NATO airspam

bobjoeharris
Warrant Officer
Posts: 464
Joined: Tue 12 Mar 2013 04:51
Contact:

Re: NATO airspam

Postby bobjoeharris » Wed 15 Jan 2014 23:06

I want to try a test of a doom 50 peice aa net vs only helos and planes :D
I am [LCol] 'Harris' In ALB and RD, and 'Lt Col. Harris; in EE
bobjoeharris wrote:fighting for dry, colorless landscapes with boring grey houses, as dry napalm is dropped to further dry up the land, all while the silent ships watch from the silent sea :(

User avatar
Jereth
Lieutenant
Posts: 1025
Joined: Mon 5 Mar 2012 06:27
Location: Northern Virginia, USA
Contact:

Re: NATO airspam

Postby Jereth » Wed 15 Jan 2014 23:55

Grabbed_by_the_Spets wrote: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.

Faction balance isn't really that bad. In terms of air spam potential, I actually prefer to use PACT to air spam these days, but NATO is just as capable. Likewise, both factions are equally as capable at defending against it. Now, if you are referring specifically to PACT minors ability to defeat air spam, well... try removing the block on the choices you have regarding deck construction.

Also, while I applaud your effort to include objective material to aid the discussion, screenshots don't really tell the full story. Speaking from personal experience, when asking for balance changes, replays (and lots of them) are much more effective at getting Eugen's attention.

User avatar
stryker468
Sergeant
Posts: 72
Joined: Sat 25 Aug 2012 22:10
Contact:

Re: NATO airspam

Postby stryker468 » Wed 15 Jan 2014 23:56

Its not just NATO...
Perfection is the Enemy of Progress

User avatar
QUAD
Colonel
Posts: 2766
Joined: Sun 10 Nov 2013 21:17
Contact:

Re: NATO airspam

Postby QUAD » Thu 16 Jan 2014 00:04

Late game NATO air spam is pretty horrific, I agree, but in terms of the match opening I prefer pact. Avias, MiG-21Bs, and polish Helis rule all.
Mobile Units Operational :!:

Gopblin
Major-General
Posts: 3620
Joined: Thu 24 May 2012 19:10
Contact:

Re: NATO airspam

Postby Gopblin » Thu 16 Jan 2014 00:11

QUAD wrote:Late game NATO air spam is pretty horrific, I agree, but in terms of the match opening I prefer pact. Avias, MiG-21Bs, and polish Helis rule all.


Bah, never got the point of Avias. They aren't much more capable than Lim6 at A2A or A2Helo, but cost more and don't have the ground attack capability.

At least the Draken has speed advantage over Freedom Fighter, although on balance FF is still way better.

Mig21 aren't bad tho, as long as there isn't any return fire. Their ECM means they are done as soon as NATO gets a couple F14s up.

Best wishes,
Daniel.
Nationality? - Russian.
Occupation? - No, no, just visiting.

User avatar
EricTerminator
Major
Posts: 1879
Joined: Tue 27 Mar 2012 18:16
Contact:

Re: NATO airspam

Postby EricTerminator » Thu 16 Jan 2014 00:19

Need replay ?

Here's the one for the 1st screenshot : http://alb-replays.info/#/browse/?view=1479
BECAUSE HUNTING CHALLENGERS WITH MIG-31S WAS TOO EASY :


leroy11
First Sergeant
Posts: 231
Joined: Fri 6 Jul 2012 15:23
Contact:

Re: NATO airspam

Postby leroy11 » Thu 16 Jan 2014 00:28

Jereth wrote:
Grabbed_by_the_Spets wrote: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.

Faction balance isn't really that bad. In terms of air spam potential, I actually prefer to use PACT to air spam these days, but NATO is just as capable. Likewise, both factions are equally as capable at defending against it. Now, if you are referring specifically to PACT minors ability to defeat air spam, well... try removing the block on the choices you have regarding deck construction.

Also, while I applaud your effort to include objective material to aid the discussion, screenshots don't really tell the full story. Speaking from personal experience, when asking for balance changes, replays (and lots of them) are much more effective at getting Eugen's attention.


Yes it neither NATO nor PACT specific, in fact I am loving PACT cat c Napalm and mass interceptor support at the moment. I don't find air difficult in fact I find it a quite fun part of the game.

I think but there are two problems people have with air.

A. Opening, people don't realise they need to invest in, and takes loses to win, that opening air clash.

2v2 its not usual to have 20+ planes wheeling and contesting the middle of the map to see who can get helicopters in and secure that all important position.

Some people just wont put a single plane in, you know 90 percent of the time there totally stuffed and its just a matter of timer ticking to win.

B. Following up on this is the person who doesn't want to play the A of ALB.

They deploy the best in bulk, like all 4 bukM1s and 4 TungMs in out in the first 10 minutes or less and then nothing else, no manpads, no fighters, nothing, They want to play EE and have set up a "keep away" sign so they can play ground game and don't have to worry about air.

This just doesn't cut it for long.

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

Re: NATO airspam

Postby Skapa » Thu 16 Jan 2014 01:10

EricTerminator wrote:Need replay ?

Here's the one for the 1st screenshot : http://alb-replays.info/#/browse/?view=1479


Quick question, was the pact side a team?
Image

User avatar
F-22
Lieutenant
Posts: 1225
Joined: Thu 30 May 2013 03:13
Contact:

Re: NATO airspam

Postby F-22 » Thu 16 Jan 2014 01:11

If you don't spam everything that flies in conquest it seems you're doing it wrong.

as long as you and your buddies can get men to almost every strategically important on the map, you can win games in 10 minutes flat. (which isn't hard with Skyhawk or Freedom Fighter spam support)

I know, I've done it myself.

Air spam > Balanced decks in conquest.

User avatar
Jereth
Lieutenant
Posts: 1025
Joined: Mon 5 Mar 2012 06:27
Location: Northern Virginia, USA
Contact:

Re: NATO airspam

Postby Jereth » Thu 16 Jan 2014 01:46

EricTerminator wrote:Need replay ?

Here's the one for the 1st screenshot : http://alb-replays.info/#/browse/?view=1479

Thanks! But I'm not sure it qualifies as "air spam". I mean... look at all those FOBs! :lol:

Skapa wrote:Quick question, was the pact side a team?

It doesn't look like it.

After reviewing the replay, and paying particular attention to the opening, I have to wonder at PACT's overall plan. Why were the Mig-29's evac'd after the F-14's were already evacing? And what exactly is PACT's helo forces doing? They seem to be scattered and without any reasonable objective. If you're not going to send a credible heli-borne force to secure key terrain, at least have significant and aggressive wheeled forces to get there on the ground. I mean, come on, NATO was +6 before PACT secured anything besides their starting sector, and that has nothing to do with air spam. And where's the recon? The occasional token recon helo isn't going to cut it, especially when you don't have air superiority.

On this map in particular, it is critical to take key terrain first. PACT put forth little to no effort towards that goal, and thusly surrendered map control. Air spam is not the guilty party here.

Return to “Wargame : AirLand Battle”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 22 guests