NATO airspam

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

Re: NATO airspam

Postby DelroyMonjo » Wed 15 Jan 2014 21:11

OP didn't specifically state 'helicopters'. The title is
NATO airspam
!
Illegitimi non carborundum.

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 21:11

Hartmann wrote:feels pretty pointless to use any helicopters in openings on nato right now.

what game are you playing
Image

User avatar
[DAY]Topspin2005
General
Posts: 5134
Joined: Thu 30 Jun 2011 15:13
Location: Germany
Contact:

Re: NATO airspam

Postby [DAY]Topspin2005 » Wed 15 Jan 2014 21:13

OK, please keep it serious and without inflammatory/insults like "whining" etc. ! THX! ;)

admiral9
Lieutenant
Posts: 1035
Joined: Wed 22 May 2013 18:48
Contact:

Re: NATO airspam

Postby admiral9 » Wed 15 Jan 2014 21:14

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.


Don't listen to this man! He forced me to play a deck with purely trucks and jeeps the fiend, on a sidenote theres a chance the last pic was of my opening with that deck as I remember using some canons and F1C's to screen my helo inf, but yeah I will 100% agree that airspam is a little bit out of hand but i wouldn't blame one guy for it.

Also theres strela 10's, theres manpads on manpads on manpads on manpads, and the obvious own interceptors and migs.
Image
daywalkerzyx wrote:Elite inf really aren't a problem.

Trimen
Second-Lieutenant
Posts: 908
Joined: Wed 5 Jun 2013 02:30
Contact:

Re: NATO airspam

Postby Trimen » Wed 15 Jan 2014 21:37

The OP has some points,

Airspam on both sides goes way overboard.

The problem

NATO airspam is generally composed of cheap transport helos which have weak weapons. PACT airspam is generally composed of gunship transports which can decimate armored forces. I have seen Delfin raid with 9 birds saturation bombing my starting zones on 10v10 eliminating CV's.

I have seen air armadas of MIG-21 BIS sweep the sky of all fighters and helos, What's worse is the there is only 1 true interceptor in NATO (F-14) vs 2 in PACT(MIG-31, MIG-31M). A Pact Player's death wheel can be larger then a NATO player.

Then again I have also seen the power of 9 A4 Skyhawks on a poorly supported rush. the quickness they rearm means they are sent out constantly.

Solution proposals. (controversial)

Split out infantry cards. If US Riflemen have a 16/12/8 availability add a new card with a availability of 8/6/4 and have that be the one with the special transport.

Current availabilty for basic transports (trucks, jeeps, APC), half availability for special transports (IFV, Helo)

To compensate make the special infantry cards a separate unit. This way you can have 3/3 infantry in cheap land transports, and 3/3 infantry in special transports. This will hurt Air Assault Decks but for the sake of balance it is necessary.

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 21:42

CAT system needs to go, it's a license to spam. Simple as. CAT C and mixed decks, the two balance screwing entities.
Last edited by Countess Bathory on Wed 15 Jan 2014 21:43, edited 1 time in total.
Image
Accept Roki Vulovic as your Lord and Saviour today and beware of the false prophet, Jesus Christ

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 21:43

RangerPL wrote:MiG-21bis has 1983 armament, not 1990.


Lol, no. The MiG-21 only got the capacity to use the R-77 in 1993, and was never capable of using the R-27.

User avatar
triumph
Major
Posts: 1830
Joined: Sun 31 Jul 2011 20:12
Contact:

Re: NATO airspam

Postby triumph » Wed 15 Jan 2014 21:47

RangerPL wrote:
Hartmann wrote:feels pretty pointless to use any helicopters in openings on nato right now.

what game are you playing

The one that involves aggressive play.
Image
Transcend Excellence

User avatar
chykka
Brigadier
Posts: 3387
Joined: Wed 28 Nov 2012 14:55
Location: Canada, Alberta
Contact:

Re: NATO airspam

Postby chykka » Wed 15 Jan 2014 21:56

JBravo wrote:A replay isn't really needed to prove that airspam is a problem right now.


I can agree with you. Pact can do it too.. Less planes that are good at it though. As a player who sucks at conquest, guess how I have been winning? 45 point Corsairs for napalm, Jaguar A's, Skyhawks (don't really need skyhawks just helps to protect my infantry though and kill T80's... lol), and if I have space an Air supremacy fighter. But you really don't need a fighter as I just rush off the start (Planes off start feels like a cheese, as you don't have recon to see them yet.) No recon?! How does that work you ask?


It's guess work. at the start of the match any recon you have won't be any where near him. With jaguars (or any Sead for that matter) to probe them and act as recon. Than you use the spam once you get an Idea where they are. If they use planes I use the corsairs Vulcans to try to deal with them than napalm typical locations to slow them down. (conquest is a race no?) The air spam technique feels like cheese, probably because I'm not a typical plane user or a conquest player. Yet I was winning repeatedly with this tactic. In conquest because all I need to do is slow them down enough for my tanks and infantry to get ground, if they come out with SU27's or any other planes I can't handle. I just field jaguars after I see them evac so I know I have time. (after all my 30 point Skyhawk of Corsair doesn't have to be that close to "Spot them" So long as I have something in the air I usually see them. Than repeat the napalm which is usually quite safe.

