NATO airspam

User avatar
Drang
Major-General
Posts: 3725
Joined: Sun 3 Feb 2013 04:20
Location: Fighting on the edge of the world
Contact:

Re: NATO airspam

Postby Drang » Wed 15 Jan 2014 20:29

This isn't a NATO/Pact problem, and you are being disingenuous in presenting it thusly. It's a minors/majors/mixed problem.

User avatar
DelroyMonjo
Colonel
Posts: 2604
Joined: Sun 6 May 2012 19:20
Contact:

Re: NATO airspam

Postby DelroyMonjo » Wed 15 Jan 2014 20:39

Don't let any FACTS screw up your premise!

http://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=216896772
Illegitimi non carborundum.

User avatar
LoneRifle
Major-General
Posts: 3569
Joined: Wed 3 Jul 2013 17:11
Location: Cackalacky
Contact:

Re: NATO airspam

Postby LoneRifle » Wed 15 Jan 2014 20:44

Yes, these are examples of how bad it can get, but this is becoming more and more common now, Huge air-rush by NATO forces (especailly France and US). that simply overwhelm you and with nothing you can do about it. It's starting to become common again seeing cheap helispam rushes but France and Mixed NATO, it's F-14 circles of doom are just as bad as they ever were, and nighthawks come in droves of 3-4 at a time...

Please revise the current air-to-ground combat system and vice-versa, especially for Pact minors, all the OSA's barley feel worth using ever since the pirce increase, and having two set's of radar missiles outraged by a common IR missile in both aircraft is starting to feel depressing. Kub's, Strela-10's and OSA's should be the bread and butter units, but right now NATO bombers are simply flying circles in them. It feels like Buk-M1 and Tunguska-M are the only viable AA unit's right now...

It's upsetting seeing all of your OSA's getting chewed up by hoards of Ravens like yesterdays dinner, but your SU-22MP4's unable to successfully shoot down two Roland's, having to fire last, and usually just getting shot down.

Also, last but not least please look into helo rushes! Celtics and Puma Pirates, or Lynx with Kiwoa currently rules all on any infantry themed map, with perhaps only Poland being able to stand up to them! Mi-8's are big, slow, expensive and just a death trap for anyone using them, Mi-2's and Mi-4's are SF only. and Hinds cost the same as most Gunships.

I feel right now Pact (or at least Pact minor) has absolutely no way of countering these, regardless of skill level and puts a real block onto the choices we have.


Whats wrong with this post.......

A whole lot.


First off, you are on this forum alot so you could not have possibly missed the fact that one of your opponents names was COCA-COCA DEFENDER.
On Conquest
On Uppsala

You should have known what was coming. So don't go screaming "Tryhard NATO Fags" like you did in game when we were using subpar decks as well. 2 of us were using decks that could never have stood a chance on their own.

We play together a lot, and we call out what decks we are using and what air assets we are bringing for the initial all important plane confrontation in conquest uppsala. Your team simply did not bring enough air assets, because believe me you have the upper hand in Cat C AtoA spam.
Tomcats only have time for 1 shot each on their wheel before they HAVE to evac or get butchered by dog-fighting planes. The game before we got rushed by 8, 8!!!! Czech BIS and a hoard of spam napalm that easily blew through the first wave of Tomcat missiles and the Mirage and Eagles that were covering them. You want to talk about unfair and unrealistic units? I can bring 4 Tomcats with Cat C, 4!!!! You can bring 16!!!! BIS 1975 planes with ridiculous armament from the Cat A Su27 into the game. For 90 or 100 points. A Tomcat costs 145.

Here is a sad comparison minors comparison. The Danish (the weakest national of all) A-A F16 is Cat A, costs more then the BIS but has a weaker mid range missile then the Czech BIS and equal missiles to the Polish one, which are both CAT C. You want to talk about unfair minor buffing, giving czech and Poland a massively spammable 1975 airplane with 1990 weapons is the textbook definition of overbuffing a unit.

There is a reason why you lost your SEAD plane. Its because it flew right at the Rolands and Tomcats. And you weren't facing noobs who leave their radar aa turned on.

If you are getting hit by a 4 plane elite Tomcat Train, their will not be any Nighthawk/Raven's bombing you from that player. Because that means its a Cat C Marine. In this case it was a national US Marine Cat C (My deck), which meant it has some ridiculously glaring weaknesses. Fortunately, My esteemed Comrades on the team were utilizing decks of glorious design French Cat A, and USA Cat A (Also a Danish Cat A thrown in their for funzies) which happen to complement my deck very well.

... at least have the guts to consider giving Cat C USA an actual fighter. The fact that Czechs and Poles get Cat C Spamfest with 1990 armament while America HAS TO rely on the Tomcat is the root of your problem. You would see a whole lot less Tomcat train if Eugen gave usa the F4G back.

