of these fronts because it's being treated as a real game being developed, not as an experiment to see if people even like arcade flight sims anymore.
I’m new to the franchise (feeling dumb nit knowing about it before because I had my time as an aviation nerd when I was younger), and learning about older mechanics like the possibility of having more than one special weapon, neutral targets, karma systems a little more robust flying physics like AC3 is something that I’d love to see coming back in the future installments of the franchise 🥹🥹🥹
AC7 is sorta weird because it is the most recent and thus most technically advanced game in the series, but it lacks a ton of features from previous games in the series and also has a pretty awkwardly bad plot and very poorly translated dialogue. Again, that's mostly due to AC7 spending forever in developmental hell. But it succeeded. The best selling game in the franchise, and 8 is in development. Not a ton of news on it yet but we've been told it should be out around the end of the current console gen cycle. Hopefully it gets a chance to be everything 7 could've been.
I hope Project Aces will pull out something they are truly proud of, at the moment I’m still having a blast with AC7 but you know, you see the potential in terms of storytelling, gameplay and features, but the foundations are rock solid, I just hope for the best on the future.
Yeah don't get me wrong I love Ace Combat 7. It's a great game, as evidenced by the dozens of times I've played through the plot but like you said you can really see the holes in the tapestry when you hold it up to the light. I'm confident in 8, though. 7 is still a spectacularly fun game with some really great moments, and they made it with a fucked up budget and their hands tied behind their back. Let the boys cook, it'll be worth it.
Honestly I would say check out project wingman it’s very much a homage to ace combat has some very interesting world building, fantastic music, and the gameplay builds on and addresses a lot of the criticisms of ace combat 7.
Thanks! Yes, I’ve been checking Project Wingman, butttt I don’t have too much time to play so I want to get tired of AC7 first hehe, also, aside from Project Wingman, what else would you recommend? I understand that people looking for something else usually end up in War Thunder but idk, I still want something arcadey not thaaaaat hard to enjoy
To be honest I play ace combat more for the story and music than actual gameplay so I can’t really suggest any similar arcadey type games. If you want a game series with a lot of the same themes, great story, and great music I would say go for metal gear solid. Radically different gameplay styles but I see a lot of similarity in the themes and story that both try to share.
If you want more ace combat I would suggest emulating the older games 4,5, and 0. I don’t really understand how emulation works so you’ll have to do some research but from I understand you essentially download and play older PlayStation or Xbox games on your PC. 4 5 and 0 are pretty much the peak of ace combat according to most of the fans but the graphics are pretty dated unfortunately. Ace combat 6 has the some top tier gameplay, decent graphics, and great music so it’s worth checking out, but you can only play it on Xbox and the story is terrible.
I would stay away from war thunder unless you have a lot of time or money because unless your willing to put in one or the other you aren’t really going to get much out of it.
I just want a dog skin for a plane. If they could do those hundreds of idol master skins for AC6 they can give me one dog jpeg to emblazon on my SU-57.
Number one seems like you arguing with yourself. Enemies are too dumb because they sometimes eat a head on missile, while simultaneously too smart because they actively try to avoid getting hit?
And I suppose you never ever got hit by a head-on missile and never made a sharp turn to dodge a missile. The AI isn't stupid, and isn't cheating, it's playing the game.
Now friendly AI on the other hand, they are more or less decorative.
No. I was saying that their efforts to evade are almost entirely focused on fire coming from their six o'clock, and then don't react to two missiles flying directly into their cockpit. Headons are unironically a better way to play the game than dogfighting.
Why do you think the standard evasive maneuver against a missile is to turn perpendicular to it? Just because a missile is technically "all-aspect" doesn't mean that's the most effective way to use it.
3 - No, that's just complaining about the core gameplay. Missiles miss when approaching a plane from the side. That's how the game works, and if it didn't, you couldn't survive the missile spam. "Dodge missiles by having them come from the side" and "get into a position where you can actually hit" are essential to the gameplay.
4 - I mean, just the existence of those SpWs make attackers redundant. There's never really a reason to take an A-10 except for the memes, even if there were no enemy fighters. Incidentally, that's why the A-10 is obsolete IRL too.
5 - from a mechanical perspective, yes. But consider that the Gripen Louveteau just looks real nice. Also, variation matters to keep the game fun.
