Anti-Aircraft and Missiles

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

    • Anti-Aircraft and Missiles

      Hello : Today i had a war.

      The enemy was active, and tried to defend himself. He choosed to follow a tech path that i do not approve, even as his enemy. He focused MBT + Strike + Mech Infantry + Helos (As he was allied with my two other ennemis that got inactive, i suppose that they decided upon dividing "who will research what"). He had moderate anti-aircraft capacity, which is why i brought an aircraft carrier filled with hélos to pass those anti-aircraft defenses. I didn't need them.



      At 10:55 PM, I began a landing and use a stealth bomber to approach his main group of SAM next to city, and wait to be in patrol ~30 seconds over it to launch several missiles at point-blank. I don't think a missile was shot on the 3. After those SAM were shot, i used regular strike fighter to launch missiles in every direction and every radar signature i could saw, thanks to my AWACS that was flying near the coast, at the max distance so he could see the UK mainland. The first missiles (over ~25-30) were shot down. After that, they all falled on my enemy, killing 30 000 human-worth of troops in the first 15 minutes. Marines finished their landing some hours later, and began to advance in a ... basically, empty country.





      After 12 hours of war, this was the situation. And after his very weak airplanes got shot down trying to bombard marines protected by navy, it was more than simple. Thanks to the notification, each time a enemy unit entered the conquered territory, it took a missile in less than 10 minutes. The casualties raised to 51K. Virtually, no marines ever encountered closely any british. And he tried. He mobilised, he launched counter attacks. My only casualties are due to stealth aircraft taking some anti-air damage when uncovering themselves (missile launch)

      This leaves me pretty terrified. Of course, bad choices have been made, surprise effect, and the fact we are in late game, so the damage output is very high... But damn ! A commited player until Day 40 is brutally exterminated in less than the time one need to do any normal daily activity. Going to the groceries, coming back with your late game country 90% devastated. I don't even know how to play, as it's my first real game, but still... a man has a brain and curiosity.

      I don't say that missiles and planes are OP. They are contextually OP, as every CoN tech choice if our opponent doesn't counter it. But it seems that it's this "context" that allows for the most brutal and unforgiving destruction of other players. From now on i WILL use extensively TDS and SAM, and rush anti-stealth, because while i have a correct activity, i still fancy my sleep, and calm.


      Following all this, i have a question, and maybe a proposal.

      First, is there anything on the road to diversify what counters the players have at their disposal to defend against air+missile synergy ? I was amazed by how easily anti-aircraft defenses were annihilated by point-blank missile launching, or by the raw force of saturation (one missile down, ten to shoot, goodbye)

      If no, i would suggest a little change of anti-aircraft mechanism. I already saw from my navy that CoN considered as separate "regular damages" (if i may say) and anti-aircraft damages, so let's take this independant anti-aircraft value. On Supremacy , there is a mechanism that (with a few exception) make a unit gain "another round of fire" one minute after exterminating a group (or a lone unit). On CoN, from the little i saw, my first missile was shot down, the other continued (and the anti-aircraft was waiting one hour) ---> Why not re-use this mechanic in order to lightly buff SAM/TDS against such style of attacks ? For example, if a missile is shot down (as it count as one entity), the TDS regains a round 10 or 15 minutes later, making "saturation" much harder (but not impossible).

      For the rest, if any of you has experimented ways to handle air+missile synergy in an original way that allows for variations of presence, i'm eager to learn. Cheers !
      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.
    • I have exactly the opposite experience. I sent 12 full level CB's against a fleet that included 5 frigates. My CBS were all destroyed with not one getting through. Frigates are way OP vs CM's.
      ----------------------

      Jacopo: Why not just kill them? I'll do it! I'll run up to Paris - bam, bam, bam, bam. I'm back before week's end. We spend the treasure. How is this a bad plan?

      Remember that no one ever won a war by dying for his country. He won it by making the other poor dumb idiot die for his country.
    • @Opulon: Great read and good food for thought. Let us look into this SUP mechanic cause an altered version of it would indeed be very handy - albeit more for ground based systems - fleet is a different story as War-Spite rightfully points out.

