Unpopular Opinion - Ace Combat 7 Multiplayer is Fun and Balanced

[Molthus]

I play unrestricted (SP weapons on and no price cap) lobbies in AC7 and have an absolute blast doing so. I've died to a wide variety of planes and have played some special lobbies and limited, though I personally greatly prefer unlimited.

Why I prefer unlimited:

• Gives the most raw and fluid movement
  
• Most fast paced and action packed experience of the modes.
  
• From my brief experience in price capped, it feels mainly like unlimited just slowed down and with less kills from everyone

Counterargument: The game is unbalanced and only F-22 with QAAM or X-02 with EML gets any kills.
My Response: While I myself fly an X-02 with EML, I have been killed countless times by many other planes using other weapons such as pulse lasers, LAAMs, SASMs, and even occasionally TLS, just as examples. There are many planes that have these weapons, however, and can do fairly well, though I do expect that the more advanced planes would perform better.
I propose Ace Combat 7 is balanced, but perhaps not in the way you'd first expect. I say just about every weapon and every plane has a purpose and an optimal usage. If you fly an F-22 with high tracking and high damage QAAM in an FFA, you will have the most advantage; you can fire and forget almost of your missiles and have a high chance of getting kills with several. As an X-02, you most likely will find yourself going after and getting all of your kills personally at close range, which means more work for you. You could also use LAAM from the sidelines and snipe people with that, though similar to the X-02 you have to work more for it. Meanwhile in a 1v1, X-02 with EML will typically win, as they just need to line up the EML shot. In TDM, Two pilots with Pulse can distract the enemy team while another flies top cover with high tracking power QAAM or LAAM. Similarly, two F-22's with QAAM that are alert can almost always keep any one X-02 down, but two X-02's providing cover for each other can make it really hard for any other X-02 to touch them let alone any other planes that deal in close quarters combat.
That brings me to another major point of balance - parts. Loadouts make all of the difference, and can decide rounds. Choosing the right parts for the skills you're trying to use best is important!

Counterargument: The game is just turnbattling and getting tons of missiles shot at you.
My Response: Turnbattling is a thing, but that is not by any measure the only way to play the game. You don't have to pursue a single person the whole time - switching targets frequently is viable and reduces turnbattling. Fiurthermore, if you know how to dodge, the majority of those missiles won't connect. That brings me to my theory as to why many don't enjoy the game:
Most people don't seem to have multiplayer experience. Many don't know how to dodge, how to get the best shots, and how to manage their energy in general. I intend on making a tutorial guide on how to do this soon, but until then, we have lobbies full of people that pick the F-22 + QAAM because they get killed the most by it because they don't know how to dodge it. Suddenly, everyone is using F-22 without actually knowing how to use it, and then when one experienced player comes in with an X-02 or a good loadout F-22 or really any other plane (A friend did that with an F-104 in an open lobby and won), they destroy everyone. If you don't know how to dodge, this will not feel fun and it will feel unbalanced; however, I challenge these people to not just throw out there that the game is unbalanced and sucks. I say, learn from who beats you; learn your vulnerabilities and learn theirs, and utilize that information to get better until you reach the top.

Obviously I still want responses, but I figured I'd try and address some of the most common arguments here. I want a respectful and logical discussion here. Not being respectful or measured will make your argument look bad anyway.

Edit: formatting.

[Young Erusean Officer]

Yeah the multiplayer is fun. Think I'm Commander in Chief 10 atm. Still suck at it despite having played the older non xbox and psp games religiously.

I also play better without QAAMS or EML. Learning to avoid QAAMs is a basic skill and EML loses plenty of usefulness once the others know you have it. They'll even assume you do beforehand according to your choice of aircraft.

I'm hoping for few patches to come out though. Although I have fun that doesn't mean it can't be improved.

[Useless Bunny]

I honestly expected that AC pvp multiplayer would be awful and I'm glad I was surprised. I prefer cost limited lobbies without special weapons because what decides if you gonna go down and shoot someone down is if you can fly better than them, making proper use of your team and, of course, some luck. I also like low cost planes with special weapons sometimes too, especially EML, but it's just impossible to win when you find that one guy with bad connection teleporting around.

