AA Capability

[mcaryf1]

I have noticed that the AA improvement seems to be somewhat selective. For example an AA upgrade on a ship will give improved capability against Bomber, Air and Carrier attack whilst that for facilities such as Ports and Cities only operates against Bomber attack. Is there a reason for this or is it too complicated to effectively add to the resident unit's relevant defence bonus?

I have found the AA unit to be quite useful in particular protecting the USSR against too effective German aircraft, however, like other distance defence or attack weapons, I think it should be subject to the possibility of losses when inflicting damage on attacking aircraft. Thus rather than 100% attack evasion I am experimenting with 50% so it does not just build up a huge experience advantage. I should note that I do give it 2 strikes and in some cases a strike range of 2 (in my scenarios bombers have 2 attacks largely to reflect the huge numbers in for example Bomber Command). The AA strike range is mainly to cope with unit overcrowding but in reality the Germans for example tried to deploy their FLAK in extended corridors to create safer routes for supply and unit movement into Normandy.

I should also note in passing that I try to avoid any unit having invulnerable attack capability such as rocket artillery or V weapons mainly because I do not like the impact of experience gain but also rocket artillery would have been subject to counter battery fire and they are only 1 square back because SC does not support stacking. Even V2s suffered losses with rocket malfunctions, explosions on the launch vehicle etc. so some risk of casualties during its attack is appropriate and reflects expended rockets.

Regards

Mike

[Bill101]

Hi Mike

Interesting thoughts on AA, and as always, it's good to read because it provides food for thought.

Thanks!

Bill

[SeaMonkey]

This might be a case where, like defensive artillery fire, adjacent friendly units could benefit from the AA unit's capability. As pointed out since SC does not include stacking or combining of units into a multi -role task group, units adjacent to one another could be mutually supporting with their differing weapon schemes. Or, also could represent a condition where an HQ could support, with its attachment feature, an enhanced combined arms team.

[jon_j_rambo]

AA is juicy. Thins them bombers down. Then again, i never buy AA......i play to win, put the dough in fighters to serve the heavens.

[xwormwood]

AA is juicy. Thins them bombers down. Then again, i never buy AA......i play to win, put the dough in fighters to serve the heavens.

This would probably change once AA would start to fire AFTER the fighters did their duties.

Today it is either fighter OR anti-air gun.

And even if 5 fighters are able to intercept, only one will do it, while the other 4 units stay on the ground, watching the bomber smash their targets....

[jon_j_rambo]

True. If air combat had some flexible schedule options....SC-8 might

[Colin I]

I like AA. with double intercept fighters massed TAC finally has some balance. Jollyguy has AA2 Tigers - they take some stopping......

[jon_j_rambo]

Jollyguy is back? Nice!

[Colin I]

Rambo: Yes, we are involved in something of an epic. JG played the Axis softly then went all out against Russia. Japan ran riot and he has China, Eastern USSR and even some of Alaska - but I stopped him in India. He has had less luck at sea - Japan is still strong but Italian and German navy were trashed. The big flashpoint is Southern Russia into Middle East with Allies attacking from Egypt/Syria, Germans holding Turkey and trying to take on a weakened USSR and very strong Western Allies at same time. The Allies have massive carrier/air support but he has Tigers with good AA. Its going to be a close game.