NATO airspam

User avatar
Drrty-D
Major
Posts: 1949
Joined: Mon 20 Feb 2012 16:49
Location: Rijeka,Croatia

Re: NATO airspam

Postby Drrty-D » Mon 20 Jan 2014 14:09

triumph wrote:http://i.imgur.com/FcwiqWD.jpg
Much strela ela ela eh?


Guess you are the AA guy in your team :-? .9 APoints left,for CVs,Supplys and some recons :-).
Image

User avatar
KeyLord
Command Sergeant Major
Posts: 337
Joined: Thu 2 May 2013 13:33
Contact:

Re: NATO airspam

Postby KeyLord » Mon 20 Jan 2014 14:31

Iglas will slove all your problems. The great thing about cat C spams is that 90% of jets don't have ECM so your MANPADS will be at their most effective (i.e. in great numbers). Sometimes when the air gets thick you have to bunker down and hold through the storm, and micro your radar AA, and counter with some fighters to pick off any stragglers. The air trains hurt bad but "The bigger the air train, the smaller the ground one". A good MANPADS defense will pick off 1-3 jets per spam so you just need to keep them supplied.

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

Re: NATO airspam

Postby admiral9 » Mon 20 Jan 2014 17:38

integ3r wrote:
admiral9 wrote:Uppsala there's the sector that used to be the seaside one its now a bit more inland, practically no cover if attacking unless you control the city.

Just means you need to attack somewhere else. The area is easily defensible with the giant forest. I would say the other side is more of a problem. The one with the hill, river and open field. However, aggressive play in the opening should let you gain a foot hold across the river which neutralizes the problem. Still, that's not easy. I agree. Very much a problem with the long supply route as well.

admiral9 wrote:Gavle the open field sector that place is devoid of cover if you start on the wrong side and even on the good side there's.

I agree. Gavle could be a problem. This is a map design issue though. However, given proximity of battle to from spawn means buk or OSA opens are much more viable since you can have them sit on the FOB and consistently kill air units without running out of ammo. The spawn point on the other side however is contestable with plenty of cover.

admiral9 wrote:rivers of blood alb edition, do i need to explain?

It's tough, but there's a decent amount of cover. If you're facing spam, it just means you should focus the sides. Besides, each side has a patch of forest from which you can defend or launch attacks. You don't need to stand in the field.

admiral9 wrote:karlstad was it? that map also has some pretty open areas.

Just because it has open areas does not mean it's a problem. Karlstad has plenty of cover to dance stuff around in or ambush recon helicopters to make cheap shots hard. Given proximity to mid from spawn, FOB/BUK options can even be viable. For pact, you WANT some open area because you can play the 2800 range game which NATO has pretty much no counter for.

admiral9 wrote:Although I would actually say if you are going towards an open map bother with a bukm1 unless they are bringing 9 skyhawks off the bat a bukm1 behind the sector will help your strelas.

The problem with BUKM1 against spam and such is its poor capacity. It will run out in no time. That's why people like OSAs, but our true lord and saviour is Strela 10M.


Uum bro for some reason it seems you think that something is wrong with those zones... i just gave examples...
I mean i adore all of the examples as my playstyle is armor oriented so i wouldnt say those are bad zones i would say that they are the zones where armored players can go toe to toe in a skill joust.
Also i prefer the shilka over the strela cause of the double avail meaning that through sheer volume of fire you can down crap planes and if used well the shilka can eat up helos up till the apache even.

Jereth wrote:Thanks for the clarification, although I don't think it changes anything. So you know a high ranking guy, and you've played against PLF when they used lots of air... What's the point?

The existence of a strategy doesn't prove that the strategy is over-powered.

If anything I'd say your line of reasoning should tell you that a strong Air Force is a key component of a well balanced and competetive strategy, if the play styles of highly ranked players and competetive clans are anything to go by.


I wouldn't per say, say that the tactic is over powered, I said the air heavy playstyles are favored by the current meta and that can be seen by the fact that both high ranking players and clans use that tactic. (if i have used the word overpowered in one of my posts it might have me been misusing a word)
Also a USSR deck can roll without anything resembling a strong airforce, I usually just roll with su27S and some random extra AA/multirole.
I will then again admit that most nato nations and NSWP need an airforce (W. germany not so much either)
Image
daywalkerzyx wrote:Elite inf really aren't a problem.

Skapa
Master Sergeant
Posts: 159
Joined: Thu 29 Aug 2013 18:33
Contact:

Re: NATO airspam

Postby Skapa » Mon 20 Jan 2014 17:43

Drrty-D wrote:
triumph wrote:http://i.imgur.com/FcwiqWD.jpg
Much strela ela ela eh?


Guess you are the AA guy in your team :-? .9 APoints left,for CVs,Supplys and some recons :-).


I think it was a joke.... at least I hope it was! :lol:
Image

beeroshima
Master Sergeant
Posts: 193
Joined: Tue 1 Oct 2013 00:36
Contact:

Re: NATO airspam

Postby beeroshima » Mon 20 Jan 2014 20:17

Skapa wrote:
Drrty-D wrote:
triumph wrote:http://i.imgur.com/FcwiqWD.jpg
Much strela ela ela eh?


Guess you are the AA guy in your team :-? .9 APoints left,for CVs,Supplys and some recons :-).


I think it was a joke.... at least I hope it was! :lol:


Sarcasm is lost on some people. Either that or that deck is horribly bad, but the ones they themselves choose are so horribly bad, they don't realize it was a joke and it seems feasible to them.

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

Re: NATO airspam

Postby triumph » Tue 21 Jan 2014 01:02

I thought th@t @ would give it @w@y.
Image
Transcend Excellence

Return to “Wargame : AirLand Battle”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 24 guests