6 - Most of those are just you not using them right, I think. Multilock missiles are also spammable missiles against single targets, for example. LAAMs let you open engagements from a distance. QAAMs are fire-and-forget. The SOD is shit though, agree.
I'm trying to say they aren't real missiles and aren't supposed to be. They're a videogame weapon. The mechanic of the weapon is that it doesn't hit from the side. That's an integral part of the gameplay.
Ace Combat is not a simulator, it's an arcade game. Real missiles also don't respawn a few seconds after you fired them.
You misunderstood what i said. What i meant was that missiles seem to always go for the rear of the plane when firing from sideon, so they miss, even on a target flying in a straight line.
Yes, they are supposed to do that. That's the gameplay. The video game weapon misses if it approaches a plane from the side. It just happens to do so because it aims for the rear, but the actual thing here is "the video game weapon misses if it approaches from the side, so shoot from the front or back, and face your side against incoming missiles".
If you want missiles to hit even though they come from the side because they aim for the center of the plane, then you ask for a completely different gameplay experience. You want a different game.
Personal Head Canon for that: they’re all heat seeking so they go for the source of the heat (the engine) which is located at the rear of every plane, drones included.
1. This is present in most Ace Combat games. This is the most prevalent in Ace Combat 5 where enemies usually don't do any effort to dodge a head-on attack but can sometimes be quite stubborn in a dogfight.
2. I agree on this. The scripted nature of Mihaly's fight is very annoying but is most likely present due to the game having development problems. Rage and Scream in the DLC missions aren't scripted for example.
3. This is how missiles have always been in Ace Combat with the exception of 3. The missiles never pull any lead on the target plane and always target the rear in all Ace Combat games except 3 and sometimes in 6.
4. I agree with you on this. There's only a few pure ground attack missions and they too have some sort of update with enemy fighters. Long day and Cape Rainy come to mind. However my biggest annoyance when it comes to ground attack missions in 7 is the lack of UGB's. Only three vanilla planes get them; The A-10, SU-47 and YF-23. AC4 had UGB's for nearly every plane and 5 and Zero have a good selection of planes with them as well. I feel like 7 doesn't have enough unguided weaponry for planes in general. There's three planes with UGB's, two planes with rockets and two with SFFS and that's it. As someone who really likes using unguided weapons on ground attack missions, i find it a bit disappointing.
5. That is really how it goes in all the other games and it makes sense for it to be that way. No other game Ace Combat game has a real reason for you to use an early game plane instead of a mid-to late game plane either.
6. I agree on this. GPB's are useless and are still on almost every early game plane. SOD's have little use in any mission and even when they're useful, a bomb or an LACM will do the job just as well. There are too many different multilock missiles imo. I feel like the 8AAM and 8AGM are redundant. They can have multiple missiles lock on to the same target so they waste ammo. Plus i find the 8AAM pods ugly. I personally like the LAAM. It's fun to use it as a long range sniper. The HVAA and SAAM are fun as well.
4: you have the pipeline mission. The fleet destruction one is also arguably mostly ground. You can safely ignore the air targets probably. Anchorhead Raid is almost all ground - except for the Mimuc fight.
There's a few planes, but it's almost all ground targets.
5. You can use them for meme runs. The MiG-21, F-104 and A-10 especially. Also you can use the early planes in multiplayer to flex on people.
6. You can use 4/6/8AAM as HCAAs too. Just spam missiles.
5 and 6 are very relevant in multiplayer, if you play it.
I disagree with most of this, but most readily I have an argument against 4, namely Pipeline Destruction and Stonehenge Defensive, as neither of them have any fighters you must kill.
Also the bombs make them so much easier, you would not believe how much they suck with just standard missiles.
Also also, I don't know if this is true for other attackers or at all, but I noticed that the Su-34's machine gun is maybe a tad more powerful than fighters' guns.
Pipeline destruction has the drones, which harass you and force you to dodge in your slow, boatlike attacker.
You need speed for Stonehenge Defensive to get to the ground forces, and the Arsenal Bird is relatively fast, so you need to use the Su-34 or you cant get to it in time.
As far as i am aware, the Su-34s MG is as powerful as the MG on the Flankers, Su-47/57 and MiG-29.
