buk or osa's?

delta653
Private
Posts: 3
Joined: Fri 25 May 2012 00:55
Contact:

buk or osa's?

Postby delta653 » Mon 12 Aug 2013 15:52

Currently, for my main pact deck, i'm using biryusa's, tunguska-m's and buk m1's as my form of aa defence. So far, they have worked out for me. However, recently, i'm torn between keeping my buk's, or replacing them with osa's because the rate of fire simply impresses me. Any advice from the vets out there, as to what i should choose for an effective aa screen?

User avatar
praslovan
Major-General
Posts: 3939
Joined: Tue 20 Sep 2011 21:56
Location: Slav inhabited Alps
Contact:

Re: buk or osa's?

Postby praslovan » Mon 12 Aug 2013 15:56

First one is a bit of an overkill IMO. I have Tun, Buk and Igla inf... I never start with BUKs, but call them in later on in needed.
Last edited by praslovan on Mon 12 Aug 2013 15:57, edited 1 time in total.

Jar Jar
Command Sergeant Major
Posts: 349
Joined: Tue 6 Sep 2011 01:02
Contact:

Re: buk or osa's?

Postby Jar Jar » Mon 12 Aug 2013 15:56

Personally i prefer buks over osas, because they are awesome and have a really long range. If you micro your buk carefully its way stronger than a osa. If you want to use the Osa swap the Birusya for it.
Image

v-snejok
Chief Warrant Officer
Posts: 656
Joined: Sat 25 May 2013 12:03
Contact:

Re: buk or osa's?

Postby v-snejok » Mon 12 Aug 2013 15:57

Buk can kill nigthawk, osa cant (out of range), thats because I use buk.

rrev
Sergeant First-Class
Posts: 140
Joined: Mon 27 Feb 2012 20:19
Contact:

Re: buk or osa's?

Postby rrev » Mon 12 Aug 2013 16:04

It's BUK's and Tunguska-M's and either of the following.
Strela
Biryusa
OSA

Why would you choose between BUK's and OSA's? BUK's are hard-hitting, long range SAM's far back in the line while OSA's are more like frontline skirmishers along with IGLA's.
I personally rarely use BUKs myself in any non 10v10 match, there's no need for them most of the time and they aren't cost-efficient. But I always have them in all my decks if I can. It's the most powerful long range SAM in the game. All NATO planes has trouble in dealing with them so if I really need/want to invest heavily in AA, BUKs are called in. They'll finish off the HATO airforce, but comes to a great cost.

Take both if you hate planes, along with Tunguska-M's. If anything is to be dropped, it's always OSA's, Biryusas or strelas. I keep switching between each of those but I'd never take out my BUKs despite using them the least. They're simply too valuable in certain situations.

feeblezak
Lieutenant
Posts: 1110
Joined: Sun 4 Mar 2012 13:43
Contact:

Re: buk or osa's?

Postby feeblezak » Mon 12 Aug 2013 16:06

Sigh. The typical new player mistake of choosing based on stats alone, and not weapon systems. Take both. BUK's are a long range sam system, OSA's are a rapid fire medium range sam system.
Give the MiG-19PFM its 5600m Missile back!!
If Someone could tell the drivers of the T-72M1M's and T-72B's to close their hatches, cheers.

User avatar
praslovan
Major-General
Posts: 3939
Joined: Tue 20 Sep 2011 21:56
Location: Slav inhabited Alps
Contact:

Re: buk or osa's?

Postby praslovan » Mon 12 Aug 2013 16:11

You don't need osa if you have tunguska.

User avatar
another505
More than 10 000 messages. Soldier you are the leader of all armies!
Posts: 13128
Joined: Sun 21 Jul 2013 05:18
Location: Hiatus
Contact:

Re: buk or osa's?

Postby another505 » Mon 12 Aug 2013 17:18

yea, there is no reason to take the osa over the buk
you generally need at least 2 kinds of AA
front line , fast firing, short range AA
and second line of long range, hard hitting, slow reloading AA

osa cant fill buk's role
and tunguska is always a better deal than osa for having no RAD, when the AA gun is off, but turn it on when they are spamming planes without SEAD

always get manpads unless you are french.... cause they are not manly enough
Last edited by OpusTheFowl on Mon 12 Aug 2013 18:33, edited 1 time in total.
Reason: Language

Phil s
Sergeant
Posts: 71
Joined: Sat 27 Jul 2013 06:56
Contact:

Re: buk or osa's?

Postby Phil s » Mon 12 Aug 2013 17:46

Imagine it as a set of layers, that is pretty much how the soviet air defence was built,

sa-7 (strella) Right at the front
sa-9 and zsu-23-4 Shilka
Sa-8 (Osa)
Sa-6 or Sa-11 (Buks),

then behind them were Sa-2's and Sa-4's.

delta653
Private
Posts: 3
Joined: Fri 25 May 2012 00:55
Contact:

Re: buk or osa's?

Postby delta653 » Tue 13 Aug 2013 14:46

Hey guys, thx 4 yr advice. I'll be sticking with buks then

Return to “Wargame : AirLand Battle”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 20 guests