[Strez]

I do miss the Base Attack mode from AC:AH. That, and skin customization, were the only good things to come from that game. They'd definitely improve the game's MP offering, which is kinda paltry IMO. That PVE mode from Infinity would be nice too.

I do like that low-tier aircraft have more room for better parts in order to match up with the top-tiers. Love bringing a buffed up MiG-29, F-2A, or Gripen into the dogfights with Raptors and Wyverns. The MiG-29 is an absolute beast with those beautiful skins. I think an F-15J build based around buffing agility and SP weapons would perform well.

I've also seen stacked teams of MiG-21s on mics roll over randos in F-22s before. Ofc that's because the MP-exclusive weapon parts are absolutely bonkers and turn standard MSLs into ghetto QAAMs.

[King Fossil]

AC7 MP is bad because there's no objective other than killing the enemy so there's no teamwork. When there's an objective you have teamwork with people attacking it/defending it/defending the people who are attacking it. With DM you don't get that.
I played it enough to get the medals/emblems and now I'm done with it and will probably never touch it again. Have fun EML spamming I guess.

[628]

Imo, low-cost setting (2000) with SP weapons is most enjoyable. Of course still we can spam QAAMs and EMLs in 2000 cost limitation. However, the load amount of SP weapons is limited in the setting and we can't enhance SPs performance a lot, unlike in unlimited setting.
My most favorite craft in MP by far is MiG-29A. It's nimble, both air-to-air SPs are quite useful, and it manages to perform "post stall maneuver". Maybe junk in unlimited, but quite monster in 2000 matches.

[Molthus]

Originally posted by Ryan628jpn:

Imo, low-cost setting (2000) with SP weapons is most enjoyable. Of course still we can spam QAAMs and EMLs in 2000 cost limitation. However, the load amount of SP weapons is limited in the setting and we can't enhance SPs performance a lot, unlike in unlimited setting.

Except if plane performance is reduced, and SP weapon performance is reduced, isn't that basically the same thing just slower all around? Alternatively; if SP is more greatly reduced, doesn't that just mean less kills for everyone? I played a 2000 cap limited game earlier, and I got hit like once with a missile and never had to take evasive action. I guess it may be all a part of the same problem of the majority of the PC base lacking skill, but I much prefer the thrill of constantly dodging and weaving through missiles. Also, I was doing some testing earlier and a pulse and high standard missile tracking build on an aircraft appears to perform practically as well in unlimited as F-22 and QAAM or X-02 with EML.

Originally posted by King Fossil:

AC7 MP is bad because there's no objective other than killing the enemy so there's no teamwork. When there's an objective you have teamwork with people attacking it/defending it/defending the people who are attacking it. With DM you don't get that.

That is a fair point, but I don't think calling it "bad" just because you don't prefer that objective is fair. To a person who prefers pure air to air combat, the multiplayer would be a blast. I wouldn't mind more options though.
When you get a group of friends or just people you've encountered together with a chat and a private lobby, you can make custom objectives too. I've done a few tunnel races, formation flights, historical recreations (MiG 21 vs phantoms, etc.) and all sorts of other fun and crazy stuff where the objective isn't as simple as killing people. I recommend you give it another shot with a good group.

Originally posted by King Fossil:

Have fun EML spamming I guess.

That is unnecessary. The rest of your argument was fairly strong and I'd agree with you, but when you stoop to a closing ad-hominem-esq attack it just makes you look bitter, which only hurts your argument.

Originally posted by Molthus <BK>:

Obviously I still want responses, but I figured I'd try and address some of the most common arguments here. I want a respectful and logical discussion here. Not being respectful or measured will make your argument look bad anyway.

It also makes it look like you didn't read this whole thing, which further weakens the argument.

Originally posted by Sheev Racer:

I do miss the Base Attack mode from AC:AH. That, and skin customization, were the only good things to come from that game. They'd definitely improve the game's MP offering, which is kinda paltry IMO. That PVE mode from Infinity would be nice too.