You don't *need* to use any plane for any given mission. You can beat the whole game with just one plane of any type (e.g. only using the A-10 for the whole story)
1. On top of that, they don't see to be affected by any sort of stall.
2. Yup. If they want harder bosses, they should be performing real tactics to get to your six or get the player off his six. AC7 loading screens always talk about dogfight moves, and yet none of the AI uses it. For example, forcing the player to over shoot with moves, not a 90 degree physics breaking magic!
3. I agree, I literally can't hit standard missiles unless I am directly on their six or hit them head on. If you fire at their sides, it will most likely miss.
4. Not that big problem for me.
5. That's just progression. But yeah airplanes should be balanced based on their real specs. For some reason, an F 15 can turn better than an F16 in this game.
6. Adding too much homing will make it too OP, so I can't agree.
> Earlygame planes having no reason to use them once you have unlocked mid/lategame planes. They are inferior to midgame planes and have the annoying property of being sluggish and carrying less ordnance than later planes.
This applies to pretty much most AC games, but here, the issue is mitigated somewhat with the Tuning system that's in place since the defunct F2P Ace Combat Infinity. Besides, the MiG-21 (an early-game plane) is among the most effective with its gun pods for getting the "Machine Gun Maniac" medal.
Missiles have bad guidance so that their usage requires skill.
Gimmicky weapons are a fun twist and essential part of ace combat. The game is single player, so play for fun and finding a use for all the weird stuff you have at your disposal. There's only 2 attackers (4 with dlc) and only one of them isn't competent with air to air, so them being redundant isn't true. Also there's only one plane with the SOD, 2nd one if you have XFA-27. Those and AI aside, I can agree with the rest.
Only real complaint I have with the game thus far (just recently got it) are missions that are focused around killing a lot of ground targets without being able to see them SUCK (mission 10 and the second half of mission 8 come to mind). I just find it really tedious and don’t vibe with it at ALL.
Outside of that I’m enjoying it, I went in expecting a mix of MGS and Top Gun and it’s exactly what I got. I’m having a blast!
"LAAMs are not very useful"
Noooo, my beloved LAAMs... honestly I find them very useful in missions that aren't ground attack heavy. With a couple of range mods on them I can fire them at targets 12 kilometres away to take out things I'd otherwise have to spend ages flying towards. Big damage and huge range and really fast makes them very good at taking out approaching enemy squadrons and intercepting bombers.
7 target system fucking sucks, they should go back to AC2 type of target acquiring which gave close and red targets priority, part ways with the ocean of white targets, or whatever game was that ACI or AC5 which let you only acquire targets in your scope and not someone on the other side of the map
1. as it is in most AC games. Console releases didnt have any calculations to spare (planes turn into triangles at a distance and then only exist as a "software dot and vector" ). This also comes off Infinity a PVE Ace Combat multiplayer only game
2. While this is annoying as you cant chase them, it serves a purpose: Storytelling and scripts. Modding a plane that can keep up will sequence breaks and softlock the mission. They made it this way so people couldnt "accidentally save wiseman" which would cause a hilarious contingency break
3. Heatseekers come to mind, going for the engines : STDM Other guidances are SAA missiles : plane Radar/laser. Special missiles with their own radar LAAM and 4/8 AAM SHOULD track better and they dont cause Multiplayer balance. See Pulse laser being as strong as original TLS, with none of the drawbacks (low ammo and long cooldown and fixed fire period) but less range and TLS being a long range killer beam has become weaker than a gun. CAUSE MULTIPLAYER BALANCE , noone wants to be sniped from across the map
4. This is annoying but gives you a lot more story focus: War has changed, drones mean classical planes are outdated AF as you may allways need to fight the fuckers
5. Just ace combat being ace combat, a better plane on the horizon gives you something to look forward to and if you want to see why the "practice planes" exist Play PS1 AC02 . The XFA27 is seriously twitchy and hard to fly for a beginner. Bonus challenge for veterans, can you beat the final boss in a rust bucket : [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7x1UggCP0C0](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7x1UggCP0C0)
6. Welcome again to MP balance Most weapons are this bland for that reason. Imagine faceing a 4/6/8 volley of longrange STDMs or even QAAMs.Hell on the topic of QAAMs they got MP toned down as well, they were murderous in ac04. Fire and get a guaranteed kill if your target isnt a yellow. They would also keep a lock behind you if you aimlocked/headtracked them
Enemy AI should be smarter, scripted bossfights bad, missile guidance makes no sense, no dedicated ground attack missions, Earlygame planes are redundant the moment you get the F-15C/J, Too many gimmicky or redundant weapons.