Raven spams with nighthawk coming behind is even getting worse...

most of the time I am willing to risk and lose a 170pt su27 just to kill a 135pt raven


Units that come at 1 per card are spammable now. K.
Last edited by [DAY]Topspin2005 on Wed 15 Jan 2014 21:10, edited 1 time in total.
Reason: inflammatory parts deleted
Image

User avatar
Mako
General
Posts: 7352
Joined: Sun 5 May 2013 20:00
Location: Cascadia
Contact:

Re: NATO airspam

Postby Mako » Wed 15 Jan 2014 20:58

ITT: OP fought some CAT C decks
If there's two kinds of players, those that like challenges and those that want a fair game, pubstomps should make everyone happy.

User avatar
Bluebreaker
Warrant Officer
Posts: 454
Joined: Mon 6 May 2013 16:25
Contact:

Re: NATO airspam

Postby Bluebreaker » Wed 15 Jan 2014 21:00

yeah because airspam is only a NATO thing :lol:

I mean spetz, komandosi and flamers in helo rushes are not a thing. s :lol:

messershmitt
Sergeant
Posts: 69
Joined: Mon 3 Jun 2013 19:22
Contact:

Re: NATO airspam

Postby messershmitt » Wed 15 Jan 2014 21:01

andy02m wrote:
Grabbed_by_the_Spets wrote:Huge air-rush by NATO forces (especailly France and US). that simply overwhelm you and with nothing you can do about it...



Considering the number of times i've been curb stomped by USSR heli's please understand if I ...


Andy gets it. The OP's generic argument is just another thinly veiled plea for a "PACT minor" buff. We've all seen this before, Spets: you like East Germany, so you want them to be as powerful as possible regardless of deck balance.

To imply that NATO alone is guilty of heli spam is dishonest, and undermines the OP's credibility. Honestly, I see nothing wrong with sending your initial infantry rush in helicopters - This is a legitimate tactic that has been proven in combat, just ask the viet cong.

The real problem with "heli spam" is how the empty helicopters are handled after unloading. Honorable players will recall their empty choppers and park them, or use them in a purely defensive capacity. Dishonorable players will send their empty helicopters on a suicide mission to hunt CV's or soak up missiles. This is this problem that deserves attention, as no cold war commander would order his pilots to kamikaze.

Solution? Players need an incentive to recall their helis (and other empty, unarmed infantry carriers). In RD, I would like to see a system where players are partially refunded for sending these units back off the screen, and out of the game.

On a related topic: The definition of "spam" is totally subjective, and is an inaccurate way to describe a dishonorable tactic. Please be more careful while using describing certain tactics as "spam", because the "spam" illustrated in the OP's screenshots is in no way dishonorable.

User avatar
RangerPL
Major
Posts: 1909
Joined: Thu 27 Jun 2013 08:26
Location: ostrichland
Contact:

Re: NATO airspam

Postby RangerPL » Wed 15 Jan 2014 21:03

MiG-21bis has 1983 armament, not 1990.

And who cares if it's OOTF? Those are the only effective fighters those countries have.

Helicopters aren't the problem, Cat C decks with 5 planes per card are the problem.
Last edited by RangerPL on Wed 15 Jan 2014 21:07, edited 1 time in total.
Image

User avatar
Sunshine
Lieutenant Colonel
Posts: 2428
Joined: Mon 12 Mar 2012 15:51
Contact:

Re: NATO airspam

Postby Sunshine » Wed 15 Jan 2014 21:07

Grabbed_by_the_Spets wrote:Huge air-rush by NATO forces (especailly France and US).

Phew, as a NATO player I am totally relieved that Pact would never ever spam air assets, Ev4R!

Seriously, people need to get rid of their forking bias, it gets annoying as hell!
Both sides pull of the very same crap, period.

The problem is a common one, not a faction-based one. Yes, it has to be addressed and "fixed", my fingers are crossed.
Image
Sponsored by italic & German superiority.

User avatar
Hartmann
Lieutenant
Posts: 1163
Joined: Thu 30 May 2013 18:31
Contact:

Re: NATO airspam

Postby Hartmann » Wed 15 Jan 2014 21:08

Counter with a spam of 10 MiG21/23 in openings and simply sweep all air from the map?

Seems like that's what most people are doing atm, feels pretty pointless to use any helicopters in openings on nato right now.

User avatar
Sunshine
Lieutenant Colonel
Posts: 2428
Joined: Mon 12 Mar 2012 15:51
Contact:

Re: NATO airspam

Postby Sunshine » Wed 15 Jan 2014 21:10

Hartmann wrote:Counter with a spam of 10 MiG21/23 in openings and simply sweep all air from the map?

Seems like that's what most people are doing atm, feels pretty pointless to use any helicopters in openings on nato right now.

True!
Image
Sponsored by italic & German superiority.

Return to “Wargame : AirLand Battle”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 21 guests