Research priorities

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

    • booombooom wrote:

      williamdice wrote:

      ...
      01.) Mot Infantry
      02.) ASF
      03.) MAA
      04.) Destro
      05.) Mot Infantry L2
      06.) Navy Commander
      07.) SAM
      08.) Land Radar
      09.) MRL
      10.) TDS

      I might change 3. 4. and 6. according to the situation but this is the basic for me for the pub game.
      boom,

      How often would you guess that you need to use MAA (Mobile Anti-Air?) (and later need to use SAMs) to counter air threats instead of using your ASFs?

      If you use them a lot, would you say it's because they don't require as much of your time to manage them (ASF have to be sent on missions and/or left (unsupervised) on patrol)?

      Do they make a lot of kills for you (or do they scare away opponents (opponents who have decent Air Forces) after an initial engagement)?

      KFG

    • ASF Do not defend you when you are Off line and even I have see some players with no life and they tend to fall dead on their key board. But I need to sleep for 6 hrs at least.

      1.) Use of MAA early for safe guard for proper sleep (6 hrs = 1day Off line time in 4x game, enough time to wipe out someone in early game. some one like Iraq, Syria, Israel, Belarus who don't even have mountain or jungle province to slow down the enemy, MAA have decent defense against early Mot Infantry Rush)
      2.) USE of MAA + SAM coz if your enemy is using SAM + SF at multiple position, then I can't defend every place with just ASF at the same time.
      3.) ASF dose not cover me against Cruise Missile.
      4.) Elite choppers ( MAA can make sure my main offence stack did not die without some proper defense, you want to kill me with a surprise? nope I will take something from you too all the way to the grave with me.)
      5.) I do tend to defend the air base which I am using near the enemy with my own AA. Coz if they caught me on ground when Refuel then my game is over.
      6.) SAM need some day to build coz of L3 Army base, and someone with a bit gold can finish you with early SF with gold. MAA can make sure they are giving proper donation to CON and our lovely game so they can spend the money on develop the game.
      7.) Sent 1 infantry + 1 MAA as bait in the enemy land, wait with main SAM + Rader and ASF wing in the back fog of war, let the enemy SF group jump on it. And then hunt them down.

      for now this are the reason most likely. :)
      Have fun, nothing personal.

      The post was edited 4 times, last by booombooom ().

    • boom,

      Thanks for the info and for the useful descriptions of your tactics. However, I am still curious about a couple of things - You've been playing longer than I have - Can I trouble your for some guesstimate answers for these two parts of my questions?

      How often would you guess that you need to use MAA (Mobile Anti-Air?) (and later need to use SAMs) to counter air threats instead of using your ASFs?

      . . .

      Do they make a lot of kills for you (or do they scare away opponents (opponents who have decent Air Forces) after an initial engagement)?


      KFG

    • the answer is simple: you use both asf and sams
      mobile aa works decently as early armor and deterrence against early aircraft but simply lacks the dmg/range to compete with sams in killing fixed wings
      so if you have to choose between either of the two then sams are the way to go
      big difference between using asf and sams is
      Asf are fast as fuck compared to sams which makes them pretty useful for offensive/reactive missions where using dams to intercept simply is not a solution but the downside is that they trade dmg with other aircraft; add in that air to air rng tends to go crazy in either direction then fighting strikefighters with asf can be quite the pain
      iirc at max lvl it’s something like 80:20 dmg for asf vs sf?
      the high speed of asf also makes them great for intercepting lone infantry trying to accomplish something
      sams on the other side are far more passive but also more dmg efficient; AA is especially deadly against enemies that are just patrolling mid-air

      in terms of kills: frankly i do not remember anyone getting scared by AA; ppl tend to send even more aircraft in the hopes to overwhelm it

      asf are simply to versatile not to make while sams only really become a necessity if you focus on ground units, just the protection against cms on its own is worth it imo
      I am The Baseline for opinions

    • Teburu wrote:

      the answer is simple: you use both asf and sams.