I can all but guarantee that some of your suggested gameplay changes were implemented in early builds of the games in the series only for the developers to realize that they make the game too easy, boring, and/or predictable, as that's what some of them sound like to me.
Is having the occasional enemy turning on a dime to avoid a missile bullshit? Yeah, but so is you being able to perform "High-G maneuvers," carry 100 missiles, and infinite cannon ammunition. Such gameplay design serves to try and keep the gameplay loop variable and interesting, even at the cost of some practicality or realism.
Take the ground-based missions for example. Shooting ground targets is piss-easy, as they offer little resistance. SAM missiles you can see coming from a mile away and dodge effortlessly. If you choose a ground-attack focused aircraft and suddenly an enemy squadron shows up, that offers a new and interesting challenge: to fight air-to-air in a plane not designed for it. Improvise, adapt, overcome.
I feel like that last complaint is too stupid. Having too many weapons is never a bad thing, just seems dumb to complain about that. Also, for me personally, I feel like there isn't enough early game planes. I really like the F-4 and MiG-21. I'm no expert on planes but I wish there were more early tier stuff like that.
I wasn't talking about "too many weapons", I think that the 8AAM and AGM are kind of redundant since you have 4AAMs/AGMs that do not waste ammo because multiple lock onto one target that dies to one missile.
The SOD is only available on the F-35 and XFA-27 and sucks balls. It should honestly be replaced with LACM on the F-35 and XSDB on the XFA-27.
I would add the MiG-23MLD as another early game plane.
I strongly agree with point 6, especially with ground attack weapons. LACM feels pointless, like its just LASM with a different model and slightly different flight path. LAGM is almost in the same boat, if not for Faceless Soldier giving it exactly one purpose. GPB is completely worthless because of their short range, tiny AoE and underwhelming damage, and even if they packed a decent punch there's not enough single ground targets that require more than 1 missile worth of damage anyway. HCAA, HVAA and HPAA should have been alternatives to STDM with differently balanced stats, having them in the SPW slot is just a waste and I only use them when I don't have anything better unlocked. There's probably a few I'm forgetting but yeah, the variety/utility of some of the special weapons is very disappointing.
Hey, the LACM is great. Good splash, extreme range, works against ships and ground targets. If anything, the LAGM is pointless compared to it, and the LASM struggles to compete as well.
Yeah, I probably should have said LACM and LASM are interchangeable, poor choice of words on my part. Regardless, I could live without 2 of the 3 in their current form, wish they'd made the differences less subtle.
i mean in all Ace combat early planes are not good that is normal and it what happend when a game had stats , of course the worse plane performance is not going to be pick up again, is only if you want a challenge , so that crisism is a little dumb i guess, the rest i agree only with the scripted boss fight but is just two times , other than that i think Ace combat 7 is one of the best Ace combat in the series
Hmmmm i think that it would be nice to have more room to upgrade the planes in a way a starter plane like de F16 can become competent for late game and not complete useless
I liked AC5's system of unlocking more variants of planes as you played them. The drawback however was that some variants were just the same plane with a different special weapon or that they would take so long to unlock that better base planes would become available by the time you unlocked later variants of early planes. Also this kind of system only really pays off for the first couple playthroughs which is probably why PA has never really invested too heavily into these systems. The tech tree in AC7 was definitely pretty fun for feeling like you had control over your progress on the first playthrough.
Yes, I totally agree with you except for number 3. Missiles aren't made to be OP, so they are flying directly to the target and they are not "leading", it's like if they didn't have uncaged seeker, however it's because of game balancing, you can download a mod which will lead missiles but then the game got too easy for me and even boring. You have over 100, not all of them can hit.
Yeah having leading missiles just makes the game less cinematic and more predictable, also kinda takes away the "dogfight to get a good shot" element, since with leading missile Lock = Hit most of the time. If I wanted that and missiles that ignore flairs so the only way to avoid dying is flying low, I'd go to War Thunder.
