I don't know what history you've been reading, but I totally remember all the harrowing tales of Henschel drivers risking themselves on suicide missions in Normandy to strafe the completely naked British and American vehicle columns.
Hs 129 and P-47 breaks the game
- Thread starter Tankovsky
- Start date
-
We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
The thing about the Hs129 and Ju87 is that they're situationally high risk. This inherently makes balancing them in such a black and white counter environment like Phase A where no ASF or AA means you're basically screwed with an AT plane in the air. The easy solution is simply moving all AT planes to Phase B or later, but that is also drastic and heavy handed.
The AT planes became a lot less potent once they were nerfed, and I actually see tanks surviving a decent amount vs them. I think the biggest gripe I have with them at the moment is how they shoot through cover. Unlike bombers, they actually need a parabolic path to the target and last I checked, you can basically delete a flak unit by attacking it through a hedge. I know why the system is the way it is now, as making the concept of cover applying to planes user-friendly in execution would take a small miracle, but it is kind of annoying.
The AT planes became a lot less potent once they were nerfed, and I actually see tanks surviving a decent amount vs them. I think the biggest gripe I have with them at the moment is how they shoot through cover. Unlike bombers, they actually need a parabolic path to the target and last I checked, you can basically delete a flak unit by attacking it through a hedge. I know why the system is the way it is now, as making the concept of cover applying to planes user-friendly in execution would take a small miracle, but it is kind of annoying.
I fail to see how it's drastic or heavy handed. You shouldn't be able to ground-strafe an enemy column into oblivion in Phase A, because your enemy didn't invest 125+ points into a hard counter that is only really useful vs that gambit. They're not combat recon assets, nor would they be immediately at hand/deployed to support recon operations (as, say, a spotter plane or a fighter might be); you would only send them in after you'd effectively identified a concentration of armour to attack i.e. after recon is concluded, or Phase B
A fair point, though I think we both know that the "Combat Recon" title given to Phase A is optimistic at best.
I think the real solution may be to cut Phase A in two, creating a Phase A and B out of it, while moving the current B and C phases up in alphabetical designation to C and D respectively. Essentially, make the recon Phase actually recon by moving almost all sizable vehicle and infantry assets out of the first two or three minutes. Of course a consideration to make is that Humber and SPW 222 would run amok in this scenario, and to be honest, I don't have an answer to that problem. Making ATGs availible in this phase makes some sense, though I feel more definitely must be done to ensure SPW rape trains don't own the day in that scenario.
I think i'd broadly like to see a de-escalation of phase A but also a shortening of it. I don't think the game needs a new phase- the distinction between phase B and C is too mushy anyway right now, so making phase A 7-8 minutes and taking some of the more dangerous stuff out of it while making phase B 12-13 minutes would probably help, but it'd require a redesign of a lot of divisions.
Also I think fighter strafing is too efficient. It's not as bad as it used to be, but it can really change a game, especially with the way ATGs take extra HE damage from everything.
Also I think fighter strafing is too efficient. It's not as bad as it used to be, but it can really change a game, especially with the way ATGs take extra HE damage from everything.
I don't know why everyone sucks the HS129 off so much, I find the Ju-87G's to be much more reliable tank killers. AA isn't supposed to shoot down planes, it panicks them and ensures you win the air fight. When you have air superiority you can then prevent enemy aircraft from harrassing you. This isn't rocket science, why don't you play around with strategies before coming whining on the forums,for the love of god.
Depends on the HS129 in question. One of them has a higher fire rate, meaning it can take more shots at a given target in one run even with its higher speed. The other has a lot more AP, making penetration more likely. Plus they have a lot more health for only 20/40 points more.
I think the main point is that the HS129 is available in FSJ, which is both played more frequently than the 17th that gets the JU-87G, and can afford to buy the HS129 more easily due to the higher income and generally "less expensive" phase A. Basically, people see it in action more often.
But I would agree, the JU-87G can actually kill more tanks in one mission if left alone by AA, due to better maneuvering and more ammo.
Both are equally cancerous in A.
"Oh, I've managed to defeat the enemy's ground assets, now time to push and taken some territory"
"lolnope, you die now"
"Oh, I've managed to defeat the enemy's ground assets, now time to push and taken some territory"
"lolnope, you die now"
In my opinion the JU-87G (160) is too cheap compared to allied ground attack aircrafts.
I think allied ground attack aircraft are too fast compared to the JU87G
Many, many, many players of this game seem to want it to be about BIG TANK BATTLEZ and get real mad when tunneling the ground war gets them nowhere.
best is when u r fighting allied player who blobs a bunch of shermans in a line right into panther
or fighting lehr player who bumbles his konigs like it is invincible right into crossfire
No, it's what happens if you don't defend against the Ju-87G or HS129, not "air assets" in general. No other air units can reliably kill tanks, and certainly not multiple tanks. You also cannot reasonably expect a player to prosecute a successful early-game attack and establish an effective ADN in Phase A!
There is nothing wrong with defensive airpower; when an opponent has the oppurtunity to negate it, using fighter cover and flak. I have no problems with HS129s/Ju-87s being used, as they were, to blunt set-piece attacks. I do have a problem with their being used in Phase A to completely wipe out armoured formations that cannot be reasonably defended.
Probelm: engmery aircratf.
Solutin: buy p51 mudtanf and shiot it down
Now u hav 50 extre ponts naf a figter
Solutin: buy p51 mudtanf and shiot it down
Now u hav 50 extre ponts naf a figter
only issue (imo) is 3rd falls hs 129 in phase A i dont think they need it.
and u can reasonably defent against it easily with pancerna and 2e DB since they have cheap fighters. after first income tick u can pick up a fighter. for guards armoured its 2 income tick. 3AD is not as well off but has best AA and is a phase C division. ju 87 G is non issue.
U want allied air at you should wait for ptabs and not complain about Germany's natural superiority in weapon system development.......
1. Early game you certainly can do that. Take an early game fighter-bomber, then you get the benefit of both defensive fighter cover and offensive bombing capability. If the enemy has sunk that many points into both a Ju-87G and a fighter early in the game, they will be sorely lacking on the ground and a push should be comparatively trivial, plus his figher can be nullified with a single AA piece to assist your own fighter (which can also be used offensively). 2. Yes, "air assets in general" if all they have are Ju-87's and HS129's, those are fighter food. 3. Maybe you shouldn't just be spamming tanks at the enemy. Are AT guns overpowered because they can destroy an armoured push?
The Reich thanks you for your service, Herr 1776ZOOMSNIPE1911.