      ...

      asf are simply to versatile not to make while sams only really become a necessity if you focus on ground units, just the protection against cms on its own is worth it imo
      X/ Apparently I'm going to have to learn to write clearer questions :S

      T - Thank you for the info and the advice - However,

      For this question, "How often would you guess that you need to use MAA (Mobile Anti-Air?) (and later need to use SAMs) to counter air threats instead of using your ASFs?" I'm looking for an answer along the lines of "One opponent per game, on average", or "Five to ten times per game-day, after day 5 or 6", or "Rarely, but when they do engage an enemy the result is very important", or ...

      Similarly, for the "How many kills ..." question, the sort of information I'm looking for in an answer might be something like, "Almost none until day X, but then in half of my games they typically shoot down 10-20 CMs. In the other half of my games, my opponents didn't use CMs).

      I know (reasonably well) how the weapons work.

      However, like many other players, I don't have a large number of games under my belt, and that makes it harder to decide which insurance policies to buy (types of defensive units to build). For example, SAMs that don't encounter any targets in a game are only good (in that game) for giving the builder peace-of-mind, and the confidence to use their other units more freely.

      Also, in my VERY FEW, PUBLIC games, the game was all-over-except-for-the-crying long before advanced tech levels were widely available (and deployed). How often that occurs, effects the ROI for some of the defensive weapons we're describing.

      KFG

    • Q "How often would you guess that you need to use MAA (Mobile Anti-Air?) (and later need to use SAMs) to counter air threats instead of using your ASFs?"

      A: Almost in every game when I am playing with Random players in my coalition. And when I am playing with my discord group or alliance members we use different build order.

      Q: "How many kills ..."

      A: I never count it properly coz I never knew I had to count it for you. If I remember I will count it next time. :rolleyes:
      Have fun, nothing personal.

    • booombooom wrote:

      Q "How often would you guess that you need to use MAA (Mobile Anti-Air?) (and later need to use SAMs) to counter air threats instead of using your ASFs?"

      A: Almost in every game when I am playing with Random players in my coalition. And when I am playing with my discord group or alliance members we use different build order.

      Q: "How many kills ..."

      A: I never count it properly coz I never knew I had to count it for you. If I remember I will count it next time. :rolleyes:
      Apparently I'm going to have to learn to write clearer questions. "Guesstimate" answers involve guessing, not counting.

      Joking aside - Thanks for the info.

      I'm surprised that you've had to fend off air attacks "almost in every game". That's the exact opposite of my experiences (so far).

      Except for one, my opponents (across *PUBLIC* WW3, BG USA, and FP maps) (2 or 3 games per map) have never come at me with air units (the initial ASF doesn't count) or missiles, and the air units of that one opponent were dispatched in 24-48 hours (without them doing much damage) by my micro-managed ASFs.

      Live and learn I guess.

      Thanks again,
      KFG

    • KFGauss wrote:

      Teburu wrote:

      the answer is simple: you use both asf and sams.


      ...

      asf are simply to versatile not to make while sams only really become a necessity if you focus on ground units, just the protection against cms on its own is worth it imo
      X/ Apparently I'm going to have to learn to write clearer questions :S
      T - Thank you for the info and the advice - However,

      For this question, "How often would you guess that you need to use MAA (Mobile Anti-Air?) (and later need to use SAMs) to counter air threats instead of using your ASFs?" I'm looking for an answer along the lines of "One opponent per game, on average", or "Five to ten times per game-day, after day 5 or 6", or "Rarely, but when they do engage an enemy the result is very important", or ...

      Similarly, for the "How many kills ..." question, the sort of information I'm looking for in an answer might be something like, "Almost none until day X, but then in half of my games they typically shoot down 10-20 CMs. In the other half of my games, my opponents didn't use CMs).

      I know (reasonably well) how the weapons work.

      However, like many other players, I don't have a large number of games under my belt, and that makes it harder to decide which insurance policies to buy (types of defensive units to build). For example, SAMs that don't encounter any targets in a game are only good (in that game) for giving the builder peace-of-mind, and the confidence to use their other units more freely.

      Also, in my VERY FEW, PUBLIC games, the game was all-over-except-for-the-crying long before advanced tech levels were widely available (and deployed). How often that occurs, effects the ROI for some of the defensive weapons we're describing.