Allowed me to grab all the territory, than I just threw my tanks at them for the rest of the game to keep them away from all my captured zones, (this depends what they are using) Sometimes tanks won't do anything if they have lots of helicopters. My zones were pretty undefended early but I still captured the middle ones. Until later I can fill with infantry and manpads. Than by the time they can push: either I let him come, run out of napalm, or he got past my initial tank push as well. I've got atgm infantry by that time, and more income to defend.. and already far enough ahead that he's got to make a big push tie the income or loose. (This is why I preferred EE's conquest where they removed several zones (more central ones) so you don't get an advantage for winning, IE more income -> Snowball effect.

I think the issue, that makes plane spam too effective sometimes is fielding them early Especially in conquest, as losses don't matter so much as long as the planes did enough to slow him down. Using SEAD as a form of recon, than just guessing. I don't think it's fair but as a way to show you how cheese it is. I can out rush a very hard, keep him off at least one of his closer zones (you know the one's most player have no trouble getting in the first minute. Win with only 1000 losses playing up too 3000. I think I should take more losses playing so aggressive no?
Only thing I couldn't slow down is an air assault deck. You can't napalm helo's, But if I had clusters... well you know how that works lol. This is just three kinds of planes too, I could bring much better ones but their low cost made it ideal for a conquest rush in multiplayer.

Oh, And to tell you PACT helo's feel difficult to use off the start because of plane spam. Gunships aren't cheap, (Planes cost about the same as helicopters Corsairs are much cheaper!) For use early game. Yes you can hide them from planes but planes can see moving helo's easy. Making the helicopters < Jets in early game. Helicopters are my favorite thing to use off the start especially gunships. Speed, gets infantry in great spots fast. But I can say easily, that jets are the easiest way to stop my gunship Deck. Not AA, that would be silly. Your point would be wasted and I would snatch all the good ground before your AA gets close. Rather just buy lots of planes off the start and the hell with getting more recon lol. That's why my gunship decks usually loaded with KUBs and Osa's. That's my issue with plane spam as recon isn't important for planes, especially early game.[/u]

Countess Bathory wrote:CAT system needs to go, it's a license to spam. Simple as. CAT C and mixed decks, the two balance screwing entities.


Well CAT system is fine, the only plane I would want to see more of is those little migs. Cheaper planes seem to have [u]similar numbers in same category to expensive planes like the F14, wild weasels, a10's compared to something like the little mig. I don't care if my opponent spams planes usually, more for my AA to eat. But only same number of migs as F14's? Rather I see issues with the SEAD spam in Cat decks however and like I said before early use of them is what makes plane spam work. How many nato players think they are great players when they get SEAD too use off the start to catch you off guard? If they get one tunguska or KUB that's a lot of points. Think how hard it is to spot planes if you don't have any yourself. Especially with no recon helicopter, (Which could just get shot down off the start too..) Than follow up with 3 f14s and the bombers of choice. As I explained when I use jaguars off the start you get that early bit of time to use your napalm freely.

F14's should not be able to get that many of them. F14s are units you can kinda always field and forget about. Getting easy points, sometimes without me even noticing they shot something down I just see my score go up. It's silly in 10v10s when I see SEAD trains, covered by a spinning circle of F14's. Your losses from a Tomcat will always feel undeserved. Or if they just guess and hit a High value target with a bomber. TBH tomcats aren't unfair rather just cheese in big numbers. They should be too stun incoming bombers and planes which is exactly what they do. Not to shoot them down across map. One f14 does just that, Three will do the latter. It usually can't kill in one hit. But if you have 3 or more, than it's just spam. I've played a 1v1 against a colonel who decided he needed 3 prowlers and F14s in a 1v1? He got my tunguska and a radar AA piece because he caught me off guard as it was the first time I saw the planes. But didn't even bother with AA after that just man pad infantry to walk down the forests and slip into his zones.
Kommandosi are great at getting Command vehicles. Apparently igla's and strella3's are OP? The only losses I really took were a few cheap tanks (due to a lack of AA heli's got them) and my expensive tunguska 2k22m and a 50 point OSA.

So around 200 points I lost in total most being to a prowler. So plane spam isn't always going to win it for you, rather it's just early game cheese. You can never know if your opponent will decide to do just that. Had he been using the prowler off the start with lots of cheap bombers instead of f14's, (No idea why he bought them, I hadn't used a single fixed wing all match) I would have been in trouble tbh. (My igla's and strella's didn't get good positions till about 3/4 of the match in). If he just started guessing and hit a CV or anything for that matter I'd be slowed down. I didn't have the AA at the start or income to deal with such an attack. Especially after a potential Sead rush, if it catches you off guard. Than he refuels and hits again while I'm still open to air strikes. (Like I did to finally win a few conquest matches lol) But that's not what he did so the f14s were useless really. He left after my man pads shot down most of his planes. He said I was camping or something like that. What else can man pads do? push to his air corridor and sit there? :twisted:
Last edited by chykka on Wed 15 Jan 2014 22:57, edited 1 time in total.
Image

Mystic
First Sergeant
Posts: 223
Joined: Sat 20 Jul 2013 19:00
Contact:

Re: NATO airspam

Postby Mystic » Wed 15 Jan 2014 22:00

I'm Sorry OP but you call that an Airspam?? Lol..... Have you seen a pact Airspam it is Faaaaaaaar worse than any Nato Airspam...

Countess Bathory wrote:CAT system needs to go, it's a license to spam. Simple as. CAT C and mixed decks, the two balance screwing entities.


+1
Someone in this thread gets it...


Also this whole Airspam Problem is part and parcel of playing Conquest. Enjoy it, you asked for it and Eugen Delivered.... TD has Airspam from time to time, but you can deal with it comfortably.

Regards,

Mystic

Return to “Wargame : AirLand Battle”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 22 guests