http://alb-replays.info/#/browse/?view=171 - Coordinated NATO team helo rushing a coordinated PACT team.
http://alb-replays.info/#/browse/?view=238 - 1/3 Canadian helo rush against random PACT.
http://alb-replays.info/#/browse/?view=255 - 1/3 Polish helo rush vs random NATO.
http://alb-replays.info/#/browse/?view=272 - Coordinated NATO helo rush vs random PACT (lobby named "helo rush").
http://alb-replays.info/#/browse/?view=221 - Coordinated NATO pre-nerf puma pirate rush vs coordinated PACT.
http://alb-replays.info/#/browse/?view=222 - Coordinated NATO pre-nerf puma pirate rush vs coordinated PACT.
http://alb-replays.info/#/browse/?view=223 - Failed coordinated NATO pre-nerf puma pirate rush vs coordinated PACT.
http://alb-replays.info/#/browse/?view=224 - Failed coordinated NATO pre-nerf puma pirate rush vs coordinated PACT.
http://alb-replays.info/#/browse/?view=282 - Failed PACT hybrid helo/plane rush vs NATO.
http://alb-replays.info/#/browse/?view=283 - Coordinated PACT vs semi-coordinated NATO (defenders warned of helo rush).
http://alb-replays.info/#/browse/?view=284 - Failed coordinated PACT vs coordinated NATO (defenders given every advantage possible).
http://alb-replays.info/#/browse/?view=301 - Failed 1/2 PACT Mi-24V rush vs NATO (no indication of coordination on either side).
http://alb-replays.info/#/browse/?view=307 - Failed 1/3 NATO airborne infantry rush vs PACT.
http://alb-replays.info/#/browse/?view=310 - NATO helo rush vs NATO (ranked 1v1).
http://alb-replays.info/#/browse/?view=347 - DRAW 3/4 NATO helo rush vs coordinated PACT.
Highly available and low cost helicopters are able to be deployed in such great numbers that a more sensible combined arms force simply cannot hope to overcome before their command vehicles are destroyed.
This tournament match is a textbook example of what is possible under the current meta. The recent changes to the pirate aren't anywhere near what is required to stop this kind of helo spam. As you can see, the Brandenburger team fielded a fairly well rounded force, and obviously had a coordinated plan. Once they saw the cloud of gunships coming in, they couldn't react in any meaningful way to save themselves.
This kind of all or nothing tactic is ridiculously overpowered. I'd go so far as to say the tactic that offers the best chance to win against this helo spam is not to spam anti-air, but to helo spam yourself.
Super67 wrote:its just super cheap and your team has no honor. regardless if it works, regardless if its part of the game.
Frankna wrote:you are better than that im sure of it but too scare to take any risk...
Lemieux wrote:without a counter anti-air cheese, seems almost impossible to stop.
Random wrote:I could teach a monkey to do this
Fussel wrote:pathetic abuse of game mechanics
[DAY]Topspin2005 wrote:I would really like to change the game in a way that these tactics are no more possible. For me the ultimate patch of Wargame:EE showed that it is possible to bring a game close to it.
So every serious discuss about such tactics in another seperate topic may help the devs to fix/improve things
As you can see, our demonstration sparked a lot of emotion from the community, who overwhelmingly responded that they agree with our position. Helo spam is a broken aspect of Wargame: AirLand Battle. Please fix it. We specifically chose this venue to gain maximum exposure for this issue, as just another whine thread about helo spam would be dismissed by the community as "l2p noobs". This tournament was invitation only among the established clans of Wargame, so the caliber of player that this is being used against is not your average random. These were seasoned players working together as a coherent team, and they were helpless against this broken tactic. As a continuing part of our service to the community, we not only have identified the problem, but will also propose a solution, and have started this thread to have a serious discussion on how to fix our beloved game.
The answer isn't as simple as the tactic itself. Firstly, I think it goes without saying that the combat effectiveness of helicopter infantry that survive the crash of their transport needs to be reduced to the point that they route immediately upon contact and continue to do so for a while. This is common sense, but does not solve all helo spam. I propose a three pronged solution.
1 - Slightly increase the effectiveness of planes versus helicopters
This can be achieved by increases to gun and IR missile ranges. Right now, planes are simply not effective enough against cheap helicopters.
2 - Slightly decrease the availability of cheap helicopters.
Cheap gunships like the gazelle and the Mi-2 are useless unless they are deployed en masse. Don't reduce it so much that they can never accomplish anything, but just enough to prevent all or nothing attacks like we demonstrated.
3 - Slightly buff low end MANPADS (redeye, strela, etc)
The hard counter to cheap helos should be cheap AA. An increase in these low end MANPADS rate of fire and ammo capacity will help them down spammable helicopters faster. Give people the tool for the job, and if they don't use it, the resulting helo spam is their own fault.
This three pronged approach allows for a lighter touch to solve this issue. If any of these changes were implemented individually, they would have to be to such a degree as to negatively affect the game in other areas. By going with this comprehensive solution, the affect is greater than the sum of its parts.
So in closing, this issue is serious enough to warrant a discussion from the community and I encourage the Marshals, Devs, and anyone who cares about this game to weigh in on this important issue.