Making a copy-paste template for questions is like, a must-have in threads like this:
ex:
-----

<strong>Does AT improve a player's aim?</strong>

<strong>Would banning AT (everything else untouched) make Lockdown significantly more skill-based than it is now?</strong>

<strong>Do you think most people who complain about AT have legitimate reasons or are they just frustrated?</strong>

<strong>In your opinion, what other problems must be corrected, along with AT, that will lead to a significantly more skill-based Lockdown?</strong>

<strong>Out of that list, which one is the worst problem? Why?</strong>

<em>Optional question (although omitting would look suspicious):</em>
<strong>What are your relevant biases? What may have influenced your responses to the questions?</strong>
-----

Does AT improve a player's aim?
No. If anything, it can improve a player's movement, since it takes the focus off aiming and lets the player focus on moving where they want to.

Would banning AT (everything else untouched) make Lockdown significantly more skill-based than it is now?
No. Inherently, by the removal of handicap/automatic feature, it would become more "pure" and skill-based. Significantly? I don't think so. Movement/timing is so much more important.

Do you think most people who complain about AT have legitimate reasons or are they just frustrated?
Sure. You don't need legitimate reasons to complain.
My main issue is when people say they want developers to outright remove AT from Lockdown. That's debatable, and IMO based on frustration/idealism that won't be satisfied even if it were removed. I want to be convinced, but that's all I'm getting from it.

In your opinion, what other problems must be corrected, along with AT, that will lead to a significantly more skill-based Lockdown?
- Lack of LAN multiplayer iuehaiuehahauehAUHeauiehaIuheAUIHEAUIhEuihaiuehaUHEAUIhEhauha
- Too many random elements (random teams, random maps).

Out of that list, which one is the worst problem? Why?
It's tough, but I think the removal of random elements is the biggest one. Pretty much any competitive game setup removes random elements when possible to make it entertaining (to spectate/play) and "skill-based".
So... player-controlled lobbies? It'd also give players a say in how 'stacked' their teams are, which might give newer players breathing room to have fun and improve.

With the current game objective (capture the point), you can only do so much to say you've made it more "skill-based".

note:
Making a game more "skill-based" doesn't necessarily mean it will mean more players will play the game. Randomness can mean more fun because it can mean the lower-skilled players have a chance at winning (or equal chance of both sides getting screwed over), and that can be enough entertainment to keep them coming back.

Optional question (although omitting would look suspicious):
What are your relevant biases? What may have influenced your responses to the questions?
I main T3 Recon, and Guardian on the side. Other people having "good aim" vs me has never been an issue because my classes move slower, I'm inherently easier to hit in the first place, so enemies will hit me if they reach me.

I'm already playing a game where people have "100%" aim when I'm exposed (so AT or not, what does it matter?). For me, the determining factors in whether or not I get hit are prediction, placement, timing, and weapon range. I've been led to use guns as a counter-approach (something that thrives on prediction), or when using swords, trying to get the timing so I hit them before their slash comes out (cutting them off mid-approach).

It's not that much longer than Rete's (like what, 2 lines?). I just added the copy-paste template for other people's convenience lol.

Does AT improve a player's aim?

- It doesn't improve, it is just that the computer aims for yourself

Would banning AT (everything else untouched) make Lockdown significantly more skill-based than it is now?

- Of course

Do you think most people who complain about AT have legitimate reasons or are they just frustrated?

- That depends of the player.

In your opinion, what other problems must be corrected, along with AT, that will lead to a significantly more skill-based Lockdown?

- Better balance of the team-making

What are your relevant biases? What may have influenced your responses to the questions?

- A lot time playing LD and without AT from the beginning

A question for Auto-Target: Why only the AT users defend the AT?

@Serian The question was for Auto-Target. Didn't you read it?

Does AT improve a player's aim?

For a select few guns, namely the antigua line, and all swords. I'll have to agree with Bleyu here that I don't consider it improving but removing.
When you're dealing with 180° sword arcs, and a 45° correction to that, there's not a lot of aiming to be done anymore.

Would banning AT (everything else untouched) make Lockdown significantly more skill-based than it is now?

I've never been an advocate for a ban, there should be the liberty to choose. Lobbies are still the dream.
What I would like to see implemented in a 'forced' way, is the correlation of AT correction to ping.

The catch to this question is the word 'significant'. There are a lot of things wrong with Lockdown, so no one thing will make it all better.
It would make a difference though, and obviously one leading towards a more skill based lockdown.
As Seiran points out, movement and timing are important, but so is aiming.
It's the difference between juggling with 2 or 3 balls, suddenly becomes a lot harder when you have to combine all 3 elements.

Do you think most people who complain about AT have legitimate reasons or are they just frustrated?

The two don't have to exclude each other.
You can complain because you know how AT works, what is broken about it, and still be frustrated when somebody abuses it.

In your opinion, what other problems must be corrected, along with AT, that will lead to a significantly more skill-based Lockdown?

-Weapon balance is an obvious one. It would lead to a more varied meta where not everybody is forced into the same loadout.
Worst offenders: Brandish and Pulsar lines.

-Ranking system and team balance.

-Maps. Due to SK's camera angle, there is a big advantage to coming in from below the opponent.
Some maps offer too many options to do this imo. Also, *%ù` snowballs.

-Some minor balancing between classes.

Out of that list, which one is the worst problem? Why?

Ranking system and team balance.
You can try to compensate for all of the other issues, this one is completely on OOO though.

Optional question (although omitting would look suspicious):
What are your relevant biases? What may have influenced your responses to the questions?

I have played both with and without AT for a long time. I know what it does, how it works, and how to use it.
Thanks to a lot of people with a more exploring nature than mine, I've come to know a great deal about game mechanics/technicalities/tactics.
I've been playing LD on a high level, with all of the classes, for a long time now.

Does AT improve a player's aim?
No. It does improve one's ability to land a hit, though.

Would banning AT (everything else untouched) make Lockdown significantly more skill-based than it is now?
Somewhat.

Do you think most people who complain about AT have legitimate reasons or are they just frustrated?
Depends on what kind of complaint it is. Someone saying "lol AT noob" in a RLD game is most likely to be butthurt and does not know what they're talking about. People who make detailed posts on the forums in which they support their arguments with facts are legit, obviously.

In your opinion, what other problems must be corrected, along with AT, that will lead to a significantly more skill-based Lockdown?

1. Trinkets
2. Team imbalance
3. Class imbalance
4. UVs
5. Auto Target

Side note, I'd say connection somewhere along the lines but it's largely tied to geographical location and complaining about it while not bothering with finding a fix of your own.

Out of that list, which one is the worst problem? Why?
(you can also choose AT to be the worst, just explain why)
Trinkets. Strikers become guardians and guardians just become greater damage sources, or immortal if played well.

What are your relevant biases? What may have influenced your responses to the questions?
I mak science. I play on a competitive level when given the opportunity. I've played for more than 100 days on my main character/roughly 2700 hours on the Steam client in total. I use AT almost only in LD with weapons which get a major gain from it (Brandishes and such). Toggle button is my bud in PvE.

AT does improve the player's aim. While using AT you get a certain feel for your weapon. You get to experience the feeling on how to approach your enemies. When you decide to switch of AT, your body remembers the movements needed to effectively hit your advisary. Granted AT does make it possible to hit someone from otherwise impossible angles, but at the same time it gradually tweaks your movements so that you know how to strike.

I would have to disagree with this notion, just because of the fact that explaining the concept in this manner insinuates that aiming and timing are two entirely different things that aren't correlational at all, when it's quite the opposite. It is especially the case with guns, since most gunners not only have to lead their shot based off of where their opponent is moving, but they also have to compensate for their own movement as well while in the process of aiming. Add the fact that some guns will essentially invinciframe the target on their own (AP, Sentenza, and a fast enough Valiance are the main culprits of this), and the argument goes out the window. Timing and aiming are inherently reliant on each other, because without timing, even if your aim is perfect, you still risk not making the desired hit connect. Conversely, without aiming, even if your timing is correct, a miss is a miss, and will still result in something different than the desired outcome.

The same carries for swords as well - swinging your sword at the appropriate time to meet an oncoming target before they can react to the swing is vital to being an effective player in LD, regardless of which class you choose to use. Even if you swing in their general direction, if the timing is imperfect enough, you will miss and leave yourself open. If your timing is perfect but aiming is inaccurate enough to where your knight swings in a direction you're expecting them to come from, you're still just as open. AT compensates enough for the latter option to where it happens less often, but what I think people fail to realize is that it is possible to mislead the AT correction to the point that they will miss regardless. But to expect that from everyone is nigh unreasonable because of latency and ping being a constant issue. I will admit I'm one of the more fortunate players to have a solid enough internet to where playing without latency is a common thing for me. But to insinuate that you can learn the timing of a weapon well enough to where you'll know how to use it without any aim assistance is unrealistic at best, and highly improbable in this case.

tl;dr - footwork might be integral, but disassociating AT with the ability to land hits in the manner you're describing doesn't follow logically.

1. Does AT improve a player's aim?
☻No, I can't hit anything with my latency even with it on.

2. Would banning AT (everything else untouched) make Lockdown significantly more skill-based than it is now?
☻Of course not.

3. Do you think most people who complain about AT have legitimate reasons or are they just frustrated?
☻They'll complain about anything that kills them.

