Patrol as attack command

    • Patrol as attack command

      New

      When using planes for offensive purpose against a human opponent, in 99,5% of the situations you shouldn't use the attack button, but send them on "patrol" instead.
      This makes air mechanics weird, unrealistic, hard to understand for beginners (for example they have to learn that all enemy units within the patrol circle sum up and defend as one stack) and not satisfying for experienced players. Always same-same: Build as many 6-fighters+6-bombers stacks as you can, then send them on patrol where the enemy has weak air defense; switch off your brain.

      So please implement the following changes:
      * Remove the 15min patrol timer - planes on patrol don't attack.
      * Since that would make them too vulnerable during refueling (in particular against rockets), increase HP of refueling planes to 15 or 20 or to their original value as if they were in the air(*).
      * Since without patrol as attack command air would have one tactical option less, give +5 HP to both tactical and strategical bombers (i.e. tacs 25 and strats 35) and increase manpower cost of AA guns from 750 to 1000. So air vs. ground would stay balanced.
      * Decrease tactical and naval bomber attack damage against air by 20%.
      * Increase tactical and naval bomber defense damage against air by 20%.
      * Decrease strategical bomber attack damage against air by 50%.
      * Increase strategical bomber defense damage against air by 50%.
      * Increase fighter attack damage against air by 20%.
      * Decrease fighter defense damage against air by 20%.
      * If can be implemented without big difficulties, also let stacks containing bombers no longer have the free shot on air units attacking a target within their patrol circle. Leave that free shot only to pure fighter stacks and rename the "Patrol" command for stacks containing bombers to "Recon". With this last change, patrol would be what it really was - a defense manoeuvre for fighters. And it would open interesting tactical options because then it sometimes makes sense to separate fighters from bombers.

      These are many changes, but (at least except for the last one) easy ones. And each of them would improve both realism and gameplay.
      Some major results would be:
      * You should only attack with planes that are based on an airfield either out of range for enemy bombers (otherwise they'd bomb you while refueling) or secured with sufficient AA (your planes can't fire while refueling, but the AA will, so losses would be high on both sides).
      * Attacking targets underneath hostile patroling fighters practically never would be an option any more. You first have to shoot down the fighters. In other words: Gain air superiority, only then you can use your bombers everywhere.
      All of that would be realistic, intuitive and tactically/strategically interesting.
    • New

      Just a few questions:

      1. Why should you increase the HP of planes while refueling? You should learn to put enough AA in the airbase, plus some spare patrolling planes over it - as it happened in reality.
      2. Why should the tac bombers and the strats have ANY attack value against interceptors? Were they ever used to attack fighter planes? They should only have a defense value - quite high for the strats, extremely low for the tacs. There was a good reason why Stukas were dying like flies over England (and they were withdrawn from the battle).

      But I agree: the air battle is quite badly implemented as it is now. A radical change is needed, particularly in the way patrol is working.