The way that Air and AAA operates needs to be changed

[Claremont Waltz]

Thanks for doing a survey and proving my point re: airborne decks have the best fighters. I figured at this point everyone would know the air tabs by heart but looks like nope.

 

[Archonsod]

You do realize airborne decks get the best fighters right? If you buff fighters, you worsen the problem of air cancer. AA needs to not blow so that every deck can defend itself even if the air complement sucks. Luckily Eugen is finally coming around to that viewpoint so hopefully the cancer endeth soon.

That would only be an issue if fighters were effective when attacking ground targets, which in my experience isn't the case. The problem is they're equally ineffective at engaging air targets - in theory if I know my opponent has air cover available I should be worried about sending in my bombers. In practice unless I'm bombing somewhere close to my opponent's air corridor I'm usually pretty confident I can get in, unload the ordnance and get out without taking more than minor damage at best, in fact most of the time the bomber will be long gone before the enemy fighter gets close enough to fire.
I think the other issue is that making AAA overly effective simply encourages plane trains. After all, if I don't need a fighter to protect my airspace why wouldn't I simply fill my air section with bombers?

 

[Claremont Waltz]

That would only be an issue if fighters were effective when attacking ground targets, which in my experience isn't the case.

WUT?

The problem is they're equally ineffective at engaging air targets - in theory if I know my opponent has air cover available I should be worried about sending in my bombers. In practice unless I'm bombing somewhere close to my opponent's air corridor I'm usually pretty confident I can get in, unload the ordnance and get out without taking more than minor damage at best, in fact most of the time the bomber will be long gone before the enemy fighter gets close enough to fire.

As in WRD, you need a CAP. Circle a fighter behind your lines and you can catch bombers easy. This is less viable when your enemy can spam out half a dozen upvet fighters whenever yours comes near their planes.

I think the other issue is that making AAA overly effective simply encourages plane trains. After all, if I don't need a fighter to protect my airspace why wouldn't I simply fill my air section with bombers?

Its like you're not aware that plane trains are the problem this AA buff was meant to solve.

 

[Archonsod]

As in WRD, you need a CAP. Circle a fighter behind your lines and you can catch bombers easy. This is less viable when your enemy can spam out half a dozen upvet fighters whenever yours comes near their planes.

Yep, the problem there though is you usually need to micro the CAP plane to prevent it deciding to turn over the enemy line. It's another point of imbalance; at the moment effectively defending in the air takes considerably more micro than effectively attacking from the air. It's also a problem with the more effective AA - ideally I'd like to be able to engage the bomber before it attacks the target with a reasonable chance of either driving it off or severely disrupting it's attack. This would usually entail engaging above the enemy line in most cases. I don't mind punishing a player who leaps too early by driving off or killing the fighter, but I'd want to avoid a situation where the frontline can be bombed with impunity because it's too risky to engage the bomber until it's left the opponent's AA envelope.

Its like you're not aware that plane trains are the problem this AA buff was meant to solve.

We've had several AA buffs to solve the problem, and we still have the problem (admittedly I haven't had a chance to play with the latest update yet). As I said, I suspect maybe we're looking at this from the wrong angle by focusing purely on AA. Ultimately the air game is a triad between ground attack, air superiority and air defence, any real balancing effort should really be looking at all three points.

 

[Miskyavine]

I mean airborne decks really can only do 2 things planes and infantry and half the maps arent infantry focused maps so they only have planes then. AA is just stupid now instead of acting like hand crank manual aimed guns only effective in large groups, They now act like fully modern radar guided and aimed spaags from wargame.
AA like the wirbelwind can fire on the move and stun/kill targets going anywere from 500-700 KMH yet tanks can shoot other stationary tanks while moving... Planes ruled the day back then.
Theres a reason German armor only moved at night. Because bombs damage tanks and kill light vehicles and support vehicles. Now plane gets shot auto locked and stunned before anything happens. Planes were the most important weapon of WW2 and now ingame there borderline useless.

Germany has the units in each category
Infantry Best elite infantry, Also best cheap spam infantry, MG-42 is the best support MG even beating the .50 CAL in duels
Tanks King Tiger and Panthers plus aside from the Jumbo they get access to almost all of the allied tanks in one way or another in a few decks.
Anti tank Well 17 Pounders nice but its not a PAK-43... Also JagdPanther.
Anti-Aircraft well 88s and Flakvierlings have no equel
Artillery well IK-18s can artillery your frontlines or behind your frontlines while still being out of range of any allied artillery piece.

Support tab is equel vehicles like the M-7DD and Brummbar

Allies are better in 1 tab and thats planes which are now almost useless...

Offmap should just be removed...

If you havent played the latest patch then dont talk about AA being weak...

 

[Solty]

I agree with most of what you said. But I think the off-map arty should be marked by a flare. The main problem of it is that it is hard to predict and very powerful.