Cool down for turning Radar based AA on and off

[Rule Britannia]

SEAD missiles being unable to find a target and instantly being one or two shot by AA systems suck, for example, systems such as the BUK is cause for reason by gameplay balance alone let alone reality for a cool down to be introduced for turning radar on and off.

[Ahriman]

Originally posted by Rule Britannia:

such as you mention the Igla, pull enough of them and space them out well and the enemy can't fly without being shot down and that isn't radar based either.

The funny bit here is that you won't be able to prevent the strike, which is kinda where the problem starts. You'll have to down quite the aircraft to come up as the winner in such a trade where your 5+ iglas manage to down a jet that just detonated your tank(s).

You definitely have a rather poor perception of ranges, because no IR AA in the game can fire at a plane until it is practically above them, meaning that as long as you do the very, very, very, very, very, very basic micro with them in terms of approach angle, and don't get greedy with a deep dive, you can bomb the frontline with impunity as long as the enemy Radar AA is suppressed, or dead.

But in short, if Radar was given a cooldown, then that would require a rather notable buff in Pact ASFs across the board. A rather notable part of the Pact design lies in their use of Radar AA over ASF, while part of the design of Nato is the correct use of SEAD in combination with their ground strikers to counter it. I understand you want to ensure Nato has no real weakness in air combat, but to make it so that anyone that can do so much as beat the Medium AI will be able to block enemy Radar AA entirely with two SEAD planes is not exactly what I would consider 'fair and good' game design.

It makes life even harder for those Divisions on both sides that lack proper ASFs, primarily the reservist divisions, that are purposefully designed to usually have access to decent Radar AA due to being the guys usually defending them in the rear lines, but very poor ASF selection. Put in the ability to block all Radar AA, you'd have to invest double the amount of points per aircraft in IR to halt what will end up happening as a result.

[maroder11223]

okay there are only 4 divs out of 30 that have jammer unit so while jammer bonus is good it cant be done by most divs in game now even if you are taking them its not without cost i dont have dlc so 2 base divs that have both of them only get 6 air slots so in your case it leaves divs with only 4 free air slots and even then they have to pay premium for all of them.
and problem is if player is even bit of competent you are not doing more then one attack without losses and even first attack should end up badly for you

[LastTurkInPontus]

Originally posted by Rule Britannia:

Originally posted by LastTurkInPontus:

Sead isn't just for destruction of enemy radar but also for forcing it off. Send out sead with your bomb rush and be sure you bring both of them so enemy always will be forced keep it off. If you want you can bring EW plane too so you will turn their radar AA accuracy to nothing. Also some sead planes have 60 ecm so enemy radar AA should be very lucky to down your plane. All AA pieces (Except our lord Krug the Krugger) needs 2 hits. Lets say enemy AA has 65 base accuracy , after 60 ecm it will be 26 percent. Double hitting with it is around 6.8 percent. You are not in double lightning territory but you are in stupidly lucky territory

Equally a bad take, because this involves three things, 1. ignoring that other AA pieces exist and will be shooting, again, the issue of AA and Spam as the current AA meta. 2. The issue of EW, not every deck has EW, which raises the accuracy of AA to about 50%, and then the highest SEAD EW is the F-16 which has 40%, and that raises it to about 60% on a hit; so you're just purposefully misrepresenting the reality. 3. Don't start with 'lets say' the numbers exist, go look them up, your argument is invalid because you created a fake reality for which it works as the only reality, which is not grounded IN REALITY.

A cool down for turning radar on and off again will fix the issue as stated, because yes, SEAD is meant to turn off radar, but the fact that they can turn it back on instantly makes that a moot point and argues to my point of needed a cooldown.

I say "let's say" because %60 percent is actualy in high end of accuracy so I used it. Secondly you are right about EW planes not being available to all decks. 3 if we are to talk about AA spam than I must say I take part in it while playing 10v10 games and I see your point and also see point of non radar AA. Still there is reality of you just need to get on maximum range of your weapone , going well near enemy is suicide.

[thugnightly]

Honestly 1 sead plane has the ability to absolutely wreck your radar air defence.

Like if you have to turn the AA off the SEAD mission was a success. Even if you turn your radar on and off the chances of you actually hitting the SEAD plane are rare if the players knows what they're doing.

The mechanics right now are fine.

Broken arrow shouldn't always be the point of reference since WARNO airplay is vastly different.

[Rule Britannia]

Originally posted by thugnightly:

Honestly 1 sead plane has the ability to absolutely wreck your radar air defence.

Like if you have to turn the AA off the SEAD mission was a success. Even if you turn your radar on and off the chances of you actually hitting the SEAD plane are rare if the players knows what they're doing.