I agree 100% on the base attack and skin customization stuff. I actually thought the skin trailer we had was showing off customization stuff like that, but that's just me not paying enough attention. I still really want it though. As stated above, I agree MP's offering seems limited. I'm really hoping they add a ground attack mode alongside the DLC, but I'm sure their resources are limited as my understanding is that they're a pretty small team within the corporate giant of Namco. As far as the PVE/Coop mode, in an interview with Ace Combat Fan, Kono has basically stated that the game is structured totally wrong to allow that: https://youtu.be/bwrnCYjPUPs?t=752 (12:30 - turn on subs if you don't know Japanese).

Originally posted by Young Erusian Officer:

I'm hoping for few patches to come out though. Although I have fun that doesn't mean it can't be improved.

I agree completely. Perhaps bumping EML down to doing 99% damage to low HP aircraft instead of insta kill and slightly nerfing QAAM's would bring the other options to the front more.

[628]

Originally posted by Molthus <BK>:

Except if plane performance is reduced, and SP weapon performance is reduced, isn't that basically the same thing just slower all around? Alternatively; if SP is more greatly reduced, doesn't that just mean less kills for everyone? I played a 2000 cap limited game earlier, and I got hit like once with a missile and never had to take evasive action. I guess it may be all a part of the same problem of the majority of the PC base lacking skill, but I much prefer the thrill of constantly dodging and weaving through missiles. Also, I was doing some testing earlier and a pulse and high standard missile tracking build on an aircraft appears to perform practically as well in unlimited as F-22 and QAAM or X-02 with EML.

I'd rather assume low-cost match as "great practice" before unlimited matches. It's hard, and maybe boring for you, to utilize less maneuverable crafts, yet it is so satisfying when I get a control of match, and eventually MVP with them. Plus, I like thinking builds with limitation, that also allows the newcomers jump in without unlocking everything on the tree. I don't hate playing unlimited matches, I do play them. That's totally awesome mayhem of fighter jets and missile alerts. I just found 2000 cost match is much more preferable for me.
Maybe I just don't like everyone sticking with "only for the win" builds in every unlimited room, F-22/QAAM and X-02S/EML as you mentioned. I heard there are some crazy pilots who join and win matches with A-10 or something though.

[Comrade Squidward]

Its fun, but not balanced.
The QAAM needs a nerf, it has the same damage as HPAA, reloads faster and can track better than any other missile.

The EML takes a bit of skill to use, but even then, its blatantly OP.

[KingNigelFarage]

Originally posted by Mother Mex:

Its fun, but not balanced.
The QAAM needs a nerf, it has the same damage as HPAA, reloads faster and can track better than any other missile.

The EML takes a bit of skill to use, but even then, its blatantly OP.

to me qaam is fine, the problem is they put it in wrong aircraft, it really shouldnt be in top 3 aircraft(f22) or in some of the bottom teir aircraft, they should have only had qaam in mid teir so too pricey for restricted rooms and if wanting to use your aircraft is under powered in other areas.

[SmokingPurp]

I like the multiplayer quite a bit. But my issue doesn't come from point costs or the lack thereof; it comes from the lack of CO-OP.

I've played Ace Combat 2, 3 (Still have, buried somewhere), 4, X, and Joint Assault (those two I ripped the isos and kept my savedata from my psp memory sticks). And the one thing that kills me without a doubt...

WHERE IS CO-OP? Nothing was better than me and my high school buds linking up and doing a mission together during lunch on our PSPs. DM and TDM are fine, but as someone who grew up with games that had bot support or CO-OP, I LOVE COMP STOMPING. BRING IT BACK.

Hell, I feel like I'm the only person who misses TEKKEN FORCE MODE on that note! Monster Hunter is one thing, but the other games Namco\Bandai make including our favorite dogfighter deserve more love in the multiplayer department.

[Molthus]

Originally posted by Ryan628jpn:

Originally posted by Molthus <BK>:

Except if plane performance is reduced, and SP weapon performance is reduced, isn't that basically the same thing just slower all around? Alternatively; if SP is more greatly reduced, doesn't that just mean less kills for everyone? I played a 2000 cap limited game earlier, and I got hit like once with a missile and never had to take evasive action. I guess it may be all a part of the same problem of the majority of the PC base lacking skill, but I much prefer the thrill of constantly dodging and weaving through missiles. Also, I was doing some testing earlier and a pulse and high standard missile tracking build on an aircraft appears to perform practically as well in unlimited as F-22 and QAAM or X-02 with EML.