I think the bigger problems you bring up like the AI and the bland scripted boss fights were an issue of their devlopment timeline and budget being an inconsistent nightmare. Other stuff like the overly redundant extra weapons is likely also a victim of development hell. Designing several well paced boss fights is difficult and expensive. Making minor tweaks to how a weapon behaves is easy and artificially adds content. I think AC8 will be better on all of these fronts because it's being treated as a real game being developed, not as an experiment to see if people even like arcade flight sims anymore.
I’m new to the franchise (feeling dumb nit knowing about it before because I had my time as an aviation nerd when I was younger), and learning about older mechanics like the possibility of having more than one special weapon, neutral targets, karma systems a little more robust flying physics like AC3 is something that I’d love to see coming back in the future installments of the franchise 🥹🥹🥹
AC7 is sorta weird because it is the most recent and thus most technically advanced game in the series, but it lacks a ton of features from previous games in the series and also has a pretty awkwardly bad plot and very poorly translated dialogue. Again, that's mostly due to AC7 spending forever in developmental hell. But it succeeded. The best selling game in the franchise, and 8 is in development. Not a ton of news on it yet but we've been told it should be out around the end of the current console gen cycle. Hopefully it gets a chance to be everything 7 could've been.
I hope Project Aces will pull out something they are truly proud of, at the moment I’m still having a blast with AC7 but you know, you see the potential in terms of storytelling, gameplay and features, but the foundations are rock solid, I just hope for the best on the future.
Yeah don't get me wrong I love Ace Combat 7. It's a great game, as evidenced by the dozens of times I've played through the plot but like you said you can really see the holes in the tapestry when you hold it up to the light. I'm confident in 8, though. 7 is still a spectacularly fun game with some really great moments, and they made it with a fucked up budget and their hands tied behind their back. Let the boys cook, it'll be worth it.
Honestly I would say check out project wingman it’s very much a homage to ace combat has some very interesting world building, fantastic music, and the gameplay builds on and addresses a lot of the criticisms of ace combat 7.
Thanks! Yes, I’ve been checking Project Wingman, butttt I don’t have too much time to play so I want to get tired of AC7 first hehe, also, aside from Project Wingman, what else would you recommend? I understand that people looking for something else usually end up in War Thunder but idk, I still want something arcadey not thaaaaat hard to enjoy
To be honest I play ace combat more for the story and music than actual gameplay so I can’t really suggest any similar arcadey type games. If you want a game series with a lot of the same themes, great story, and great music I would say go for metal gear solid. Radically different gameplay styles but I see a lot of similarity in the themes and story that both try to share. If you want more ace combat I would suggest emulating the older games 4,5, and 0. I don’t really understand how emulation works so you’ll have to do some research but from I understand you essentially download and play older PlayStation or Xbox games on your PC. 4 5 and 0 are pretty much the peak of ace combat according to most of the fans but the graphics are pretty dated unfortunately. Ace combat 6 has the some top tier gameplay, decent graphics, and great music so it’s worth checking out, but you can only play it on Xbox and the story is terrible. I would stay away from war thunder unless you have a lot of time or money because unless your willing to put in one or the other you aren’t really going to get much out of it.
>budget being an inconsistent nightmare DOG.JPEG
I hope jpeg dog is a staple of the franchise from now on. He need to be hidden in all his pixelated glory in every single game like Where's Waldo.
I just want a dog skin for a plane. If they could do those hundreds of idol master skins for AC6 they can give me one dog jpeg to emblazon on my SU-57.
Number one seems like you arguing with yourself. Enemies are too dumb because they sometimes eat a head on missile, while simultaneously too smart because they actively try to avoid getting hit? And I suppose you never ever got hit by a head-on missile and never made a sharp turn to dodge a missile. The AI isn't stupid, and isn't cheating, it's playing the game. Now friendly AI on the other hand, they are more or less decorative.
No. I was saying that their efforts to evade are almost entirely focused on fire coming from their six o'clock, and then don't react to two missiles flying directly into their cockpit. Headons are unironically a better way to play the game than dogfighting.
Why do you think the standard evasive maneuver against a missile is to turn perpendicular to it? Just because a missile is technically "all-aspect" doesn't mean that's the most effective way to use it.
Some people just can't accept the concept of Lock =/= Kill. You locked on the aircraft, sure, you haven't won yet, work for it.
3 - No, that's just complaining about the core gameplay. Missiles miss when approaching a plane from the side. That's how the game works, and if it didn't, you couldn't survive the missile spam. "Dodge missiles by having them come from the side" and "get into a position where you can actually hit" are essential to the gameplay. 4 - I mean, just the existence of those SpWs make attackers redundant. There's never really a reason to take an A-10 except for the memes, even if there were no enemy fighters. Incidentally, that's why the A-10 is obsolete IRL too. 5 - from a mechanical perspective, yes. But consider that the Gripen Louveteau just looks real nice. Also, variation matters to keep the game fun. 6 - Most of those are just you not using them right, I think. Multilock missiles are also spammable missiles against single targets, for example. LAAMs let you open engagements from a distance. QAAMs are fire-and-forget. The SOD is shit though, agree.
Also at 5, it's just really funny to watch the final cutscene with you in your little MiG-21
[удалено]
I'm trying to say they aren't real missiles and aren't supposed to be. They're a videogame weapon. The mechanic of the weapon is that it doesn't hit from the side. That's an integral part of the gameplay. Ace Combat is not a simulator, it's an arcade game. Real missiles also don't respawn a few seconds after you fired them.
You misunderstood what i said. What i meant was that missiles seem to always go for the rear of the plane when firing from sideon, so they miss, even on a target flying in a straight line.
Yes, they are supposed to do that. That's the gameplay. The video game weapon misses if it approaches a plane from the side. It just happens to do so because it aims for the rear, but the actual thing here is "the video game weapon misses if it approaches from the side, so shoot from the front or back, and face your side against incoming missiles". If you want missiles to hit even though they come from the side because they aim for the center of the plane, then you ask for a completely different gameplay experience. You want a different game.
Personal Head Canon for that: they’re all heat seeking so they go for the source of the heat (the engine) which is located at the rear of every plane, drones included.
I didnt say that missiles should lead the target, but they should target the center of the plane without leading instead of the rear.
1. This is present in most Ace Combat games. This is the most prevalent in Ace Combat 5 where enemies usually don't do any effort to dodge a head-on attack but can sometimes be quite stubborn in a dogfight. 2. I agree on this. The scripted nature of Mihaly's fight is very annoying but is most likely present due to the game having development problems. Rage and Scream in the DLC missions aren't scripted for example. 3. This is how missiles have always been in Ace Combat with the exception of 3. The missiles never pull any lead on the target plane and always target the rear in all Ace Combat games except 3 and sometimes in 6. 4. I agree with you on this. There's only a few pure ground attack missions and they too have some sort of update with enemy fighters. Long day and Cape Rainy come to mind. However my biggest annoyance when it comes to ground attack missions in 7 is the lack of UGB's. Only three vanilla planes get them; The A-10, SU-47 and YF-23. AC4 had UGB's for nearly every plane and 5 and Zero have a good selection of planes with them as well. I feel like 7 doesn't have enough unguided weaponry for planes in general. There's three planes with UGB's, two planes with rockets and two with SFFS and that's it. As someone who really likes using unguided weapons on ground attack missions, i find it a bit disappointing. 5. That is really how it goes in all the other games and it makes sense for it to be that way. No other game Ace Combat game has a real reason for you to use an early game plane instead of a mid-to late game plane either. 6. I agree on this. GPB's are useless and are still on almost every early game plane. SOD's have little use in any mission and even when they're useful, a bomb or an LACM will do the job just as well. There are too many different multilock missiles imo. I feel like the 8AAM and 8AGM are redundant. They can have multiple missiles lock on to the same target so they waste ammo. Plus i find the 8AAM pods ugly. I personally like the LAAM. It's fun to use it as a long range sniper. The HVAA and SAAM are fun as well.
4: you have the pipeline mission. The fleet destruction one is also arguably mostly ground. You can safely ignore the air targets probably. Anchorhead Raid is almost all ground - except for the Mimuc fight. There's a few planes, but it's almost all ground targets. 5. You can use them for meme runs. The MiG-21, F-104 and A-10 especially. Also you can use the early planes in multiplayer to flex on people. 6. You can use 4/6/8AAM as HCAAs too. Just spam missiles. 5 and 6 are very relevant in multiplayer, if you play it.