      KFG
      If we are not taking into account missiles, that are the clear "dead angle" of the MAA, i guess that with 4 MAA per group, you have enough point defense to deter the overwhelming majority of pure air stacks, that will unavoidably lose at economical ratio against you.

      This is even more true if you play with outposts, and if the rest of your stack involves things like mechanized infantry.

      For example, i do love helicopters a lot, but if i have both attack helicopters and gunships, a stack with, say, 4 MAA, and 6 Mech infantries, that is rushing on the ground, I will not attempt any attack on it except if i'm desperate.

      Sending a full stack of attack helicopters will not yield good results against the "decent against choppers" mech infantry , sending a full stack of gunship to deal with the mech infantry will bounce off the hard HP of the MAA, and mixed stack will just result in mixed and disappointing results.

      Strike Fighters may be the best to "forcefully kill", but i do know that i lose way more than i kill.


      As i say to my rookies "I have 3 times more troops than you, so i kill you" isn't a strategy, but if we are speaking of countries with similar economical ability, then yes, it works superbly "in this very specific scenario".


      The problem is ... "missiles".

      SAM + ASF , the weak spot is choppers, because the efficiency to kill them is tied to your ability to be reactive and analyse properly the situation. It's easy to understand why so many of us love it.
      SAM + MAA, the weak spot is "with groups that are made 75% of units that can't fight, National Guard will beat you" :D
      ASF alone, the weak spot is pretty much everything, once a bait has been forced.

      Depending on how your game goes, you'll pick your prefered weakness.

      If you have a complete and entire confidence your opponent will not send missiles on your face, then creating yourself a plate armor (philosophy) made entirely of MAA can be attempted. The obvious advantages i can see is that you liberate yourself a lot of electronics for navy or airforce.
      Running an online alliance is pretty much like running a small company, except you need to find other way than money to keep your employees productive. May they play or work, they are humans.

    • O - Thanks for the info - Your answer and the other answers have been great educational material about tactics.

      But - Apparently I'm going to have to learn to write clearer questions.

      Those tactics become useful/valuable (in public games) *only* if your opponents are attacking with the units you guys listed.

      Even though my games-joined sample size is small, comcompared to your and booomboom's total games-joined (7 vs (36 + 238) listed in the public rankings), it's still a little surprising/unusual that I've encountered essentially zero opponents that made me wish I had anti-air or anti-missile units, when booomboom says that he encounters them in almost every game.

      I'm not arguing with you guys - I am simply noticing something odd about the mix of opponents I've faced so far - I'm definitely planning to continue keeping an eye on this in my next few games.

      KFG

    • KFGauss wrote:

      O - Thanks for the info - Your answer and the other answers have been great educational material about tactics.

      But - Apparently I'm going to have to learn to write clearer questions.

      Those tactics become useful/valuable (in public games) *only* if your opponents are attacking with the units you guys listed.

      Even though my games-joined sample size is small, comcompared to your and booomboom's total games-joined (7 vs (36 + 238) listed in the public rankings), it's still a little surprising/unusual that I've encountered essentially zero opponents that made me wish I had anti-air or anti-missile units, when booomboom says that he encounters them in almost every game.

      I'm not arguing with you guys - I am simply noticing something odd about the mix of opponents I've faced so far - I'm definitely planning to continue keeping an eye on this in my next few games.

      KFG
      well I did not mean that. I just don't want to encounter them in every game. That's why It's a general Defensive build order. And I am never asking to follow it or like it.
      And Btw I mostly play WW3 Apocalypse 4x Speed.
      Have fun, nothing personal.