I'd rather assume low-cost match as "great practice" before unlimited matches. It's hard, and maybe boring for you, to utilize less maneuverable crafts, yet it is so satisfying when I get a control of match, and eventually MVP with them. Plus, I like thinking builds with limitation, that also allows the newcomers jump in without unlocking everything on the tree. I don't hate playing unlimited matches, I do play them. That's totally awesome mayhem of fighter jets and missile alerts. I just found 2000 cost match is much more preferable for me.
Maybe I just don't like everyone sticking with "only for the win" builds in every unlimited room, F-22/QAAM and X-02S/EML as you mentioned.

That's fair and makes sense!

Originally posted by Ryan628jpn:

I heard there are some crazy pilots who join and win matches with A-10 or something though.

I happen to know people that do this as well as with F-104 and actually win unlimited matches. That's part of the reason I think in the end having enough skill wins out. Against two equally skilled pilots, build and conforming to the meta matters a lot more, but otherwise it seems pretty balanced.

Originally posted by Mother Mex:

Its fun, but not balanced.
The QAAM needs a nerf, it has the same damage as HPAA, reloads faster and can track better than any other missile.

I guess that's fair, but it isn't by any means the only working option for deadly weapons; parts also play into that a lot. You can buff standard missiles to (at least from what I can tell) about the effectiveness of QAAM's if not better.

Originally posted by Mother Mex:

The EML takes a bit of skill to use, but even then, its blatantly OP.

Using pulse and guns can be very similar (though pulse has rapid fire by comparison and does medium damage, and guns is even more rapid fire and does even less damage, but it still almost balances). Dodging EML is also a very viable thing and if a player knows EML is coming for them they can make themselves almost impossible to hit.

Furthermore, at that point that's the majority of non-ground attack SP weapons that can be/are OP when used properly, excluding a few of the more random SP missiles and the TLS which I feel needs a buff if anything. My point is, everything has it's place, and when used correctly, is extremely effective. Is that then really OP, especially when *everyone has fairly easy access to it? I think skill makes the majority of the difference, as does using each tool for what is designed to do best (like I said before, EML for 1v1/sniping/close quarters, QAAM for general destruction, pulse for an in-between).
*anyone can access it when they actually go and unlock it. Brand new players won't, but nothing but time/practice inhibits them from getting it*

If you were arguing that none of the weapons in the game require a great deal of skill to get kills with, I'd be a lot more inclined to agree. Most of the people playing the game just don't seem to know how to evade, etc. so anything can be lethal. However, skill supplements existing firepower like nothing else. A player that DOES know how to dodge can get kills with the same ease without dying nearly as much, making them win. When multiple skilled players start competing, then skill gets that much more important. I guess what I'm saying is it doesn't take skill to use the weapons, it takes skill to use them well.

Originally posted by KingNigelFarage:

to me qaam is fine, the problem is they put it in wrong aircraft, it really shouldnt be in top 3 aircraft(f22) or in some of the bottom teir aircraft, they should have only had qaam in mid teir so too pricey for restricted rooms and if wanting to use your aircraft is under powered in other areas.

That's an idea I've not heard before and makes a lot of sense. Maybe it wouldn't pan out in the long run, but that would be cool to see if you could give the most damaging aircraft the most weakness as well.

Originally posted by SmokingCamels:

I like the multiplayer quite a bit. But my issue doesn't come from point costs or the lack thereof; it comes from the lack of CO-OP.

I've played Ace Combat 2, 3 (Still have, buried somewhere), 4, X, and Joint Assault (those two I ripped the isos and kept my savedata from my psp memory sticks). And the one thing that kills me without a doubt...

WHERE IS CO-OP? Nothing was better than me and my high school buds linking up and doing a mission together during lunch on our PSPs. DM and TDM are fine, but as someone who grew up with games that had bot support or CO-OP, I LOVE COMP STOMPING. BRING IT BACK.

