Anti-tank & Anti-air(combine them into one)

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

    • Anti-tank & Anti-air(combine them into one)

      For my personal experience on this game, Call of War, people are rarely using this two type of weapons.
      WHY??
      Because both the anti-air and anti-tank is not good at fighting infantry and it is too SLOW
      while infantry is the most common unit of this game.

      Also, these two type of weapon have the limited useable way, people often just skip production of these two types of unit to build tank and plane instead, this cause the players usual habitat to spam tanks and planes, that make the units production much narrow.

      So, why not combine the anti-tank and anti-air together, as in the real history, some of the anti-tank is also use for anti air purpose, and i think the speed of that should at least the same as the infantry unit that won't slow down the marching speed of entire battle stacks

    • Siren a,
      I see that you have played in 11 games and have killed a total of 66 'real' people in those games. That is an average of about 6 kills per game...

      When your games are played out longer there is uses for AT and AA. They are used for different purposes and I know many good players use them quite well.
      If you can play your games longer, I think you will see some of the benefits of them.
      "Until there are clearly defined and enforceable rules for hand-to-hand combat, there can't be rules in global war. Kill em all!"

    • In fact, i just play few of them , it think i probably seriously play 4 games,but i probably stay there for at least a week for those 4 games.
      And i forget to mention that i saw people build them but really what is the point, slow as hell , I know someone would say it is for defensive, but that is not that true. If a enemy infantry march in your anti-air & or anti-tank don't even able to escape. Enemy as an offensive can choose what type of weapon to attack that, to avoid the anti-guns' strength and kill them. Stacking may be a good idea, but how able to do that in the early to mid game , you don't even have troop to stack up on that to defend your border. It is pretty much useless. IN the late game, i would say anti-tank useless, a rocket can kill them , and anti -air in somewhat useful in defend but it would slow down your invading stack, so what is the point to let enemy prepare but you really need them no matter your attack or defend.

      Over all, i would say they are pretty bad design compare with other type of weapons

    • Hello fellow player,

      On the recent Antarctica maps that I played I had armies of around 350 troops at the moment of winning the maps around day 30-32. Around 140 of those 350 troops were anti-air, SP anti-air and tank destroyers (I personally prefer the TD over anti-tank on the antarctica map because I can exploit using them in the open fields around the labs).

      And boy you need them at that stage. Sure you can not use anti-air and anti-tank in some form and send infantry and tanks into enemy troops every chance you get. But then it is very likely you will not have enough troops to keep the labs occupied. Doing things the way you mention means you lose troops yourself a lot to, not just the enemy. You can never win an Antarctica or larger map with that way of doing things. The secret to any map is to make your enemy lose more, way more troops than you lose yourself. If you are the country with the bigger economy you can afford to lose more troops than your enemy can.It is still a bad idea to fight in a way where you will lose more troops then your enemy will. Troops you don't lose you don't have to replace. So you can put more resources into your economy and then again build more troops. Losing troops makes you lose maps.

      If you have an army that can handle itself in every situation, no matter what the enemy throws at you. You will need some of all the equipment the game has to offer. A lot of players consider some units to be useless and ''never'' build them. But trust me, try it out for yourself, there is a situation in which every unit can shine and give you an edge. There are no general purpose units in the game that can do everything as long as you have enough of them. One dimensional armies ar the easiest to defeat. Every unit has its counter in the game, so against a one dimensional army you need only one counter.

      Some players refer to divisions that come prepared for every possible threat as ''doomstacks'' but in my opinion that is just a beginners way of complaining about someone that planned ahead better. Besides it does not mean that you will have 100 unit divisions, but proportionally adjusted divisions. If you send 1 infantry somewhere it makes a lot of sense to send with it 1 anti-tank and 1 anti-air. You can also do this at the start of maps.

      Like Ike53 said, you have not even defeated 100 enemy player troops. So with all due respect but you are quite new to the game. You will probably not be saying this after you have managed to win at least 10 maps.

      Get some more experience and perhaps you will re-evaluate your opinion on anti-tank and anti-air.

      Good luck in future games!

      Kind regards,

      Edepedable

    • Siren a wrote:

      In fact, i just play few of them , it think i probably seriously play 4 games,but i probably stay there for at least a week for those 4 games.
      Do you really mean to say you usually quit your games after a week? The initial phase is barely over by then. Maybe you want to have an argument against mech infantry, and that it is impossible to build?

      As others have said, AT and AA are both VERY useful units, if you use them in the role they were intended for.
      When the fake daddies are curtailed, we have failed. When their roller coaster tolerance is obliterated, their education funds are taken by Kazakhstani phishers, and their candy bars distributed between the Botswana youth gangs, we have succeeded.
      - BIG DADDY.