      @Frigate issue: Pls remember we just nerfed the fleet AA capabilities in last weeks update. The issue is that you gotta be able to protect the incredibly valuable and rather scarce fleet assets. Also fleet stacks AA much more often than land forces.
      "Going to war without France is like going hunting without an accordion." Gen. Norman Schwarzkopf
    • Yes. Now that you point it out, it makes sense. I do not have any experience of naval warfare actually (maybe in another game ^^). But for fleet, i think, the problem is different, right ? Apart from the frigate, no naval unit has a "projected defense", and in theory, the problem is more "point-blank" defense that can go to great values because of stacks.

      My Own little navy (on the screen) has a stacked missile defense of 16.7 (*0.85 due to penalties of course). Does this mean that every time a CM hits them, before i recieve any damage, the CM is destroyed ?

      If so, and considering you want to make naval warfare much more dangerous by missile exhange (which is relevant. It's not the line battle era anymore), there are two possibilities ( that go with a revision of the SUP mechanic)
      that jump on my mind

      _ A new tech line of missile (or maybe a sub-tech line unlocked by CM lvl 2), anti-navire, with much more HP, and speed, but only damaging ships. I'm sure your 3D graphist would love the Exocet.

      _ Going full rampage, reducing drastically defense missile for every naval unit (disabling it for most), and putting it into "attack missile defense". Usually navies prefer to rely to their "bubble" to check and destroy incoming missiles, which is also why recent breakthrough in propulsion are so much focused into low-signature super-sonic missiles ---> Usually, when a missile is closing on a ship, anti-missile guns and such defenses are more a "last chance try" in panic.
      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.
    • George Kenneth wrote:

      i feel that a loaded fleet of frigates with air upgrades should be able to overcome cruise missile

      Germanico wrote:

      @Opulon: Great read and good food for thought. Let us look into this SUP mechanic cause an altered version of it would indeed be very handy - albeit more for ground based systems - fleet is a different story as War-Spite rightfully points out.

      @Frigate issue: Pls remember we just nerfed the fleet AA capabilities in last weeks update. The issue is that you gotta be able to protect the incredibly valuable and rather scarce fleet assets. Also fleet stacks AA much more often than land forces.
      The issue with frigates is that you should be able to overwhelm them and prior to the update you couldn't. I was attacking a stack that had a combined anti missile value of 42 with 88 hit points worth of missiles. Not one got through and they were all fired at the same time. The only way to have defeated that fleet, was with a massed frigate cruiser sub fleet of about 5 each. There is no logical reason that an air arm of 5 top end heavy bombers, two strike fighters, and a swarm of support air sup fighters should not have been able even damage one ship in a 3 dd, 5 ff, 1 cv stack with NO air support. I understand protecting expensive fleet units, but at some point they have to be vulnerable.

      Incidentally that same game, my 2 theatre defense, 3 mobile sam units were unable to defend themselves against an air attack by 3 strike fighters and 2 air sup.
      ----------------------

      Jacopo: Why not just kill them? I'll do it! I'll run up to Paris - bam, bam, bam, bam. I'm back before week's end. We spend the treasure. How is this a bad plan?

      Remember that no one ever won a war by dying for his country. He won it by making the other poor dumb idiot die for his country.
    • Some people seem to say that it doesn't work, and that their missiles get wrekt 100% of the time. There something i don't understand in this. Maybe we are lucky because of context, and that the general case is that TD are overpowered. Don't know, didn't play enough.

      However, i don't think that Saturation is a problem. Too Easy saturation is a problem :p.
      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.
    • Interesting, I liked the comments. Something that did not fit very well is the covertte. It seems like a waste of resources. Or am I wrong ?. I've never used the anti-aircraft system yet. I believe that heavily invested in the anti-aircraft system is a big mistake, the infataria easily destroys the air defense system. I've never had problems until today. I wonder if I'm wrong.
    • whenever i play this game i get my airforce and anti air anti missile tech done first then i get b-52 bombers then awacs i like using ground based systems to launch my missiles i use ballistic missiles to defend my cities and cruise missile launchers to protect my coast lines for my land army i get a mix of everything but i invest alot in combat recon and main battle tanks also i noticed that the rocket artillery unit is really worth the time to mass produce 5 or 6 of em can rip a city apart in a few turns
      icbm launch: to be continued meme 8|