Do people on here regularly/ever play Ax suited? When I first started playing I seemed to make a lot of money playing these hands and hitting flushes, but now I am feel I may have been lucky.

Once 3 suited cards fall you are only getting real action from a lower flush, who unless holding K will probably be very wary of higher flush anyway.

I find the only way to really make money is by pushing all in on the flop if you hit 2 suited cards.

You are 46% to win if called by top pair/ an overpair, and the number of times these hands will fold to your all in reraise means this must be a +ve expectation play.

However if called by a pocket pair which has hit trips you will be a 3-1 underdog.

Do people think long term playing suited aces holds a +ve expectation?

Playing A-Xs is much more complicated than all that.

From my perspective, suitedness is both over and undervalued. Too many people will play crap hands like J4s or Q7s, just because it's suited. This is way overvaluing suitedness and will cost you $ (particularly when you flop top pair). Too few people will discriminate between a hand like AQo and AQs (and KQo and KQs) when deciding whether to call a raise from EP or opening with a raise from EP or MP.

All that said, here's some of my general thoughts (as a tournament player) on AXs when I have an M of 20+:

1. When the blinds are cheap, play AXs (where X<10) from any position if you can see a cheap flop. I play it primarily for it's 2 pair and flush values, not the TP value (maybe with A9 or A8 against a field of limpers). Most of the time you'll be throwing your hand away, but on occasion you hit your hand, I usually end up busting someone else out. On occasion, open with a 2x bb raise in EP with it (a little advertising here to disguise your really big hands later).

2. Just throw away A2s-AJs against an early raiser unless they're just coming in for 2x bb (again, a cheap flop). I'm much more leery of a big pair now, so I'm going to be very cautious.

3. Just throw away any offsuit A2-AQ against an early position raiser that you either don't know or is medium-tight. This might seem incredibly tight, but it will save you a lot of $.

The OP is talking NL, but I'll give my limit thoughts just to throw it out there.
I don't play any Ax with x<10 UTG or UTG+1 regardless of suitededness or not. MP and late I'll play Axs if there is at least one limper in already. Late I'll raise first in, but I do that with alot worse hands than Axs to steal blinds. I'll never call a raise with x<J regardless of suited or not.
So the only difference the suitedness of Axs vs Axo makes for me is that I'll limp in middle position or later with any Axs if at least one limper is in before me. I don't play Axo with x<8 or 9 regardless of limpers unless as I said I am late position raising first in.

I nearly always play suited aces at lower limits/buy ins, the only time i dont is in early position with a raised pot. I find that playing suited aces on a table of poor players is much more effective because there are many people who simply call any bet because they have a flush.