Plane Resilience

[BlackFoxSamaki]

With how prolific and powerful ground AA is now at this point in the game, I think all planes across the board should have their resilience bumped up a level. At the moment it's incredibly easy to close out an entire third of the game's trifecta of ground, artillery, and air. Either that or all planes should have their costs reduced as currently a very small amount of points in AA can render hundreds of points of air-power unusable making planes incredibly cost-inefficient. On top of this the Allies are heavily reliant on their air-power to offset the advantages Axis have in ground and artillery meaning that Allies cannot properly compete due to their only advantage (air-power) being so easily shut down. Two 88 flaks are currently enough to shut down an entire section of the map to planes, which leaves the Allies with no way to balance off against the advantage Axis has in straight ground battles.

[Committing Sudoku]

AA was already nerfed in the past and is in a pretty good state. A few hundred points of heavy caliber flak are supposed to create a no fly zone in the area, not sure what you are expecting there. If AA is really a problem in your games then start using artillery to weed out AA positions more often.

[BlackFoxSamaki]

Originally posted by Committing Sudoku:

Aircraft prices were recently buffed. AA was already nerfed in the past and is in a pretty good state. A few hundred points of heavy caliber flak are supposed to create a no fly zone in the area, not sure what you are expecting there. If AA is really a problem in your games then start using artillery to weed out AA positions more often.

Part of the problem is that the flak 88 especially is very resilient to arty fire and is able to take a lot of damage due to the large crew of 9 men. Plus even if the gun is reduced to 1 crew member it continues to function as good as it did with a full crew. The only thing the Allies can do is try to get the 88's with arty, but the Axis actually have far better access to heavy on map arty so they can quite often counter-battery while the Allied arty is trying to shoot at tough 88's. Now you would think the other counter to anti-air is ground units but the flak 88 is easily able to out-range and out-perform the majority of Allied armor and has such a high rate of fire that it can even fight well when out-numbered.

One of the huge problems with the range rework is that most tanks are not even able to engage the 88 at all before it destroys them. Ostensibly the reasoning behind the shorter range for many guns is that those guns could not penetrate anything at max range anyway. However, this makes no sense when it comes to light armored vehicles or soft targets like AA guns or infantry as penetration has nothing to do with the effectiveness of HE versus these targets. Thus the range rework has created a scenario where tanks are no longer useful for clearing soft targets, despite the fact that this should be one of the primary roles for tanks to fulfill. Planes cannot counter the 88, tanks cannot counter the 88, infantry cannot counter the 88, and the 88 is very resilient even against artillery fire. Now I know that the 88 is a very powerful weapon and gained its reputation as such for a reason, but once tanks that could fire HE shells became available for the Allies in WW2, the 88 was no longer an impassable obstacle as it currently is in-game.

[Committing Sudoku]

Originally posted by BlackFoxSamaki:

Originally posted by Committing Sudoku:

Aircraft prices were recently buffed. AA was already nerfed in the past and is in a pretty good state. A few hundred points of heavy caliber flak are supposed to create a no fly zone in the area, not sure what you are expecting there. If AA is really a problem in your games then start using artillery to weed out AA positions more often.

Part of the problem is that the flak 88 especially is very resilient to arty fire and is able to take a lot of damage due to the large crew of 9 men. Plus even if the gun is reduced to 1 crew member it continues to function as good as it did with a full crew. The only thing the Allies can do is try to get the 88's with arty, but the Axis actually have far better access to heavy on map arty so they can quite often counter-battery while the Allied arty is trying to shoot at tough 88's. Now you would think the other counter to anti-air is ground units but the flak 88 is easily able to out-range and out-perform the majority of Allied armor and has such a high rate of fire that it can even fight well when out-numbered.

One of the huge problems with the range rework is that most tanks are not even able to engage the 88 at all before it destroys them. Ostensibly the reasoning behind the shorter range for many guns is that those guns could not penetrate anything at max range anyway. However, this makes no sense when it comes to light armored vehicles or soft targets like AA guns or infantry as penetration has nothing to do with the effectiveness of HE versus these targets. Thus the range rework has created a scenario where tanks are no longer useful for clearing soft targets, despite the fact that this should be one of the primary roles for tanks to fulfill. Planes cannot counter the 88, tanks cannot counter the 88, infantry cannot counter the 88, and the 88 is very resilient even against artillery fire. Now I know that the 88 is a very powerful weapon and gained its reputation as such for a reason, but once tanks that could fire HE shells became available for the Allies in WW2, the 88 was no longer an impassable obstacle as it currently is in-game.

So it seems like issue is with the 88 specifically (which recently got nerfed) and not anything related to what you originally posted, and your solution would be to revert range rework and to cut the 88 durability so it can get one shot?

