Why the Increased Income is Necessary

nimitz98
Sergeant Major of the Army
Posts: 373
Joined: Sat 23 Mar 2013 22:59
Contact:

Why the Increased Income is Necessary

Postby nimitz98 » Thu 2 May 2013 01:45

So, I've seen a lot of people complaining about the increased DP income lately, so I thought I would form up a short(ish) post to explain my theory as to why this is so.

Well, the TL;DR answer is that "PLANES ARE EPICZSZCZSCZC," but that's not very descriptive. the long answer is that planes now rule the battlefield. In W:EE, the king of the battlefield was the T-80U for pact, and the M1A1/Challenger/Leopard 2A4 for NATO. This is no longer true. The points in EE scaled to the deployable units, the best of which were the heavy attack helos and heavy MBTs, which, if used correctly, were all but invincible. In AirLand, expensive tanks are no longer invincible, even if you use them right. This is, of course, due to the addition of aircraft. What this means is that you can lose a T-80U in an instant. In EE, this would most likely mean game over for you, but, in AB, it is not intended to be.

Ground units are at the mercy of aircraft. Whoever wins the war in the air will also be victorious on the ground. Aircraft are essential. You must posses a sizable air force, or you will lose. With W:EE Deployment Point values, this would not be possible. The person who brought in aircraft with their initial deployment would always win, and their opponent would be unable to bring in any ground units because they would have to turtle for an eternity in order to bring in a single air superiority aircraft. By that time, it would be too late; the enemy would already be sending their hordes of ground units that they bought for the equivalent of one F-15C.

My point is, ground units don't matter as much anymore. Aircraft and ground units are now of equal importance; aircraft should not be ultra-expensive aces-in-the-hole. Therefore, points must scale to aircraft, which are inherently more expensive than the high-tier units of EE. In order to successfully implement aircraft, Eugen either had to lower the cost of all ground and helo units, or raise the DP income. They chose the latter. I hope you all understand now why Eugen has done this.

Nimitz
Image
EF-111 RAVEN -- UNSTOPPABLE MENACE TO CVs -- PLZ NERF
Spoiler : :
Image

User avatar
FirmusPiett
Lieutenant
Posts: 1110
Joined: Sun 5 Aug 2012 15:03
Location: A galaxy far, far away...
Contact:

Re: Why the Increased Income is Necessary

Postby FirmusPiett » Thu 2 May 2013 01:47

A nice summary, and this seems to be true from everything we can see of the game and how it works so far...
Image

User avatar
Hidden Gunman
Lieutenant Colonel
Posts: 2057
Joined: Fri 6 Apr 2012 07:47
Location: Adelaide South Australia
Contact:

Re: Why the Increased Income is Necessary

Postby Hidden Gunman » Thu 2 May 2013 01:57

I've noticed battles tend to be a lot more drawn out now, with a lot of fighting going on. I wholly agree that a side with airpower will dominate a side tha doesn't, so that needs to be counterbalanced, and the best way to do that is through the funding.

Bottom line though, the amount of cash you get is no great imbalancer, when the victory conditions are largely dependant on the amount of killing you do. For example, I've finished games with thousands of unspent points, simply because my team killed enough of the bad guys to win, without taking massive losses ourselves.

Hey, I like to have lots of units...it beats fighting an entire game with four tanks and a helicopter.

I've got a big deck, and I don't mind using it...
A Firefly killed Wittman...

It's a 17lbr, not a 76.2mm.

naizarak
Captain
Posts: 1626
Joined: Tue 25 Dec 2012 12:53
Contact:

Re: Why the Increased Income is Necessary

Postby naizarak » Thu 2 May 2013 02:21

Umm..no not quite. Aircraft are game-changers but they alone won't win a game for you. All they do is offer the same support you would get through artillery or anti-air. Speaking of anti-air, any competent player can build up a formidable AA umbrella for a relatively cheap price and totally shut down the enemy's air power.

OmikronAnubis
Sergeant
Posts: 78
Joined: Mon 27 Feb 2012 19:42
Contact:

Re: Why the Increased Income is Necessary

Postby OmikronAnubis » Thu 2 May 2013 05:06

As you already mentioned: Airunits and groundunits are of equal importance. Why should in this case a lowered income make the side with the first jet victorious by default?
Most of the good Airplanes are quit expensive and loosing them is already with the high income unfortunate. With lowered income you just would have to think about the airstrike twice.
If the whole income is lowered the only difference is, that there would be less spam, or at least not in this scale. Games would take in theory longer if both sides are equaly strong and it wont be like "Oh... i lost 4 of my Challenger 1... lets call a dozen new tanks then!". Instead this would be more like... "I lost 4 of my Challanger 1... Damn i need plan!"
You just would have to advance more carefully.

