NATO airspam

User avatar
QuakeRiley
Lieutenant
Posts: 1316
Joined: Sat 18 May 2013 02:01
Location: England
Contact:

Re: NATO airspam

Postby QuakeRiley » Wed 15 Jan 2014 20:00

Everyone knows there us currently a problem with airspam. How about you think of some way to fix it?

Grabbed_by_the_Spets wrote:It feels like Buk-M1 and Tunguska-M are the only viable AA unit's right now...

Image
EVERYWHERE
Last edited by QuakeRiley on Wed 15 Jan 2014 20:07, edited 1 time in total.
Image
"...In their Centurions, the 8th Hussars have evolved a new type of tank warfare. They taught us that anywhere a tank can go, is tank country: even the tops of mountains."

User avatar
Mikeboy
General
Posts: 5354
Joined: Sat 27 Apr 2013 21:59
Location: Democratic People's Republic of Yorkshire
Contact:

Re: NATO airspam

Postby Mikeboy » Wed 15 Jan 2014 20:05

QuakeRiley wrote:How about you think of some way to fix it?


Universal increase to AA range and increase to plane's flying height (this makes bombs unable to hit moving targets as accurately, so it's significantly easier to attack)

User avatar
QuakeRiley
Lieutenant
Posts: 1316
Joined: Sat 18 May 2013 02:01
Location: England
Contact:

Re: NATO airspam

Postby QuakeRiley » Wed 15 Jan 2014 20:09

Mikeboy wrote:
QuakeRiley wrote:How about you think of some way to fix it?


Universal increase to AA range and increase to plane's flying height (this makes bombs unable to hit moving targets as accurately, so it's significantly easier to attack)


From experience (so don't quote me on this) the height of the jet is factored into the range so increasing range and plane height just cancels out the AA range increase.
Image
"...In their Centurions, the 8th Hussars have evolved a new type of tank warfare. They taught us that anywhere a tank can go, is tank country: even the tops of mountains."

User avatar
Mikeboy
General
Posts: 5354
Joined: Sat 27 Apr 2013 21:59
Location: Democratic People's Republic of Yorkshire
Contact:

Re: NATO airspam

Postby Mikeboy » Wed 15 Jan 2014 20:11

QuakeRiley wrote:
Mikeboy wrote:
QuakeRiley wrote:How about you think of some way to fix it?


Universal increase to AA range and increase to plane's flying height (this makes bombs unable to hit moving targets as accurately, so it's significantly easier to attack)


From experience (so don't quote me on this) the height of the range so increasing range and plane height just cancels out the AA range increase.


I'm not certain about this, but I think range is seen as flat distance across the map. However I haven't tested that.

Even if the AA-plane ranges remain the same, it still stops planes from being used against moving targets so effectively.

User avatar
QuakeRiley
Lieutenant
Posts: 1316
Joined: Sat 18 May 2013 02:01
Location: England
Contact:

Re: NATO airspam

Postby QuakeRiley » Wed 15 Jan 2014 20:15

Mikeboy wrote:
QuakeRiley wrote:
Mikeboy wrote:Universal increase to AA range and increase to plane's flying height (this makes bombs unable to hit moving targets as accurately, so it's significantly easier to attack)


From experience (so don't quote me on this) the height of the range so increasing range and plane height just cancels out the AA range increase.


I'm not certain about this, but I think range is seen as flat distance across the map. However I haven't tested that.

Even if the AA-plane ranges remain the same, it still stops planes from being used against moving targets so effectively.


I think it does, must test it sometime.

Just means that jets with +4 clusters will be used more. Unless you're a lovely Czech who can go 100KPH you're not going to escape that.
Image
"...In their Centurions, the 8th Hussars have evolved a new type of tank warfare. They taught us that anywhere a tank can go, is tank country: even the tops of mountains."

User avatar
Mikeboy
General
Posts: 5354
Joined: Sat 27 Apr 2013 21:59
Location: Democratic People's Republic of Yorkshire
Contact:

Re: NATO airspam

Postby Mikeboy » Wed 15 Jan 2014 20:17

A relative buff to clusters wouldn't be unwarranted, gives you a reason to use the lackluster cluster bombers like the MiG-21 over HE bombers.

User avatar
Countess Bathory
Colonel
Posts: 2919
Joined: Sun 3 Nov 2013 14:09
Location: East of the Sun, West of the Moon
Contact:

Re: NATO airspam

Postby Countess Bathory » Wed 15 Jan 2014 20:20

Where's the airspam defence force? No sign yet.
Image
Accept Roki Vulovic as your Lord and Saviour today and beware of the false prophet, Jesus Christ

Kin-Luu
Captain
Posts: 1687
Joined: Sat 10 Mar 2012 10:45
Contact:

Re: NATO airspam

Postby Kin-Luu » Wed 15 Jan 2014 20:21

Playing PACT minors against tryhard decks is hardmode.

But for a serious PACT deck, NATO airspam is easy to deal with.
Image

User avatar
QuakeRiley
Lieutenant
Posts: 1316
Joined: Sat 18 May 2013 02:01
Location: England
Contact:

Re: NATO airspam

Postby QuakeRiley » Wed 15 Jan 2014 20:25

Mikeboy wrote:A relative buff to clusters wouldn't be unwarranted, gives you a reason to use the lackluster cluster bombers like the MiG-21 over HE bombers.


They have their uses. Such as clearing out forests with clusters. Or ending Comrade Aviation Pilots.

Kin-Luu wrote:Playing PACT minors against tryhard decks is hardmode.

But for a serious PACT deck, NATO airspam is easy to deal with.


Try it as Scandinavian fun (even just cat C) decks vs PACT tryhard decks. So much harder.
Image
"...In their Centurions, the 8th Hussars have evolved a new type of tank warfare. They taught us that anywhere a tank can go, is tank country: even the tops of mountains."

Kin-Luu
Captain
Posts: 1687
Joined: Sat 10 Mar 2012 10:45
Contact:

Re: NATO airspam

Postby Kin-Luu » Wed 15 Jan 2014 20:29

QuakeRiley wrote:
Kin-Luu wrote:Playing PACT minors against tryhard decks is hardmode.

But for a serious PACT deck, NATO airspam is easy to deal with.


Try it as Scandinavian fun (even just cat C) decks vs PACT tryhard decks. So much harder.


It is almost like all minors are bad. Maybe it would be a good idea to buff them?
Image

Return to “Wargame : AirLand Battle”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 26 guests