    • 1. Infantry - get the bulk of your military up to strength and speed
      2. Corvette - protect your coastal cities quickly and helps to bombard enemy units on the coast
      3. Gunships - fuckin lethal and decimate any infantry early in the game. Cheap and quick to make. Only drawback is having to build airfields to attack further afield.
      4. Strike fighter - damage to AFV/tanks as enemies start to develop
      5. Attack sub - unstoppable for defence of your coastline and offensive role later in the game

    • Tom_Cruise wrote:

      1. Infantry - get the bulk of your military up to strength and speed
      2. Corvette - protect your coastal cities quickly and helps to bombard enemy units on the coast
      3. Gunships - fuckin lethal and decimate any infantry early in the game. Cheap and quick to make. Only drawback is having to build airfields to attack further afield.
      4. Strike fighter - damage to AFV/tanks as enemies start to develop
      5. Attack sub - unstoppable for defence of your coastline and offensive role later in the game

      If you already went for gunships, why don't you also got for attack choppers and mix them up with gunships? More effective than a pure stack of SF

      Also why do you put attack subs into coastal water? The get their stats halved there.

    • Kalrakh wrote:

      Tom_Cruise wrote:

      1. Infantry - get the bulk of your military up to strength and speed
      2. Corvette - protect your coastal cities quickly and helps to bombard enemy units on the coast
      3. Gunships - fuckin lethal and decimate any infantry early in the game. Cheap and quick to make. Only drawback is having to build airfields to attack further afield.
      4. Strike fighter - damage to AFV/tanks as enemies start to develop
      5. Attack sub - unstoppable for defence of your coastline and offensive role later in the game
      If you already went for gunships, why don't you also got for attack choppers and mix them up with gunships? More effective than a pure stack of SF

      Also why do you put attack subs into coastal water? The get their stats halved there.
      Early on in the game gunships are a cheap and lethal build - attack helos require additional resources and airbase 2 which is hard to aquire so early. But once I build an airbase 2 I just go for strike fighters as they offer more versatility with range and attack options (cities). In order to save resources (notably raw materials for research) I try not to diversify too much.

      Also my subs are not parked in coastal waters but further out to sniff out any potential attack. The only instance I had my sub in coastal waters was when my corvette was away softening infantry units before my transport units arrived.

      What helo stack combination would you recommend?

    • Tom_Cruise wrote:

      Kalrakh wrote:

      Tom_Cruise wrote:

      1. Infantry - get the bulk of your military up to strength and speed
      2. Corvette - protect your coastal cities quickly and helps to bombard enemy units on the coast
      3. Gunships - fuckin lethal and decimate any infantry early in the game. Cheap and quick to make. Only drawback is having to build airfields to attack further afield.
      4. Strike fighter - damage to AFV/tanks as enemies start to develop
      5. Attack sub - unstoppable for defence of your coastline and offensive role later in the game
      If you already went for gunships, why don't you also got for attack choppers and mix them up with gunships? More effective than a pure stack of SF
      Also why do you put attack subs into coastal water? The get their stats halved there.
      Early on in the game gunships are a cheap and lethal build - attack helos require additional resources and airbase 2 which is hard to aquire so early. But once I build an airbase 2 I just go for strike fighters as they offer more versatility with range and attack options (cities). In order to save resources (notably raw materials for research) I try not to diversify too much.
      Also my subs are not parked in coastal waters but further out to sniff out any potential attack. The only instance I had my sub in coastal waters was when my corvette was away softening infantry units before my transport units arrived.

      What helo stack combination would you recommend?
      The standard constallation is: 1 Ace, 2 Gunships, 2 Attack, or even better 1 Ace, 1 Gunship and 3 Elite Attack

      The good thing about choppers you can mix them as you need them, you could go 3 gunship and 1 attack if you mainly face infantry or 1 gunship and 3 attack if you mainly face armored. Though gunship always take the blunt of the damage, so better have some spares to replace them.

      Air base 2 is not really that hard to get, so you could as well just got strikers from the start. Though if you go strikers, you should mix in some naval variants to make them less vulnerable to AA :)

    • Unfortunately MAA are pretty much broken. Mostly because of the range but also the damage.
      They are good only as early deterrent if your enemy is rushing air units. But you still has to build ASF to combine.
      And ofc they are good against helicopters.

      But that tactic with 4 MAA in stack I don't understand?
      It's a lot of resources, it's slow and small range.
      With that stack you can kinda protect only one strategic point/city. What about your other cities?
      And I say kinda because even with 4 MAA in stack there's good chance they will only point defend meaning enemy with 2 SF stacks (4+1 ASF) will probably not loose a single plain and will heal quickly to attack again. And your MAA will not heal so quickly.

