Comrade Trapp Posted December 27, 2003 Share Posted December 27, 2003 I know this question has been asked before but I'm going to ask it again. In your opinion, is the "build nothing but airfleets" strategy an acceptable tactic? To me, playing a game with one side using that strategy is no fun, it gets boring real quick. I mean, if there was some risk to it then thats one thing, but wheres the risk in doing nothing but building airfleets? How do you defend against mass airfleets in Russia? It's kinda disheartning when the Axis brush aside an entrenched HQ supported AT +1 army using nothing but airpower. If you want to use massive airpower, then at least using something like Rambo's RACK strategy where theres risk involved. Personally, I'm tired of seeing the "build nothing but airfleets" tactic, especially when its used during a tourny game. Its a ****y way to win. Does anyone else feel the same way or is it just me. Comrade Trapp Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Iron Ranger Posted December 27, 2003 Share Posted December 27, 2003 It's not a 'fun' way to play but it gets good results. I play several different ways with Germany and have avoided the all air race when I can but its is the best move you can make. Example: Defending coastline/spoting Norway - Northern Germany It will take 2-4 corps to do this job (cheap at 500 MPPs). But later in the game UK will use these troops as target pratice and move transports around to cause problems. Why not put in 1-2 corps 1-2 air and a bomber or two plus an HQ (EXPENSIVE 2000MPPs) but you can hit back and build exp by bombing London's port every turn. Lots of advantages, if you can afford it. I wouldn't say its gamey (all air) but its not very fun to play or play against. Use it in compitision games not fun ones, HR against? Also note that all air games are about luck, the player is looking for luck (tech) to provide him with an advantage (and concedes quickly if they don't), its not skill as any idiot can put 5-8 chits in the 'Planes' slots and hope to get more advances then the other guy. It takes skill to win with most other stratigy's (Sealion, Blockade, Russia First, Spainish gambit, Med First, All Med ect...) [ December 27, 2003, 10:05 AM: Message edited by: Iron Ranger ] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Comrade Trapp Posted December 27, 2003 Author Share Posted December 27, 2003 I have no problem with that, fighting for air superiority (Battle of Britain for your example) is one thing. But its when someone uses nothing but airfleets to achieve a breakthroughs that pisses me off. Comrade Trapp [ December 26, 2003, 11:57 PM: Message edited by: Comrade Trapp ] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Iron Ranger Posted December 27, 2003 Share Posted December 27, 2003 but that is the result of a pure air plan. All tech into AA/LR/Jets. Defensively you would do my post, offensively you would do your post - all air for breakouts/kill HQs (the desired end result of an all air plan). Play the 42 (41?) senerio - they are close to balanced (as must as a nonbid 39) and the air tech is low with alot of combat at the start so players don't have time for the air race. Its more of a 'historical' situation with armor playing a huge role. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jon_j_rambo Posted December 27, 2003 Share Posted December 27, 2003 Trapp, welcome to the real world. It's all about the air. It's fun to do different strategies, but nobody will do it in a serious game. Here's some frustration, I played a conservative, balanced UK...was doing okay...but only have Jets +1 in 1943!!! The Germans had +4, I was meat, nothing you can do about it. The Top players 80% of the time do Cookie Cutter with Jets, that's it. I've been playing "Call of Duty", great game, plenty of action. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shaka of Carthage Posted December 27, 2003 Share Posted December 27, 2003 As an acceptable tactic for playing the game, yes. But its nothing more than exploiting the major weakness of SC, which game after game, eventually becomes predictable and boring. Once you understand and master the superiority of air units, there's not much left to do. Hence, there is no strategy other than air. But it becomes a different game, when you limit the air. Anyone who has played with air limits knows what I'm talking about. If you haven't, you should try it. It will bring back the joy of playing SC that massive numbers of air units take away. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Terif Posted December 27, 2003 Share Posted December 27, 2003 Here my 2 cents: A pure air strategy is a strategy, but not a good one. Airfleets are important and you need a certain amount of airfleets to achieve breakthroughs and for spotting purposes. Buy not enough air and you will loose, but if you buy too much you will loose against a good opponent too. If your opponent is not so experienced, you can even win with a pure air strategy, but usually you have no chance with it. Airfleets vs ground units is not very mpp efficient. They cost twice as much (with Jets) as an army, do only half the damage ( with experience they improve a bit, but an army is still much better) and are expensive to reinforce. Only if you have plenty of mpps (mistake of your opponent ) and you dont know where to invest them, you can buy more airfleets than necessary . To kill full strength units only with airfleets is not a good idea, except in some rare cases. When my opponent attacks a full strength unit only with air, I am nearly always happy, cause I know he cant use them for better purposes this turn any more . In all my games I have never seen a successful pure air strategy. The best strategy is a good mix of different troops. If you produce too one sided and your opponent recognices this he can use it against you and you will loose. The only nation that has to use a nearly pure air strategy, is UK. They have no chance at the ground, they can use only air to support the invasion later in the game and to battle against Axis between France and Barbarossa. But I have never seen Axis with much more than 10 airfleets, usually they have something around 6-8, they simply cant afford more air, without neglecting their ground forces. And you need enough ground units to win the war. Only at the end, when the war is decided, airfleets increase to 20+ when either Allies are close to Berlin/Rom or axis forces are hunting the last allied survivors...but until then they usually stay at something around 10 vs 10. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Terif Posted December 27, 2003 Share Posted December 27, 2003 Comrade Trapp: How do you defend against mass airfleets in Russia? If all the axis air is in Russia, then go into defensive mode there and attack/invade in the west - there you should have air superiority in this case. In Russia: Stay away with your Hqs from the front. They have a range of 5 hexes. Use it and move them 5 hexes back, so the air cant reach them. Alternatively you can entrench them in cities or forests. Best are mountains, where they are nearly undestructable only with air. BTW: HQ support is only needed for your heavy counterattack forces behind the front - not for your corps defenders -, so you can even move them 7-10 hexes away from the front if necessary...Dont forget, you are the defender at this front, you need HQs only if you want to attack. In the open fields, close to the front, there you are right: then HQs can be hunted down easily by enemy air. But thats the fault of the russian commander, you cant blame the enemy air for this mistake . Use cheap corps to block and delay the enemy. airfleets loose in average 0.33 strength points (=~7-10 mpp depending on the Jet Lv) per attack, even with 4 bars experience !, with less experience they loose much more...so they cant kill your corps for free . And while axis air is in Russia, your western allied air/ground units should be busy killing axis units at the other front... For more details read my ´old´ help thread and the links mentioned there: http://www.battlefront.com/cgi-bin/bbs/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=18;t=002198 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xwormwood Posted December 27, 2003 Share Posted December 27, 2003 Originally posted by Comrade Trapp: In your opinion, is the "build nothing but airfleets" strategy an acceptable tactic? Its a ****y way to win. Does anyone else feel the same way or is it just me. Comrade Trapp 100% agree All these guy who always buy lots of air play with a different motivation than me. I want to have fun, i would rather buy a fancy tank or a little sub fleet instead of air no. 7,8 or 9. So i loose very often, but hey, i don't care. I am not the kind of guy who plays a game a thousend times just to discover every little gameplay weakness. Honestly: i don't like guys who do it. Never did. So i wish every ""build nothing but airfleets"-player lots of fun to win every game in a "****ty way". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Friendly Fire Posted December 29, 2003 Share Posted December 29, 2003 I find the strategy outlined by Terif works well in the USSR. I haven't seen a lot of evidence in the games I have played to suggest that the air made all the difference. After all, unless the UK can stop (or slow) the cookie cutter the game is usually decided even if the USSR gets lots of MPPS. I usually look for air limits in my games, not because I am afraid of the strategy, but because it is BORING! The Fall Bleu scenario is excellent, give it a try! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alexanderthe_OK Posted December 30, 2003 Share Posted December 30, 2003 I like to play games where the Air Fleets are limited also. At home we play max 10 air for Germany, US/UK, and 4 for Italy and Russia. Id like to know if this is a fair restriction, or should it be restricted even further Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shaka of Carthage Posted December 30, 2003 Share Posted December 30, 2003 Alexanderthe_OK Your ratios (ie Germany:UK/US and Italy:Russia) are roughly correct. I prefer lower restrictions, and play using these: Germany.....4 Italy.......2 UK..........2 US..........2 Russia......3* * Any Siberian Air is a bonus and allows Russia to exceed its limit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts