Air Superiority Fighters - Strike Fighters - Assault - Jamming/EAW

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

    • Air Superiority Fighters - Strike Fighters - Assault - Jamming/EAW

      Would like to create a new class of aircraft - Assault or Air Ground Support this class would be a one plane per doctrine class, much like the stealth fighters, but if wanted could be leveled like the Naval aircraft.

      Western - A-10 Thunderbolt aka Warthog aka Hog

      Eastern - Su-25 Grach (Frogfoot)

      European - Panavia Tornado IDS

      The Air Ground Support would be similar to Helicopters but would be more resilent to enemy aircraft. Would serve as a combo of the gunship and attack choppers perhaps leaning more towards the attack side (better against armor). To keep it balanced set the range around 600, more than helicopters but less than the other aircraft.

      Also would like to see the Western Doctrine aircraft taken on their roles more appropriately. Drop the F-111 Ardvark as this is more of a long range bomber, reassign the F-4 to be more appropriately used outside the U.S.A. and bring in the Harrier (as the first naval Strike fighter)
      Air Superiority
      Tier 1 – F-5 Tiger
      Tier 2 – F-16A/B Falcon
      Tier 3 – F-16C/D Fighting Falcon

      Strike Fighter
      Tier 1 – F-100 Super Sabre
      Tier 2 – F-15 Eagle
      Tier 3 – F-15E Strike Eagle (Up the Air to Air on this as this plane is designed for air to air combat)

      Naval Air Superiority
      Tier 1 – F-8 Crusader
      Tier 2 – F-14C/D Tomcat
      Tier 3 – F-14E/F Super Tomcat


      Naval Strike Fighter
      Tier 1 – F-4 Phantom II
      Tier 2 – F/A-18C/D Hornet
      Tier 3 – F/A-18E/F Super Hornet

      Stealth Strike Fighter
      F-35C Lightning II – add carrier based landing as special for Western Doctrine
      CON Gamertag: ewinner
    • ewinner wrote:

      Forgot to include the Jamming planes would target another team's anti-air, specialized.
      Western - E/A-18 Growler
      European - ?
      Eastern - ?

      Would be a nice addition for those who prefer to win via air dominance.
      :D you can already win publics by just spamming SF; there is no need to make airunits stronger by taking AA out of the equation
      I am The Baseline for opinions
    • I understand experienced players have a lot of ( already proven) tactics in order to defeat air defenses.

      However, not being one of then, I got to say, using Special Forces for this ( and some other) task looks extremly unrealistic to me.

      A dedicated "WIld Weasel"/SEAD class would be a nice adition: Perhaps a one-tier only class as Stealth fighters are.

      Expensive, not easy to develop, highly specialized planes. Wich could be made not-so effective against other ground targets apart from radars/ air defenses, BUT capable of disturbing enemy detection systems ( "jamming") just as their real-world counterparts do.

      Possible such designs could be:

      Western - E/A-18 Growler
      European - Panavia Tornado ECR
      Eastern - Su-24 MR



      About Air-to-Ground or ( just a bit more picky) "Close Air Support" planes could be, most definitly, A-10 and Su-25, and this are two designs many players would LOVE to see in action, including myself.

      One way to simulate this could be by giving them short-range ( as in real life) and perhaps shorter reaction times, ex. 10 minutes instead of 15...etc. All of this in order to simulate the mission they perform, wich is basically to act as airborne artillery for troops on the ground.

      This could also be made into a one-tier only aircraft category, as their use would be extremely limited ( basically, they suck on air-to-air, big time, and they are not good for any attack role outside their very specific spectrum)

      Tornado IDS, however, would not be on this category: She is an interdiction bomber/strike fighter, just as F-111/F-15E and Su-24/Su-34 are.

      European choice for such a plane could very well be something like the SEPECAT Jaguar. Ideal choice would be -of course- the Harrier, as that's what Harriers were supposed to provide: CAS. And that they did, both in the Falklands/Malvinas as in Desert Storm, and in many other scenarios.

      Jaguar could replace Harrier as Level 1 Strike fighter for the Europeans then :D Also, while both A-10 and Su-25 can operate from very poorly prepared, close-to-the-front airtrips, nobody could beat the Harrier in reaction times, as they can operate literally out of anywhere. Thus, I think the European Doctrine should hold and advantage on this category: perhaps shorter reactions times or something like that.


      ( btw, F-15E is NOT built for air combat: She kepts many of the Eacle C capabilities, but she's not as good as average air-to-air eagles on that respect, specially in dogfight, as she losses manouverability and turn rate due to heavier and sturdier fuselage, and other structural mods. ) F-111 was not used as a "long range bomber". Those would be...bombers :)

      F-111 was used troughout it's career as a long range interdiction plane/strike fighter, capable of flyring very low and pennetrating deep into enemy air space while using mostly tactical loadouts ( I'm talking about weight) not strategic ones, against high-value targets such as bridges, command centers, fuel/ammo depots, etc.

      That was the role She fulfilled in ( for example) Vietnam, Lybia, and Desert Storm. And that was the role assigned to her in case of Cold War getting hot. In that respect, she was US equivalent to Tornado and Su-24.


      Just as the Strike Eagle does, as they both perform the very same mission. Difference between the two is ( apart from the Strike Eagle being more capable in almost every regard but range and low-alttitude flight) F-15E can take care of itself while penetrating enemy air-space.


      In any case, a beautiful plane to have on this game, the Aardvark :)

      Greetings!

      The post was edited 10 times, last by Vassily Zaizev ().

    • Thanks for the input. I like the suggestions. The Close Air Support acting as mobile/airborne artillery is a great idea. Good way to get some of those planes in and possible introduce the attack C-130s.

      I also like the suggestion for the Harrier for the European doctrine. Since that is the Naval Strike fighter for them at Tier 1 and Tier 2, what would the Tier 2 replacement be? The Tornado?
      CON Gamertag: ewinner
    • ewinner wrote:

      Thanks for the input. I like the suggestions. The Close Air Support acting as mobile/airborne artillery is a great idea. Good way to get some of those planes in and possible introduce the attack C-130s.

      I also like the suggestion for the Harrier for the European doctrine. Since that is the Naval Strike fighter for them at Tier 1 and Tier 2, what would the Tier 2 replacement be? The Tornado?

      Well, I'm not too familiar with European tech tree, but I guess about STRIKE navals, you could very well have something like

      TIer 1: Bucanneer
      Tier 2: Super Etendard
      Tier 3 Rafale M

      Harrier Mk7 could also do the trick ( similar to an AV-8B) .

      SUEs ( Super Etendards) are a pretty interesting platform, not much of a heavy loadout but precission strikers, and with a HUGE anti-ship capability.
    • chucullain wrote:

      I personally would like to see the A10 in the game. flying tank destroyers standard western doctrine
      Well...actually that COULD work :)

      A-10 with more Anti-tank capability, Su-25 with more anti-infantry capability ( as Russians have been using it againts insurgents since..FOREVER and the rest of it's users as well) Harriers with shorter reaction times!

      :) What do you think, gentlemen?
    • Well this is discussed ever once and then.

      I understand, that there is the wish to adopt theese Planes,
      but even if everyone has hearded it often enough,...

      Lets go for mobile first ;)
      ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
      Dorado Games
      DE - Team Lead
      Conflict of Nations




      "That was not me, it was already broken!"
    • I personally would not make air force branch stronger. They already are super fast and through to their speed can basically attack at multiple spots in a short time frame. Which is essential in a online game.

      This game is all about balancing your army.

      If someone has a good ground air defense then the Air Force player simply has to rearrange his troops and build some ground forces. You shouldnt just give him other airplanes to help him out.
      @Dorado If you Close the Forum and move everything to Discord you will lose my Feedback for sure.
    • What about a fire control for Air Craft? I'm tired of seeing the AI and players not online lose aircraft because it is just sitting on the air field/ airport. I think each Air Field/ Airport should have a radar of 50 to 75, nothing that would make it on par with the radar units. Then the aircraft (planes and helicopter) could have fire control to defend the air base (field or port) from enemy radar detected by the air base (aggressive setting), return fire setting would be to attack units within the air base radar attacking it, which would still allow the tier 3 mobile artillery and rocket launchers to attack without being hit back, and default would be to do nothing.

      Obviously this would be a premium feature as currently all fire controls are.
      CON Gamertag: ewinner
    • kurtvonstein wrote:

      I personally would not make air force branch stronger. They already are super fast and through to their speed can basically attack at multiple spots in a short time frame. Which is essential in a online game.

      This game is all about balancing your army.

      If someone has a good ground air defense then the Air Force player simply has to rearrange his troops and build some ground forces. You shouldnt just give him other airplanes to help him out.
      I think It woudn't make the air force branch stronger...just diversify it in a couple of ways and adjust it's roles to combat different threads.

      Since 1991, Air Power proved itself capable of winning a campaingn by itself ( or at least alter it's pace and ballance in a dramatic way) and this game makes a point on that.

      Wich is fine for me: it is pretty realistic

      Modern day armies without air cover, air defences, etc, cannot hope to survive in the battlefield. Ground-only armies in this game shoudn't either, in my humble opinion.

      But hey that's just me :)


      Fereyd wrote:

      Well this is discussed ever once and then.

      I understand, that there is the wish to adopt theese Planes,
      but even if everyone has hearded it often enough,...

      Lets go for mobile first ;)
      Mobile: YES! :D
    • Yeah since WW2 its proven that you cant win a war without Air Force. But this is simulation and if you have 1 superunit...everyone will build it to win,

      Although at the most games it appears to me that player think infanterie is the superunit....people are willingly feeding them to my helicopters...
      @Dorado If you Close the Forum and move everything to Discord you will lose my Feedback for sure.
    • Yes, even here, winning without Air Support is difficult (but not impossible as long as you manage to keep the sky clear from enemys).

      And of course you are correct, in many games Infantry (esp. in hordes) is nearly unbeatable.
      Here, Gunships and Arty are feasting on them :)
      ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
      Dorado Games
      DE - Team Lead
      Conflict of Nations




      "That was not me, it was already broken!"