      As many of you already pointed out, in public games there are players who are massively building SF + some ASF. It can be countered ofc but not with MAA.

      My opinion, MAA is only good as a supplement to yor AA, not a unit you could rely on.

      I would love to see high altitude air units (a split between bombers and fighters) and more damage against low altitude air units for MAA.

    • Tom_Cruise wrote:

      1. Infantry - get the bulk of your military up to strength and speed
      2. Corvette - protect your coastal cities quickly and helps to bombard enemy units on the coast
      3. Gunships - fuckin lethal and decimate any infantry early in the game. Cheap and quick to make. Only drawback is having to build airfields to attack further afield.
      4. Strike fighter - damage to AFV/tanks as enemies start to develop
      5. Attack sub - unstoppable for defence of your coastline and offensive role later in the game
      Ugh ... corvette. Never build corvettes unless you have a reasonable expectation of invasion by sea very earlier. Otherwise build Frigates and get the free SAM onboard thrown in with coastal defense
      *** The Creator of Zombie Farming ***
      The KING of CoN News!!!
      The "Get off my lawn!" cranky CoN Forums Poster - not affiliated with Dorado in any way


      "Death comes to us all. Shall I deal you in?" - DoD

    • KFGauss wrote:

      O - Thanks for the info - Your answer and the other answers have been great educational material about tactics.

      But - Apparently I'm going to have to learn to write clearer questions.

      Those tactics become useful/valuable (in public games) *only* if your opponents are attacking with the units you guys listed.

      Even though my games-joined sample size is small, comcompared to your and booomboom's total games-joined (7 vs (36 + 238) listed in the public rankings), it's still a little surprising/unusual that I've encountered essentially zero opponents that made me wish I had anti-air or anti-missile units, when booomboom says that he encounters them in almost every game.

      I'm not arguing with you guys - I am simply noticing something odd about the mix of opponents I've faced so far - I'm definitely planning to continue keeping an eye on this in my next few games.

      KFG
      Well, it's a bit like Gold spammers. Some encounter one per game to the point they rage quit, some others argue they don't meet more than one every 10 games.

      Especially with small sample, as you say, it's perfectly possible to "not" encounter anything like that before a few games. However, the few times you will indeed encounter something like that, you'll gradually say yourself that you need to play to account for this specific threat, because the other players... you'll beat them anyway without breaking a sweat.

      Another thing that can be impactful is if you played mostly Cold War / Flashpoint as your first maps. They are "even worse" than the WW3 that are already bad.
      Running an online alliance is pretty much like running a small company, except you need to find other way than money to keep your employees productive. May they play or work, they are humans.

    • Zemunelo wrote:

      Unfortunately MAA are pretty much broken. Mostly because of the range but also the damage.
      They are good only as early deterrent if your enemy is rushing air units. But you still has to build ASF to combine.
      And ofc they are good against helicopters.

      But that tactic with 4 MAA in stack I don't understand?
      It's a lot of resources, it's slow and small range.
      With that stack you can kinda protect only one strategic point/city. What about your other cities?
      And I say kinda because even with 4 MAA in stack there's good chance they will only point defend meaning enemy with 2 SF stacks (4+1 ASF) will probably not loose a single plain and will heal quickly to attack again. And your MAA will not heal so quickly.

      As many of you already pointed out, in public games there are players who are massively building SF + some ASF. It can be countered ofc but not with MAA.

      My opinion, MAA is only good as a supplement to yor AA, not a unit you could rely on.

      I would love to see high altitude air units (a split between bombers and fighters) and more damage against low altitude air units for MAA.
      I agree. I wouldn't advise any way to invest in such a defense. But the question of KFGauss was pretty precise in that regard. It's the "can a 7.62 round pierce a Level III ballistic armor at 2 miles range ?" kind of question.


      If he asked me if MAA was able to kill a ICBM, i would have technically answered that "yes", if he was willing to put 10 MAA on top of 10 another in network defense.

      Would i advise to do so ? I don't think so :D
      Running an online alliance is pretty much like running a small company, except you need to find other way than money to keep your employees productive. May they play or work, they are humans.