what do you think about afghanskii and M163 CS ???

User avatar
gumpialfonso
Chief Warrant Officer
Posts: 512
Joined: Fri 16 Mar 2012 20:38
Location: Germany
Contact:

Re: what do you think about afghanskii and M163 CS ???

Postby gumpialfonso » Tue 23 Jul 2013 14:28

no one gave a answer to my AP suggestion. it would make them precious.

User avatar
Vasily Krysov
Colonel
Posts: 2671
Joined: Mon 2 Apr 2012 09:27

Re: what do you think about afghanskii and M163 CS ???

Postby Vasily Krysov » Tue 23 Jul 2013 14:32

gumpialfonso wrote:no one gave a answer to my AP suggestion. it would make them precious.


Not gonna happen. Word of God (Eugen).

User avatar
DeuZerre
More than 10 000 messages. Soldier you are the leader of all armies!
Posts: 11125
Joined: Mon 27 Feb 2012 23:17
Location: Universe, Galaxy, Solar System, Earth, Ground, Eurasian Continent, Main Landmass.
Contact:

Re: what do you think about afghanskii and M163 CS ???

Postby DeuZerre » Tue 23 Jul 2013 14:34

I already suggested that to madmat.

It's a NO, because they're afraid of seeing what se saw in W:EE when people complained about afghanskii/shilka killing their precious tanks.

No matter how I argue, I don't think they'll change their minds, even when told the following arguments:

- They are tracked so we don't see any "BTR"-like issue.
- AP 1 vs the new armour values is really low
- They'd be less efficient against armour since they wouldn't shoot at tanks at their max range (AP scaling mechanic) but would shread APCs
- They suck against planes, so they have to have at least efficiency against ground.

That said, their reasoning is OK and understandable, I guess, even if it's sad.
Image
Marshal honoris causa
FLX wrote:Removing the weaknesses from the divisions leads to all divisions being the same in the long run. We won't proceed like that.

User avatar
Breadbox
Captain
Posts: 1667
Joined: Sun 20 May 2012 12:12
Location: Cannot into Space
Contact:

Re: what do you think about afghanskii and M163 CS ???

Postby Breadbox » Tue 23 Jul 2013 14:38

That is truly unfortunate.

User avatar
gumpialfonso
Chief Warrant Officer
Posts: 512
Joined: Fri 16 Mar 2012 20:38
Location: Germany
Contact:

Re: what do you think about afghanskii and M163 CS ???

Postby gumpialfonso » Tue 23 Jul 2013 15:07

DeuZerre wrote:I already suggested that to madmat.

It's a NO, because they're afraid of seeing what se saw in W:EE when people complained about afghanskii/shilka killing their precious tanks.

No matter how I argue, I don't think they'll change their minds, even when told the following arguments:

- They are tracked so we don't see any "BTR"-like issue.
- AP 1 vs the new armour values is really low
- They'd be less efficient against armour since they wouldn't shoot at tanks at their max range (AP scaling mechanic) but would shread APCs
- They suck against planes, so they have to have at least efficiency against ground.

That said, their reasoning is OK and understandable, I guess, even if it's sad.


you´re soooo true. i can´t say any more.

xXSunSlayerXx
Sergeant
Posts: 67
Joined: Thu 23 Feb 2012 20:53
Contact:

Re: what do you think about afghanskii and M163 CS ???

Postby xXSunSlayerXx » Tue 23 Jul 2013 15:25

i like them, simply because you will NEVER get any aa unit in an equally cheap deck slot that you don't need for any other unit anyway. i rarely actually buy them, they are mostly there for emergency (no aa units left), but they are also decent for supporting pushes into towns or defending highgrounds against infantry.

User avatar
Vasily Krysov
Colonel
Posts: 2671
Joined: Mon 2 Apr 2012 09:27

Re: what do you think about afghanskii and M163 CS ???

Postby Vasily Krysov » Tue 23 Jul 2013 16:57

xXSunSlayerXx wrote:i like them, simply because you will NEVER get any aa unit in an equally cheap deck slot that you don't need for any other unit anyway. i rarely actually buy them, they are mostly there for emergency (no aa units left), but they are also decent for supporting pushes into towns or defending highgrounds against infantry.


But against any air target it will only have 20% or less chance to hit. It is beyond terrible for AA :|

Buregdzya
Sergeant Major
Posts: 254
Joined: Wed 27 Jun 2012 12:58
Location: Wien, Austria
Contact:

Re: what do you think about afghanskii and M163 CS ???

Postby Buregdzya » Tue 23 Jul 2013 17:27

Vasily Krysov wrote:But against any air target it will only have 20% or less chance to hit. It is beyond terrible for AA :|
It's thanks to your guide that I took the concept of layered air defence to heart. And this is where the Afghanski and the CS shine: they're the outmost, first layer of air defence. Of course they usually won't hit the inbound plane but combined with a multitude (3-5) of those baddies they'll either stun or damage the plane.

The kill job is for your AA behind.

On the other hand, I tried using radar AAA as first layer but that didn't quite work out because they'd get picked off one by one.

Edit: the fact that they're situated in the (usually useless) Vehicle slot makes them even more valuable, as others have already found.
Last edited by Buregdzya on Tue 23 Jul 2013 17:33, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Zloba
Sergeant First-Class
Posts: 130
Joined: Wed 19 Jun 2013 17:33
Location: Petaling Jaya, Malaysia
Contact:

Re: what do you think about afghanskii and M163 CS ???

Postby Zloba » Tue 23 Jul 2013 17:30

I'm pretty sure I saw afganskis actually firing on tanks and causing disabling hits. And when massed they can kill choppers and they don't take an extremely valuable support slot.

Compass
First Sergeant
Posts: 214
Joined: Fri 19 Jul 2013 15:13
Contact:

Re: what do you think about afghanskii and M163 CS ???

Postby Compass » Tue 23 Jul 2013 18:14

These pseudo AA vehicles are effective as ground support weapons. In fact, most Vulcans/PIVADS/Biryusas/Tunguskas, when fired at ground tanks, cause a large amount of panic. In my 1975 deck, my Biryusas actually fight on par with my T72s on the hill simply because they fire so much that they suppress enemy ground vehicles.

I'd use more of them, but I'm not a fan of the lack of range, and given that I'm a defensive player, have very little use for an overlapping PIVADS/CS role.

Return to “Wargame : AirLand Battle”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 23 guests