[BlackFoxSamaki]

Originally posted by Committing Sudoku:

Originally posted by BlackFoxSamaki:

Part of the problem is that the flak 88 especially is very resilient to arty fire and is able to take a lot of damage due to the large crew of 9 men. Plus even if the gun is reduced to 1 crew member it continues to function as good as it did with a full crew. The only thing the Allies can do is try to get the 88's with arty, but the Axis actually have far better access to heavy on map arty so they can quite often counter-battery while the Allied arty is trying to shoot at tough 88's. Now you would think the other counter to anti-air is ground units but the flak 88 is easily able to out-range and out-perform the majority of Allied armor and has such a high rate of fire that it can even fight well when out-numbered.

One of the huge problems with the range rework is that most tanks are not even able to engage the 88 at all before it destroys them. Ostensibly the reasoning behind the shorter range for many guns is that those guns could not penetrate anything at max range anyway. However, this makes no sense when it comes to light armored vehicles or soft targets like AA guns or infantry as penetration has nothing to do with the effectiveness of HE versus these targets. Thus the range rework has created a scenario where tanks are no longer useful for clearing soft targets, despite the fact that this should be one of the primary roles for tanks to fulfill. Planes cannot counter the 88, tanks cannot counter the 88, infantry cannot counter the 88, and the 88 is very resilient even against artillery fire. Now I know that the 88 is a very powerful weapon and gained its reputation as such for a reason, but once tanks that could fire HE shells became available for the Allies in WW2, the 88 was no longer an impassable obstacle as it currently is in-game.

So it seems like issue is with the 88 specifically (which recently got nerfed) and not anything related to what you originally posted, and your solution would be to revert range rework and to cut the 88 durability so it can get one shot?

No, my suggestion is to decrease plane price or increase plane resilience. While I would personally prefer the removal of the range rework, changing plane price or resilience would be a far less drastic and less risky change to make.

[Committing Sudoku]

Originally posted by BlackFoxSamaki:

Originally posted by Committing Sudoku:

So it seems like issue is with the 88 specifically (which recently got nerfed) and not anything related to what you originally posted, and your solution would be to revert range rework and to cut the 88 durability so it can get one shot?

No, my suggestion is to decrease plane price or increase plane resilience. While I would personally prefer the removal of the range rework, changing plane price or resilience would be a far less drastic and less risky change to make.

But in the reply you made earlier you said the 88 is too strong against tanks and infantry. How is reducing aircraft cost and buffing resilience going to help that?

[seashell]

i think he meant that he is struggling to kill 88 with tanks and infantry since he is not trying to use planes to counter aa.

But I played against him as koruck yesterday and he had fun spamming planes because I only had 20mm and 37mm, I thought 88mm was useless because it rarely kills planes. A dead plane doesn't come back. But the 20mm and 37mm surely didn't lock the sky.

[BlackFoxSamaki]

Originally posted by seashell:

i think he meant that he is struggling to kill 88 with tanks and infantry since he is not trying to use planes to counter aa.

But I played against him as koruck yesterday and he had fun spamming planes because I only had 20mm and 37mm, I thought 88mm was useless because it rarely kills planes. A dead plane doesn't come back. But the 20mm and 37mm surely didn't lock the sky.

The planes were from one of my Allies, he had a number of the PTAB yak-9's and every single one of those was shot down. I actually spent most of my time in that game telling my ally "That's what you get for putting 140 points into air-power!" whenever those Yaks got sniped out of the sky. My deck actually had zero cards of planes as I find them to be rather pointless now with how prevalent and powerful AA is. The main deck I was fighting that game was Herman Goering and that player started the game with two 88 flak guns, so I think not bringing any planes at all worked fairly well. The issue was even with 4 mortars I was unable to kill any of them and eventually HG's mortar halftracks killed my mortars. It wasn't until much later in the game that my team got rid of the 88's and I suspect it was simply due to most of my team having juggernaut income.
P.S. Your team had korruck and still kicked our butts for the majority of the game. I feel like that should say something about how ineffective Soviet decks are.

This is the deck I was using that game.
DCVQJdixCExEx8VpUx8VpieSkZgI046gQ5uFQJBfpAfwVpSgRfpQJBHBAI046AR446QEg45A5AABQ5AABg5AABg2IABQ2EABAwYACgTsABKUQABQzI45AzI45Gik45Wik46gzI45GE0PpABoAAA=

[ÁS - EN/PT]

Clearly a 10v10 player lol

[Magnus Aurelius, Bright Lord]

So yeah...the Yak 9 are getting shot down cause they are extremely fragile.

The 88s are resilient enough, they are a 10 crew gun after all. What they are not resilient of, is radioed mortar fire. That will kill them.
____

That deck of yours is horrible. Why do you even bring a commander if you have no officers or tank leaders ?

[BlackFoxSamaki]

Originally posted by Hobotango:

So yeah...the Yak 9 are getting shot down cause they are extremely fragile.

The 88s are resilient enough, they are a 10 crew gun after all. What they are not resilient of, is radioed mortar fire. That will kill them.
____

That deck of yours is horrible. Why do you even bring a commander if you have no officers or tank leaders ?