4. In your opinion, what other problems must be corrected, along with AT, that will lead to a significantly more skill-based Lockdown?
☻Removing my--- a lot of people's 300ms ping.
☻Also, adding an option to disable chat in lockdown, all I see is "Van-Winkle: That 7 square range." or "Random-Tryhard: AT, Polaris, Noob, LeAAve!"
- But keeping team chat, and PM's on.

5. Out of that list, which one is the worst problem? Why?
(you can also choose AT to be the worst, just explain why)
☻The lag. I live like halfway between the Eu and US servers, so they don't make a difference no matter which one I join. I can't even hit the walls.

☻AT Bombing. <- Because it was a joke.

Optional question (although omitting would look suspicious):
6. What are your relevant biases*? What may have influenced your responses to the questions?
☻I'm a gunner so the latency screws my aiming over incrediblech. Leadshooting 7 squares away from where I see the player helps, though. But then again, I get hit from 7 squares away.
☻When I see words, I just read them automatically even when I try not to, it's extremely difficult to ignore. And not to brag (but I'll do it anyway) I can tell if the word's going to be N00B, just from the shape of it on the chat.
----------------------------------------------
Short answers
1. Does AT improve a player's aim?
No

2. Would banning AT (everything else untouched) make Lockdown significantly more skill-based than it is now?
No

3. Do you think most people who complain about AT have legitimate reasons or are they just frustrated?
Frustrated

4. In your opinion, what other problems must be corrected, along with AT, that will lead to a significantly more skill-based Lockdown?
Lag/Latency

5. Out of that list, which one is the worst problem? Why?
(you can also choose AT to be the worst, just explain why)
Lag/Latency Sword Range = Gun range

Optional question (although omitting would look suspicious):
6. What are your relevant biases*? What may have influenced your responses to the questions?
-----

Apparently I didn't elaborate enough on my part. I didn't mean to insinuate that timing and aim are two completely different things. I was trying to point out that AT gives you the oppurtunity to focus more on practicing the timing of your swings, since AT aims for you so you don't have to worry about aiming. That way you can kick back and perfect your timing then move on to practicing aiming. While getting the right timing is not directly linked to a better aim, one can say that it indirectly does affect ones ability to hit.

If a player is able to land more hits than before, I think you can say that his aiming has improved. While that doesn't even have to be the case. Let's say that in situation (1) he was using AT but his timing was off and in situation (2) he had to oppurtunity to improve his timing by letting the computer aim for him. In (1) he didn't land much hits, you could say his aim was bad, but that would be a misconception. In (2) he lands a lot more hits because he knows when to strike. So while his aiming didn't improve directly, his ability to land hits did. In 20-20 hindsight AT doesn't improve aiming directly, but I still believe a player can improve by using AT to practice.

1. Does AT improve a player's aim?
   With specific weapons, against a single target. It definitely improves specific playstyles, but not every playstyle. So situationally yes.
2. Would banning AT (everything else untouched) make Lockdown significantly more skill-based than it is now?
   I guess so? See the glob of text below.
3. Do you think most people who complain about AT have legitimate reasons or are they just frustrated?
   If they are unable to use it, or using it somehow disadvantages them while giving opponents advantages, then they have legitimate reason to complain. Loaded question, "legitimate reasons" and "frustration" aren't mutually exclusive.
4. In your opinion, what other problems must be corrected, along with AT, that will lead to a significantly more skill-based Lockdown?
   Custom lobbies would be great. Class balance and end-of-game reporting; Recon and Guard can make game-winning plays, but they often don't show up under damage/defends/caps. See below I guess?
5. Out of that list, which one is the worst problem? Why?
   Depends on the definition of "skill". Really, any change to LD would be great, if only for the sake of showing that OOO recognizes that there are things that could be positively changed, and that it has a devoted playerbase.
6. What are your relevant biases? What may have influenced your responses to the questions?
   I've toggled AT since I started playing SK. Hard-mained Recon for months cause I was too slow for Striker. Played on an alt without a toggle, and didn't feel a huge difference; my highest damage (which admittedly isn't very high) has been on this alt. I only really play T2, where using AT is pretty much a given (inb4 Rebel). Constant 4bar connection, solid computer.

On skill: I'd argue that game-winning decisions are skill. The game is won by having more points at the end, or reaching the point threshold first. As things are, the community seems to want some sort of timed deathmatch with classes, and LD has turned into that to some extent. To that end, I think the biggest issues are a mismatch between the game's intentions and the community's expectations, for which there's no easy fix; a "fix" might not be helpful.

It's called Auto Target for a reason, no, frustration, Acherons/Pulsars/SS Line/jerks, jerks; their complaining is quite annoying, this section of he forums.