Pinned Air Battle

This site uses cookies. By continuing to browse this site, you are agreeing to our Cookie Policy.

  • K.Rokossovski wrote:

    Sadly, the designers know about this serious flaw in game mechanics but have chosen not to adress it.
    It is not a flaw.
    It is called battle...

    In such a case, commitment will make the difference ... or the fact that you have to go to work, school, shopping and your opponent not ;)
    Then again, maybe he has to do something, while you can remain at te controls and you get the upper hand.

    Calling this a flaw is incorrect IMHO; in fact it adds spice to the battle and requires your personal involvement instead of just auto-play.

    The post was edited 2 times, last by _Pontus_ ().

  • _Pontus_ wrote:

    K.Rokossovski wrote:

    Sadly, the designers know about this serious flaw in game mechanics but have chosen not to adress it.
    It is not a flaw.It is called battle...

    In such a case, commitment will make the difference ... or the fact that you have to go to work, school, shopping and your opponent not ;)
    Then again, maybe he has to do something, while you can remain at te controls and you get the upper hand.

    Calling this a flaw is incorrect IMHO; in fact it adds spice to the battle and requires your personal involvement instead of just auto-play.
    Do you REALLY not consider it a game flaw that the optimum way to conduct air battle requires you and your opponent each to be online every 15 minutes, and when you both do, zero losses are inflicted?
    When the enemy is driven back, we have failed. When he is cut off, encircled and dispersed, we have succeeded. - Aleksandr Suvorov.
  • MadMike69 wrote:

    You no longer need to be online every 15 mins to avoid making attacks as bombers have had an update and thier defence and attack stat is now the same, so there is no advantage to this.
    Sigh... this was discussed at GREAT length... there is an advantage as soon as both sides have more than one full (5-5) stack.
    When the enemy is driven back, we have failed. When he is cut off, encircled and dispersed, we have succeeded. - Aleksandr Suvorov.
  • K.Rokossovski wrote:

    Do you REALLY not consider it a game flaw that the optimum way to conduct air battle requires you and your opponent each to be online every 15 minutes, and when you both do, zero losses are inflicted?
    If put in that way, it indeed sounds awful, but ...

    Say there are 2 opponents fighting for control of the airspace, with equal skills and equal air fleets, should the outcome then be dictated by the game mechanics and 'x-factor' alone, or should the human-player element be decisive?

    Or put differently: would an almost predictable outcome based on game mechanics be the preferred way?

    IMHO stamina, concentration, will power, effort etc making the difference seems more attractive to me than a purely computed outcome.
  • K.Rokossovski wrote:

    You're absolutely right; BUT, losses should be incurred by both side, based on relative skill.
    I fully agree, if it is the case that it comes to a shoot out; but that is not always so.

    Imagine, when 2 Red Barons would be fighting eachother in the sky, neither of them will make a mistake (assuming there is no infantryman on the ground with a machine gun ... is who brought down the Red Baron in RL, apparently) and the air battle would end without victory, simply because they would run out of fuel.

    One Red Baron could only loose out to the other, if they would both be in the possession of mobile phones and, unfortunately for the one, one would receive a phonecall from his wife, demanding he pass by the butcher on his way home, after his daily battle, because they have guests that evening.

    Since it is his wife calling, he cannot refuse to answer. This may already break his concentration and/or timing and cause a mistake which loses him the battle.
    The battle thus is decided by a human factor (in this case the factor 'wife').

    Alternatively, skilled as he is, he may still manage that incident without losing the battle. But then comes the pressure! And the irritation!
    How on earth can she ask that, while he is in the middle of a dog fight, requiring all his attention?
    And how much time does he have left to win this ... or will he have to pull out of the fight to get to the butcher on time?
    This may again break his concentration and/or timing and cause a mistake which loses him the battle.
    The battle thus is again decided by a human factor (in this case the factor 'wife').

    But maybe not...

    So, he survives that one too. Nevertheless, the clock is ticking on mercilessly towards the butcher's closing time and he can't sit there at the controls forever!
    He must leave the battle. There is no choice... After all, skipping one victory in the air is beter than having to face an unwinnable battle at home...
    Thus he skillfully dodges his nemesys, dives into cloud cover and off he goes, just in time to make it to the butcher before closing.

    Having vacated the airspace, the enemy now has won time, moves in with ground units with sufficient AA to make an impact and the territory and airspace is basically lost.
    The battle thus is finally decided by a human factor (in this case the factor 'wife').

    There are 2 important elements in this:
    1. Battles are not always won on skill, but sometimes on the opponents inability to react properly for other reasons than lack of skill.
    2. Make sure your wife (or girlfriend/mother/'whoever-can-demand-you-to-go-shopping') doesn't have your mobile number... (I know, that is a tough one since a decade or 2)

    I therefore humbly maintain my argument that it is not a flaw in the game, but the reality of battle, which is not always decided by skills or kills, but by factors such as i.e. luck, time, stamina, will power or wife.


    (PS: This might even be the truth behind the demise of the Red Baron... Did the Red Baron receive a pigeon in mid-air from his wife, asking him to pass by the butcher on the way home? If he did, maybe that is why he didn't pay sufficient attention to where he was flying, or he took a shortcut, and thus flew too low over an infantryman's machine gun? Did anybody check for a pigeon in the downed plane?)

    The post was edited 5 times, last by _Pontus_ ().