Hell, I feel like I'm the only person who misses TEKKEN FORCE MODE on that note! Monster Hunter is one thing, but the other games Namco\Bandai make including our favorite dogfighter deserve more love in the multiplayer department.

See:

Originally posted by Molthus <BK>:

Originally posted by Sheev Racer:

I do miss the Base Attack mode from AC:AH. That, and skin customization, were the only good things to come from that game. They'd definitely improve the game's MP offering, which is kinda paltry IMO. That PVE mode from Infinity would be nice too.

I agree 100% on the base attack and skin customization stuff. I actually thought the skin trailer we had was showing off customization stuff like that, but that's just me not paying enough attention. I still really want it though. As stated above, I agree MP's offering seems limited. I'm really hoping they add a ground attack mode alongside the DLC, but I'm sure their resources are limited as my understanding is that they're a pretty small team within the corporate giant of Namco. As far as the PVE/Coop mode, in an interview with Ace Combat Fan, Kono has basically stated that the game is structured totally wrong to allow that: https://youtu.be/bwrnCYjPUPs?t=752 (12:30 - turn on subs if you don't know Japanese).

*Edit: Formatting of quotes was botched.

[⚡Snake⚡Plissken⚡]

What this game could have done well with was possibly races like GTA V or cap the tail of an opponent.
So much missed potential imo, and it's a shame, the game had some real drive, just not enough for MP content.

[Molthus]

Originally posted by Snake Plissken:

What this game could have done well with was possibly races like GTA V or cap the tail of an opponent.
So much missed potential imo, and it's a shame, the game had some real drive, just not enough for MP content.

Official races would have been awesome IMO. It seems to me that Project Aces is actually quite limited in resources and people (they are a part of Bandai but that doesn't mean Bandai will be cool with just forking over whatever they need - more likely they need to fight for all the resources they can get because plane games have, in large part, totally evacuated the mainstream. I could be totally wrong on this, but either way, I feel bad for the developers because they spent so long working on this and producing what is on it's own an incredible product just to have players start complaining over every single little thing and expecting that they'd just have the time and resources to program it (like support for /all/ flight sticks or tons of MP modes in what is still a predominately single-player focused experience) especially when this is ultimately a PC port of what originally was looking like a console exclusive game. Having some experience programming (not all programming is the same so obviously I don't know their full situation) "simple" things are rarely "simple" to implement, especially the larger the project.

Not saying this about you or anything, but this entitled attitude I've been seeing with a lot of the base is really getting on my nerves and makes me feel bad for the developers. If it's so easy for them to implement controller support useful for /just/ the PC version of the game, why don't you go and make a game yourself and do all of that? This game has already been delayed multiple times, and if you watch (I believe) the aforementioned interview, they actually restarted from scratch at one point. Sure the game isn't perfect, but we live in an age where features can be added, bugs can be fixed, and the majority of comparable projects (most mainstream triple-A games) have vastly more issues much more worth complaining about, yet when a fairly good game comes along and suggests a future of even greater games of it's kind, it gets attacked to the same degree?

I can respect respectful or constructive criticism, but most of the criticism I've seen to this game is way out of proportion and has very little basis. Even claims the story is bad seem to go hand-in-hand with not actually knowing the story.

TL;DR, I want more content as much as the next person, but I understand and accept why things are the way they are.

[⚡Snake⚡Plissken⚡]

Before you take this as a personal attack, view it this way, devs blocked HID support in favor of a hardware deal they made. They blocked code, does this make any sense to you?, UE4 supports this not an issue. Why would you bring a game to PC and lose controller support.

:s

[Molthus]

Originally posted by Snake Plissken:

Before you take this as a personal attack, view it this way, devs blocked HID support in favor of a hardware deal they made. They blocked code, does this make any sense to you?, UE4 supports this not an issue. Why would you bring a game to PC and lose controller support.

:s

Did we get any evidence though? Last I checked that was a rumor being thrown around by people that were upset. Maybe I'm wrong, but just because the engine allows for it doesn't mean the game is designed to allow it. It's a lot more complicated than that.