The best Helis were pain in the ass without proper anti-air in wargame: european escalation and it was easy to rape whole armys if they were not well defended with antiair, but still: they were quit expansive! It's the same for planes, they are expensive and strong, but everything can be destroyed. And if you fail at Anti-Air you got to learn with low inome aslike with high income. :roll:


And while i understand, that a lot of people want to stick with high income lots of us "give us the low income" ask for an alternative mode to make low-point games possible, while high income games dont have to dissappear in the same turn.
Last edited by OpusTheFowl on Fri 3 May 2013 19:50, edited 1 time in total.
Reason: Language

User avatar
grimreffer2
Warrant Officer
Posts: 418
Joined: Wed 1 May 2013 02:35
Location: Red City, MARS.
Contact:

Re: Why the Increased Income is Necessary

Postby grimreffer2 » Thu 2 May 2013 05:41

GOD I HATE WHEN PEOPLE SAY AIRSUPPORT CAN WIN THE BATTLE!! It can with Ground support and strategic airstrikes but like Stated above, it alone cannot win the match for you!

The T-80U is not a "Game Over". Last game I was against a Team who used alot of them, guess who won? My team! by 4000 points. It's called using AT infantry, Recon, AT vehicles, Tanks, and Air-support. Pick one of those things with Recon and it will fall easy.

I hope the developers are ignoring these people, and focusing on real issues, like the Game Crashing, Match Dropping, and Air-Support Bug.
1st Lt. Jason Scott, 75th Ranger Regiment.

Spoiler : :
Omfg it's 43 pixels above their requirement! Omg! Image

nimitz98
Sergeant Major of the Army
Posts: 373
Joined: Sat 23 Mar 2013 22:59
Contact:

Re: Why the Increased Income is Necessary

Postby nimitz98 » Thu 2 May 2013 05:48

naizarak wrote:Umm..no not quite. Aircraft are game-changers but they alone won't win a game for you.
I never said that aircraft alone will win you the game.
naizarak wrote:All they do is offer the same support you would get through artillery or anti-air.
Yes, but aircraft offer much greater speed and mobility.
naizarak wrote:Speaking of anti-air, any competent player can build up a formidable AA umbrella for a relatively cheap price and totally shut down the enemy's air power.
Not necessarily. Just get some good SEAD aircraft, and AA units die like flies.
Image
EF-111 RAVEN -- UNSTOPPABLE MENACE TO CVs -- PLZ NERF
Spoiler : :
Image

nimitz98
Sergeant Major of the Army
Posts: 373
Joined: Sat 23 Mar 2013 22:59
Contact:

Re: Why the Increased Income is Necessary

Postby nimitz98 » Thu 2 May 2013 05:55

grimreffer2 wrote:GOD I HATE WHEN PEOPLE SAY AIRSUPPORT CAN WIN THE BATTLE!! It can with Ground support and strategic airstrikes but like Stated above, it alone cannot win the match for you!

The T-80U is not a "Game Over". Last game I was against a Team who used alot of them, guess who won? My team! by 4000 points. It's called using AT infantry, Recon, AT vehicles, Tanks, and Air-support. Pick one of those things with Recon and it will fall easy.

I hope the developers are ignoring these people, and focusing on real issues, like the Game Crashing, Match Dropping, and Air-Support Bug.

Again, I never said that aircraft alone will win the game for you. Also, I never said that someone sending a T-80U at you was game over for you. I said that the destruction of a T-80U in European Escalation could have been game over for the person deploying it.

P.S. I find your post rude and distasteful. Please read more carefully before you reply.
Image
EF-111 RAVEN -- UNSTOPPABLE MENACE TO CVs -- PLZ NERF
Spoiler : :
Image

nimitz98
Sergeant Major of the Army
Posts: 373
Joined: Sat 23 Mar 2013 22:59
Contact:

Re: Why the Increased Income is Necessary

Postby nimitz98 » Thu 2 May 2013 05:56

FirmusPiett wrote:A nice summary, and this seems to be true from everything we can see of the game and how it works so far...

Thank you. Finally, someone who understands...
Image
EF-111 RAVEN -- UNSTOPPABLE MENACE TO CVs -- PLZ NERF
Spoiler : :
Image

shomu1
Major-General
Posts: 3973
Joined: Mon 29 Apr 2013 08:18
Contact:

Re: Why the Increased Income is Necessary

Postby shomu1 » Thu 2 May 2013 06:15

Effective air support can also stop what would have been a disastrous breakthrough. However, they cannot turn said attempted breakthrough around. You do need to keep your ground troops around to push back. But I do agree with the OP.
Image

IT IS FREEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE

Return to “Wargame : AirLand Battle”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 15 guests