  • Air superiority is most important in this game. I do not like idea about SBDE because it makes no sense to me. If you split your force and patrol same area they have better chance and do not disturb each other. First time I saw player who has patrol with 5 fighters and 5 bombers I attacked it with 9 fighters, he had no looses but I had lost 6or 7 fighters, That was time when I realized that he has 4 groups of 5 fighters and 5 bombers. I sad, hey it is very god way to hide your troops, so I used this trick a lot. Later I heard about sbde and stuff. I still feel that group of 20 fighters and 20 tac bombers should do better than you split them, but it is how this game works so never mind. Also I feel rockets are over powered, I played against one golden user who had no army at all, he just stopped all atacks with making houses, one or two militias and than kill all force with rockets. We beat him because he was multi accounting and he became inactive after some time.
    "Then, when you run out of ammunition and the enemy continues to advance - to the bayonet, when they break your knife - to your hands, when they break both of your hands - to your teeth, when you get the last tooth knocked out, as long as you move, as long you are there - attack! When they mortally wound you, see to it that you fall in their way, so they have to go around you, jump over you or move you - bother them even in death!" speech of lieutenant Tasic before battle of Cer 1914.
  • patriota75 wrote:

    Air superiority is most important in this game.
    The cost of achieving and maintaining air superiority is now much higher than before.
    Especially Tactical Bombers are not what they used to be since the update of Aug. 28.

    Alternatively, defence against massive air fleets (whether split or heaped) with other means than 'an even bigger & badder air-force', is very well possible and offers many additional advantages. However, for this to be effective, one still needs to master the prinicples of SBDEat least as well as one's opponent in the sky.


    patriota75 wrote:

    I do not like idea about SBDE because it makes no sense to me.
    However, disregarding SBDE, is like disregarding gravity.

    SBDE is easy enough. It doesn't have to be 100% exactly right what you do. I do not calculate exactly like before, but use approximate number that feel right from experience.

    Once you master SBDE, I can assure you that there is hardly a bigger joy in-game, than to see an opponent attack my ground force with his über-powerful air fleet (talking about a total of 60-70 TBs with matching numbers of fighters, split according to the laws of SBDE), with which he took country after country, leaving enemies in chaos, disarray and panic.

    The joy comes ofc not from the 1st attack round in patrol modus, but from the reaction and disbelief, when he strikes a 2nd time to disproof what he saw the 1st time (and can't be possible?!).
    And it is then that I see him turn around and flee, having lost 25% to 33% of the bomber fleet, trailing smoke from his dragging tails.
    My losses after 2 strikes were laughable.

    There is an answer to every threat in this game. Just afford the time and resources to counter any specific threat with the appropriate counter measures.

    But whether you still believe in air-superiority as the tool to mend all mistakes or whether you fight on the ground or with mixed weaponry: SBDE matters! I believe even more so in air battles than elsewhere.
  • What is the most affective air unit?
    Criticism is the key to being proud but empathy is the key to being successful.
    Two roads diverged in a wood, and I took the one less traveled by, And that has made all the difference. Robert Frost
    Ask not what your countrycan do for you, ask what you can do for your country. John F Kennedy
    Time is beyond our control, and the clock keeps ticking regardless of how we lead our lives. Priority management is the answer to maximizing the time we have. John C. Maxwell
  • _Pontus_ wrote:

    However, disregarding SBDE, is like disregarding gravity.
    If you split your stack of 15 fighters you will get 3 stacks of 5 fighters in patrol over the same area. How they do not disturb each other? They are on the same place. Same amount of planes on same place. In real life if there was sent 15 interceptors they will be ordered the same and attack in groups.
    Question is, why is left to player to do it manually and not done in program.
    Why to border to split them?
    Lets look at some fight between man for example. You have two groups of man, let`s say every group has 15 man. Who would win? 15 man holding together or 3 groups of 5 attacking the first group? I would rather be between first 15 man.
    "Then, when you run out of ammunition and the enemy continues to advance - to the bayonet, when they break your knife - to your hands, when they break both of your hands - to your teeth, when you get the last tooth knocked out, as long as you move, as long you are there - attack! When they mortally wound you, see to it that you fall in their way, so they have to go around you, jump over you or move you - bother them even in death!" speech of lieutenant Tasic before battle of Cer 1914.
  • I think that there is a problem with plane operations, and we are simply trying to figure out ways to go around it - because only Bytro can really solve it.

    The major flaw, which is the ability to "nudge" the patrolling planes avoiding attack (and avoiding the SBDE penalty), could have been easily solved by Bytro - if only the patrol timer was continuously ticking, instead of been reset on each nudge. If that is done, then all the rest are extremely minor.
  • We also are basing a lot on the assumed results, instead of actual results of repeated testing. The math does not always tell the whole story, and due to the variances of combat it takes more than one battle to prove or disprove a trend.

    There are always going to be combinations of units that are superior to others. I don't see that this needs to be "fixed" or that it is an "exploit" or anything of the kind myself. This is more of a rock/paper/scissors type thing where you need to judge how best to take on the enemy. It isn't like you can take on a huge doom stack of ground units with the same type of tactics, you have to adapt to the enemy. I see planes the same way.
    War is a game that is played with a smile. If you can't smile, grin. If you can't grin keep out of the way til you can. - Winston Churchill



    VorlonFCW
    Main Administrator
    EN Support Team | Bytro Labs Gmbh

    >>> Click Here to submit a bug report or support ticket <<<
  • atreas1 wrote:

    I think that there is a problem with plane operations, and we are simply trying to figure out ways to go around it - because only Bytro can really solve it.

    The major flaw, which is the ability to "nudge" the patrolling planes avoiding attack (and avoiding the SBDE penalty), could have been easily solved by Bytro - if only the patrol timer was continuously ticking, instead of been reset on each nudge. If that is done, then all the rest are extremely minor.
    maybe because - if we let the programme run everything - you are no longer needed as a player?

    playing this game well against other good players, requires attention, knowledge and commitment.
    in such games the factors you point out as a 'flaw' make all the difference!

    i see no need to play this game if everything is predetermined by statistics and my own actions have no influence on the outcome of battle....