The mechanics right now are fine.

Broken arrow shouldn't always be the point of reference since WARNO airplay is vastly different.

No one mentioned Broken Arrow.

[Bean]

Originally posted by DasaKamov:

Originally posted by Bean:

I think the persons main complaint is the fact that SEAD aircraft are pretty much free kills after they turn around, and they will at some point be facing away from the target.

And, again, that argument only has weight if the SEAD is the only aircraft in all of the sky.

Please read the rest of my reply, SEAD is weak to Fighters, and PACT have got some of the best fighters now. Pair this with their air defence and its really hard to get through without losing both SEAD and the other aircraft you send in.

I send in SEAD with my support planes, but I regularly have at least 1 get shot down and 1 barely flying.

These "Jamming" aircraft are in a few decks and are really just sitting ducks for fighters because of their need to loiter to be effective.

The current state of Air for NATO is a dilemma, "Should I spend >200 points for the ability to potentially(Not even guaranteed to) destroy a T-80 but lose my aircraft?"

PACT doesn't have this dilemma, for them its "I see the enemy has a M1A1, I will send my AT plane that has better range than my western counterpart and then I will stay above friendly AA so that their fighters can't get me without dying"

That roughly 400m difference means PACT don't have to expose themselves for as long, and can fire off 2 without getting shot down. I know this because I do this myself.

NATO's air defence cannot 1 shot most, if not all, PACT AT planes, meaning they have a higher chance of making it out alive too.

As for what thugnightly said, it is a problem.

Yes the mechanics are fine, but the balance is not.

NATO's ability to use air support is severely hampered thanks to the MiG-31's massively long range missiles combined with both long, short, and non radar AA.

Something needs to either be changed or buffed so that NATO can actually use its aircraft effectively rather than wasting a ton of points for minimal effect.

[Name]

Originally posted by Bean:

Originally posted by DasaKamov:

And, again, that argument only has weight if the SEAD is the only aircraft in all of the sky.

Please read the rest of my reply, SEAD is weak to Fighters, and PACT have got some of the best fighters now. Pair this with their air defence and its really hard to get through without losing both SEAD and the other aircraft you send in.

I send in SEAD with my support planes, but I regularly have at least 1 get shot down and 1 barely flying.

These "Jamming" aircraft are in a few decks and are really just sitting ducks for fighters because of their need to loiter to be effective.

The current state of Air for NATO is a dilemma, "Should I spend >200 points for the ability to potentially(Not even guaranteed to) destroy a T-80 but lose my aircraft?"

PACT doesn't have this dilemma, for them its "I see the enemy has a M1A1, I will send my AT plane that has better range than my western counterpart and then I will stay above friendly AA so that their fighters can't get me without dying"

That roughly 400m difference means PACT don't have to expose themselves for as long, and can fire off 2 without getting shot down. I know this because I do this myself.

NATO's air defence cannot 1 shot most, if not all, PACT AT planes, meaning they have a higher chance of making it out alive too.

As for what thugnightly said, it is a problem.

Yes the mechanics are fine, but the balance is not.

NATO's ability to use air support is severely hampered thanks to the MiG-31's massively long range missiles combined with both long, short, and non radar AA.

Something needs to either be changed or buffed so that NATO can actually use its aircraft effectively rather than wasting a ton of points for minimal effect.

Pact has more infrared AA and the Tunguska which can disable its radar and keep gattling cannon firing - unlike the gepard. With sead as pact, you’re almost guaranteed a kill. With sead as NATO, you’ll likely kill an OSA or something on an unsuspecting player, but be shot down by the Tunguska or iglas.

ECM planes do not counter infrared aa systems. So flying these in as nato into high infrared aa areas is just asking for an expensive point trade loss

[Scanny]

My 2 cents: having a turn-on timer would be good for Radar AA.

But for this I would argue that it should be mor lethal than it is currently, either in damage or chance to hit.

We would basically be emphasising more focus on the EW gameplay, which personally I am for.

I would also say that we should be able to really set the formation of aircraft call-ins better to account for this so I can ensure my SEAD plane is in a certian position within the package.


Edit: I honestly think the airgame needs a proper rethink (including helicopter movement). The aircraft mechanics have barely changed since WG:AirlandBattle, the engine can handle differing altitudes for aircraft, Eugene should really think about adding more depth to how aircraft can function.

[Bean]

Originally posted by Scanny:

Edit: I honestly think the airgame needs a proper rethink (including helicopter movement). The aircraft mechanics have barely changed since WG:AirlandBattle, the engine can handle differing altitudes for aircraft, Eugene should really think about adding more depth to how aircraft can function.

I agree