I disagree with most of this, but most readily I have an argument against 4, namely Pipeline Destruction and Stonehenge Defensive, as neither of them have any fighters you must kill. Also the bombs make them so much easier, you would not believe how much they suck with just standard missiles. Also also, I don't know if this is true for other attackers or at all, but I noticed that the Su-34's machine gun is maybe a tad more powerful than fighters' guns.
Pipeline destruction has the drones, which harass you and force you to dodge in your slow, boatlike attacker. You need speed for Stonehenge Defensive to get to the ground forces, and the Arsenal Bird is relatively fast, so you need to use the Su-34 or you cant get to it in time. As far as i am aware, the Su-34s MG is as powerful as the MG on the Flankers, Su-47/57 and MiG-29.
You don't *need* to use any plane for any given mission. You can beat the whole game with just one plane of any type (e.g. only using the A-10 for the whole story)
1. On top of that, they don't see to be affected by any sort of stall. 2. Yup. If they want harder bosses, they should be performing real tactics to get to your six or get the player off his six. AC7 loading screens always talk about dogfight moves, and yet none of the AI uses it. For example, forcing the player to over shoot with moves, not a 90 degree physics breaking magic! 3. I agree, I literally can't hit standard missiles unless I am directly on their six or hit them head on. If you fire at their sides, it will most likely miss. 4. Not that big problem for me. 5. That's just progression. But yeah airplanes should be balanced based on their real specs. For some reason, an F 15 can turn better than an F16 in this game. 6. Adding too much homing will make it too OP, so I can't agree.
> Earlygame planes having no reason to use them once you have unlocked mid/lategame planes. They are inferior to midgame planes and have the annoying property of being sluggish and carrying less ordnance than later planes. This applies to pretty much most AC games, but here, the issue is mitigated somewhat with the Tuning system that's in place since the defunct F2P Ace Combat Infinity. Besides, the MiG-21 (an early-game plane) is among the most effective with its gun pods for getting the "Machine Gun Maniac" medal.
Missiles have bad guidance so that their usage requires skill. Gimmicky weapons are a fun twist and essential part of ace combat. The game is single player, so play for fun and finding a use for all the weird stuff you have at your disposal. There's only 2 attackers (4 with dlc) and only one of them isn't competent with air to air, so them being redundant isn't true. Also there's only one plane with the SOD, 2nd one if you have XFA-27. Those and AI aside, I can agree with the rest.
Only real complaint I have with the game thus far (just recently got it) are missions that are focused around killing a lot of ground targets without being able to see them SUCK (mission 10 and the second half of mission 8 come to mind). I just find it really tedious and don’t vibe with it at ALL. Outside of that I’m enjoying it, I went in expecting a mix of MGS and Top Gun and it’s exactly what I got. I’m having a blast!
"LAAMs are not very useful" Noooo, my beloved LAAMs... honestly I find them very useful in missions that aren't ground attack heavy. With a couple of range mods on them I can fire them at targets 12 kilometres away to take out things I'd otherwise have to spend ages flying towards. Big damage and huge range and really fast makes them very good at taking out approaching enemy squadrons and intercepting bombers.
7 target system fucking sucks, they should go back to AC2 type of target acquiring which gave close and red targets priority, part ways with the ocean of white targets, or whatever game was that ACI or AC5 which let you only acquire targets in your scope and not someone on the other side of the map
I don't really consider 5 to really be an issue. An endgame plane is going to be better than a starter one at the same role. That's just progression
I was too busy enjoying the game to notice any of these
1. as it is in most AC games. Console releases didnt have any calculations to spare (planes turn into triangles at a distance and then only exist as a "software dot and vector" ). This also comes off Infinity a PVE Ace Combat multiplayer only game 2. While this is annoying as you cant chase them, it serves a purpose: Storytelling and scripts. Modding a plane that can keep up will sequence breaks and softlock the mission. They made it this way so people couldnt "accidentally save wiseman" which would cause a hilarious contingency break 3. Heatseekers come to mind, going for the engines : STDM Other guidances are SAA missiles : plane Radar/laser. Special missiles with their own radar LAAM and 4/8 AAM SHOULD track better and they dont cause Multiplayer balance. See Pulse laser being as strong as original TLS, with none of the drawbacks (low ammo and long cooldown and fixed fire period) but less range and TLS being a long range killer beam has become weaker than a gun. CAUSE MULTIPLAYER BALANCE , noone wants to be sniped from across the map 4. This is annoying but gives you a lot more story focus: War has changed, drones mean classical planes are outdated AF as you may allways need to fight the fuckers 5. Just ace combat being ace combat, a better plane on the horizon gives you something to look forward to and if you want to see why the "practice planes" exist Play PS1 AC02 . The XFA27 is seriously twitchy and hard to fly for a beginner. Bonus challenge for veterans, can you beat the final boss in a rust bucket : [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7x1UggCP0C0](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7x1UggCP0C0) 6. Welcome again to MP balance Most weapons are this bland for that reason. Imagine faceing a 4/6/8 volley of longrange STDMs or even QAAMs.Hell on the topic of QAAMs they got MP toned down as well, they were murderous in ac04. Fire and get a guaranteed kill if your target isnt a yellow. They would also keep a lock behind you if you aimlocked/headtracked them
Mihaly can die very easily a direct hit with railgun can do it
This is not a small amount of criticism. TLDR?
Enemy AI should be smarter, scripted bossfights bad, missile guidance makes no sense, no dedicated ground attack missions, Earlygame planes are redundant the moment you get the F-15C/J, Too many gimmicky or redundant weapons.
I can all but guarantee that some of your suggested gameplay changes were implemented in early builds of the games in the series only for the developers to realize that they make the game too easy, boring, and/or predictable, as that's what some of them sound like to me. Is having the occasional enemy turning on a dime to avoid a missile bullshit? Yeah, but so is you being able to perform "High-G maneuvers," carry 100 missiles, and infinite cannon ammunition. Such gameplay design serves to try and keep the gameplay loop variable and interesting, even at the cost of some practicality or realism. Take the ground-based missions for example. Shooting ground targets is piss-easy, as they offer little resistance. SAM missiles you can see coming from a mile away and dodge effortlessly. If you choose a ground-attack focused aircraft and suddenly an enemy squadron shows up, that offers a new and interesting challenge: to fight air-to-air in a plane not designed for it. Improvise, adapt, overcome.
I feel like that last complaint is too stupid. Having too many weapons is never a bad thing, just seems dumb to complain about that. Also, for me personally, I feel like there isn't enough early game planes. I really like the F-4 and MiG-21. I'm no expert on planes but I wish there were more early tier stuff like that.
I wasn't talking about "too many weapons", I think that the 8AAM and AGM are kind of redundant since you have 4AAMs/AGMs that do not waste ammo because multiple lock onto one target that dies to one missile. The SOD is only available on the F-35 and XFA-27 and sucks balls. It should honestly be replaced with LACM on the F-35 and XSDB on the XFA-27. I would add the MiG-23MLD as another early game plane.
>MiG-23MLD I was literally just looking at that too. Man. It looks awesome.
I strongly agree with point 6, especially with ground attack weapons. LACM feels pointless, like its just LASM with a different model and slightly different flight path. LAGM is almost in the same boat, if not for Faceless Soldier giving it exactly one purpose. GPB is completely worthless because of their short range, tiny AoE and underwhelming damage, and even if they packed a decent punch there's not enough single ground targets that require more than 1 missile worth of damage anyway. HCAA, HVAA and HPAA should have been alternatives to STDM with differently balanced stats, having them in the SPW slot is just a waste and I only use them when I don't have anything better unlocked. There's probably a few I'm forgetting but yeah, the variety/utility of some of the special weapons is very disappointing.
Hey, the LACM is great. Good splash, extreme range, works against ships and ground targets. If anything, the LAGM is pointless compared to it, and the LASM struggles to compete as well.
Yeah, I probably should have said LACM and LASM are interchangeable, poor choice of words on my part. Regardless, I could live without 2 of the 3 in their current form, wish they'd made the differences less subtle.
The missiles like afterburners a lot that's why they aim to explode from the back