The Commander is used to vet up the T-34/85 groups that come in B and C. He also is used to vet up the ZiS-3's and other troops that need help. Being a tank commander he is relatively tough and is mobile enough to reach troops that need veterancy support. The game we played was a 3v3 and this deck was built with such in mind.

[seashell]

then just buy a t-34 leader to follow your tank blob instead of getting the actual commander to do that
You just need to connect them and the leader does the same thing.
Meanwhile the commander can sit with your aa and make them more lethal.

[BlackFoxSamaki]

Originally posted by seashell:

then just buy a t-34 leader to follow your tank blob instead of getting the actual commander to do that
You just need to connect them and the leader does the same thing.
Meanwhile the commander can sit with your aa and make them more lethal.

Certainly not a bad idea, but I just prefer to save slots and points just taking the one commander. My micro is not so good so I try to focus more on macro with mass assaults and focusing large numbers on specific points to achieve breakthroughs. No leaders means I have more card slots and points for mass and the one tank command can buff whichever units need it. I certainly won't have the wide command net that others have but the idea is that I can overwhelm a specific area with the one commander bringing units in that area up in veterancy.

[Magnus Aurelius, Bright Lord]

But once he dies...

[HOODRICH_bojangles]

Originally posted by BlackFoxSamaki:

Originally posted by seashell:

i think he meant that he is struggling to kill 88 with tanks and infantry since he is not trying to use planes to counter aa.

But I played against him as koruck yesterday and he had fun spamming planes because I only had 20mm and 37mm, I thought 88mm was useless because it rarely kills planes. A dead plane doesn't come back. But the 20mm and 37mm surely didn't lock the sky.

The planes were from one of my Allies, he had a number of the PTAB yak-9's and every single one of those was shot down. I actually spent most of my time in that game telling my ally "That's what you get for putting 140 points into air-power!" whenever those Yaks got sniped out of the sky. My deck actually had zero cards of planes as I find them to be rather pointless now with how prevalent and powerful AA is. The main deck I was fighting that game was Herman Goering and that player started the game with two 88 flak guns, so I think not bringing any planes at all worked fairly well. The issue was even with 4 mortars I was unable to kill any of them and eventually HG's mortar halftracks killed my mortars. It wasn't until much later in the game that my team got rid of the 88's and I suspect it was simply due to most of my team having juggernaut income.
P.S. Your team had korruck and still kicked our butts for the majority of the game. I feel like that should say something about how ineffective Soviet decks are.

This is the deck I was using that game.
DCVQJdixCExEx8VpUx8VpieSkZgI046gQ5uFQJBfpAfwVpSgRfpQJBHBAI046AR446QEg45A5AABQ5AABg5AABg2IABQ2EABAwYACgTsABKUQABQzI45AzI45Gik45Wik46gzI45GE0PpABoAAA=

Mate this is by far one of the worst decks I’ve ever seen

This is not a particularly amazing division in the first place but first of all you’re using those meme 4rpm mortars which is like a weird hybrids between a howitzer and a mortar - they are not great

None of your units have any vet. Idk there are so many problems in this deck that it’s hard to take this thread seriously

[Elettricità sovieta]

Originally posted by HOODRICH_bojangles:

Originally posted by BlackFoxSamaki:

The planes were from one of my Allies, he had a number of the PTAB yak-9's and every single one of those was shot down. I actually spent most of my time in that game telling my ally "That's what you get for putting 140 points into air-power!" whenever those Yaks got sniped out of the sky. My deck actually had zero cards of planes as I find them to be rather pointless now with how prevalent and powerful AA is. The main deck I was fighting that game was Herman Goering and that player started the game with two 88 flak guns, so I think not bringing any planes at all worked fairly well. The issue was even with 4 mortars I was unable to kill any of them and eventually HG's mortar halftracks killed my mortars. It wasn't until much later in the game that my team got rid of the 88's and I suspect it was simply due to most of my team having juggernaut income.
P.S. Your team had korruck and still kicked our butts for the majority of the game. I feel like that should say something about how ineffective Soviet decks are.

This is the deck I was using that game.
DCVQJdixCExEx8VpUx8VpieSkZgI046gQ5uFQJBfpAfwVpSgRfpQJBHBAI046AR446QEg45A5AABQ5AABg5AABg2IABQ2EABAwYACgTsABKUQABQzI45AzI45Gik45Wik46gzI45GE0PpABoAAA=

Mate this is by far one of the worst decks I’ve ever seen

This is not a particularly amazing division in the first place but first of all you’re using those meme 4rpm mortars which is like a weird hybrids between a howitzer and a mortar - they are not great

None of your units have any vet. Idk there are so many problems in this deck that it’s hard to take this thread seriously

I actually find 160mm mortars quite good. Three of them (triple vetted and used togheter, with radio cover) can delete almost everything in a second. It doesn't matter too much the rateo, as their grenade is so strong that usually they can kill their target with the first strike (indeed, if you micro them well, you should always stop their attack after the first or the second shot, to save munitions). Moreover, their reload time is slow, but the aiming time is not that bad, and they cannot be hit by regoular counterbattery, that it's always a good thing.