AI Air Defense
 

I'd like to very humbly suggest that perhaps the pick-lists might possibly be reconsidered.

I thought I'd try a player vs AI battle (USMC vs Iran 2/2018).
Players are well use to the fact that the AI always purchases more air defense then would be normal (or reasonable) for a battalion/brigade size battle.

AI OOB:
Apx. 2 tank companies (various types in platoon size formations)
Apx. 2 mech infantry battalions
Apx 1 artillery regiment (various battery types)

3 x MIM 23B HAWK
2 x Pantsy1-S1
6 x SA-6 Gainful
12 x Igla-1 MPAD
4 x Type 86/88 SPAA
2 x Cobra AA

In my opinion this is perhaps a bit "much".

Re: AI Air Defense
 

You do? Apart from the manpads which I find almost useless in most cases, I think it is a good number of units, especially against USA or any other high tech country.

OK..... add up what all that costs then tell me how many infantry units the AI would buy if it only bought half as many anti air assets ( becasue that's what it will do ) and if the AI didn't buy twice as many air assets as you seem to think it should would it just make it easier for your air assets to attack and destroy ground targets and isn't that really what the complaint is about ??



Don

Re: AI Air Defense
 

Granted the AI will need to spend the points elsewhere, more infantry, armor, or (god forbid) artillery.

?????
"easier for your air assets to attack and destroy ground targets"
?????

Don't you mean possible?
As is, AI air defense makes aircraft/helos pretty much a total waste of points.

On average as the US player you're given the option to purchase 2 to 4 airstrikes per battle (US aircraft cost about the same as an artillery battery ... which can't get shot down, is more accurate, and has more ammo).
Given this level of air defense none ... NONE ... of those 4 to 8 aircraft survive long enough to make a single airstrike.

Since apparently I'm the only person that thinks aircraft should be viable vs the AI (not just players that forget to buy AD) I'll quit beating this dead horse.

Re: AI Air Defense
 

Well I'm going to offer my less than "two cents" here, being strictly an AI player, the anti-air systems do seem high at times, however, I agree that if I was the AI fighting the U.S. I would even throw out the "kitchen sink" too get as much AA in the field as possible. Even when I play the U.S. or some other comparable country against even a lesser opponent I always have AA units by my 4th or 5th turn at the latest to counter any possible air threat that seem to generally be experienced units when they do show up with all that means against my units. In the case of Iran they certainly have plenty of AA to use, see the ref below. It would seem that the better question is, is the AI intuitive in it's equipment selection depending on who it's playing against country wise or is it just random selection? As to the man-pad issue I'll send my condolences along to the families of the air crews I've lost to the AI units with them, you cannot discount the experience level even when playing the AI and the level of difficulty you're set up to play the game in, these factors seem to get forgotten about by many who play th game or just plane under estimate the AI.
http://www.armyrecognition.com/iran_..._pictures.html


Regards,
Pat

Re: AI Air Defense
 

As a test I ran 7 aircraft vs the above air defense a total of 10 times, the results were:

10 x 7 aircraft = 70 aircraft

41 shot down prior to attack
11 shot down after attack
Of these 11 seven (7) only made gun attacks and did not drop bombs
16 damaged so no chance of a second run
Of these 16 eleven (11) only made gun attacks and did not drop bombs
2 undamaged (one dropped bombs)

Since a 74% shootdown, 23% damaged, 3% undamaged; with a total of 10 out of 70 (14%) successful air strikes and the 2 aircraft (3%) capable of a second sortie apparently considered reasonable in WinSPMBT I have nothing further to say.

Re: AI Air Defense
 

You may want to try having someone "set up" the AI units using a scenario in order to get better composed battles. That way you just bypass AI picklists all together.

You could give some basic guidlines for various unit usage.

Normally,If I were setting up AI AA I would use alot for this reason,human players "bleed off" AA fire,then take advantage of it.
So with lots of AA,they are unable to do that.

Re: AI Air Defense
 

Is this a joke?
70 aircraft of what type? What stats?

I can use B-2s and roam above the battlefield for as long as I want to.
If you use A-10s or F-16s and expect to come out of it clean, then LOL.

Focus on high EW planes and make sure you have plenty of WW sorties before you send in your strike/bombers.
If you don't know how to use planes, just say it, but the air defences are hardly overpowering. Start with a round of artillery at points that you expect the enemy might have his best SAMs, then follow it with either recon planes or WW planes to deal with the SAMs. Then bomb with artillery any SAMs detected but not dealt with. Then WW again, then artillery and when you think it is safe, then send in the strike planes.
If you only have 2-4 sorties, then forget the above. Either focus on stealth aircraft or just don't buy any planes. The best thing about not buying any planes while the enemy has bought plenty of air defense units is that if you don't buy any planes, he wasted all those points.
And seriously, 2 sorties = 0 if the enemy has air defenses. Unless of course you get something like the B-2 or even F-22.

Hell, if the use of Apaches or other recon helos at long range so that the enemy use its missiles to them, then strike them with artillery. Then use your 2-4 strike bombers.

Re: AI Air Defense
 

I know you like to play marines hence the air but have never had a real problem using air vs the AI, that said however I rarely use it unless I can buy 6 plus planes.
Vs a lower tech opponent buy one flight of SEAD & send in at start, if your unlucky might lose 1 but they will usually get something plus give away other targets for arty. If need be send your next flight in against these once arty has hit them & surpressed them or forced them to move. Now you just have manpads to worry about but several are probably out of ammo.
Failing this save your air till 30% or more through the game & ground forces are in position or have eliminated some of the AA.

Vs a considerably higher tech opponent air is a total waste realisticly they would most likely be shot down buy that sides airforce long before reaching the AA defence or grounded to save losing them buy that side. And a few decent AA units will probably eliminate them. Just be thankful AI buys more realistic AA units rather than feilding the best its side has to offer like most players do.

The question therefore is not so much how many more ground units the AI could have bought but more its total spend on AA vs your total spend on air. Often the AI still spends less though this case the AI does seem a bit heavier than normal, though so would I vs USA or USMC

Re: AI Air Defense
 

1 x EF-35B Ferret SEAD EW=11
4 x F-35B Lightning II Fighter-Bomber EW=8
2 x F-35B Lightning II COIN EW=8

You don't call:
3 x MIM 23B HAWK
2 x Pantsy1-S1
6 x SA-6 Gainful
12 x Igla-1 MPAD
4 x Type 86/88 SPAA
2 x Cobra AA
overpowering?

What is????

Find me a real brigade size task force anywhere in the world with this much air defense and I'll never say another word on this subject.

I totally agree ... and this is EXACTLY my point.

And you still failed? Weird. Perhaps just bad lack. Then again I don't trust F-35, in game or in real life. It feels like a black hole sucking money with doubtful usage against anyone with more than one Radar.



I would probably not buy the Igla or the AA guns, but the rest are fine when it knows you will probably use your superior airforce. Don't forget that each point spent on that is a point not spent on land forces.

What is your point? That when the enemy has strong air defense and you can only send a couple of planes at a time, you have a good chance of failing? Doh!

Or that the AI simply uses so many points in air defense as to not let you do whatever you want over the skies? If yes, then basically it does the smart thing since anything less would let you(as the player) to do whatever you want.

Simple solution I mentioned earlier. Either use good stealth force or more planes. If you can't, then don't use them at all. It makes sense.

Use them when it makes sense. Just because you can use airforce it doesn't mean you should or that it will work.
I am quite good at using planes by now and 90% of the time I find myself in trouble is when I decide taking a risk, ie too few planes.
I have won battles and campaigns, against humans just using the airforce, and I have lost air fleets in a couple of turns due to bad choices. It's all part of the game/battle.

Re: AI Air Defense
 

My point is that in most Player vs AI battles you are only given 2 to 4 sorties, 6 is very rare. Given the "average" AI air defense I totally agree there is zero sense to using aircraft if you're given less then 4, better 6, sorties. And even with that many sorties you can count on 50%+ losses.

No nation in the world would bother with an air force if they took 50% casualties per sortie, even if they didn't care about pilot losses the sheer cost of the aircraft would make it senseless.

While WinSPMBT is a game not a combat simulation it tends to do a pretty fair job as a simulation. This however is one area where I feel the simulation aspect fails.
If the answer is "it is as it is for game balance" that's fine and dandy.
BUT - if if there is any intent to be a "simulation" in this regard I think the issue needs to be addressed.

Re: AI Air Defense
 

I have to agree with the last, I've seen more air sorties used against me by the AI THEN I've ever been able to purchase in air support myself on most occasions. It seems that the air support (sorties.) available is in direct portion to the size of your own land forces or other limiting factors within the game. I believe the most I've ever had was about 8 but the average is about 3. And it should be noted for the newer players you can end up using this number of sorties just on a single UAV on a one to one basis. But many good points have been brought up concerning arty prep, WW, SEAD of likely AA "sites" or I would add, using a couple of UAV's especially after the last patch fixed some long over due issues concerning their vulnerability to all types of AA. And now almost everyone has them including North Korea (Very recently apparently.) and many smaller countries on just about every continent now. I don't know how the AI uses them or not, as I think AI has used them against me less than a handful of times over the years. But not to worry the Level Bomber for some countries will become relevant in the game as many countries are equipping them with Litening and Sniper Pods or their equivalents in Russia and elsewhere, but more on that later, but think TI/GSR integrated into FCS and therefore weapons. The era of the "Dumb Bomb" in U.S. and even Russia (For contrast.) is about over, now that cheap but accurate guidance systems can be installed on the warheads, AFPKWS II is a prime example among others. I've never really thought of this game as a land only game (Older versions more so yes-not this.), this has always been more a combined arms game that's land "heavy" if you will. That's why I think it's the best of what's out and why I spend more time on "research" then playing it with the time I have available to me now. So for you air folks I think help is on the way equipment wise, for further evaluation and assessment I leave that to those of you with the know how to test and track those results using the games systems AND presenting that data to those that matter - I'm just an equipment guy and a witness to how these events have affected my interactions with the AI.

I've got a Daughter to walk down the aisle later this evening, so I hope you all have as good a weekend as we are!!!! And besides I better get ready before CINCLANTHOME gets in.

Regards,
Pat

Re: AI Air Defense
 

If the XXX setting for air sorties doesn't work for you then by all means use the controls available in the game and SET THE NUMBER OF AIR SORTIES TO A NUMBER YOU ARE COMFORTABLE WITH. This is why there ARE preference controls to adjust.

The argument is getting old. If we had seen a huge imbalance we would have dealt with it. As other have noted they can and have use air effectively.

Don

Re: AI Air Defense
 

Forgot all about that to be honest, I normally do play around with the settings to change things up. I like the "mystery" of not knowing when or how much of an air attack will come and enjoy the tactical challenge of prepping for my air attacks and putting the right units in place to protect my own forces from them. Combined arms against even a tank heavy environment I think is the most fun and tactically challenging way to play against the AI, but that's me.

Regards,
Pat

Re: AI Air Defense
 

Everybody's different that's why there is a preference screen. The "problem" is getting people to accept it's "OK" to change them.

We CANNOT be all things to all people. Given the suicide rate life itself is not all things to all people.


Don

Re: AI Air Defense
 

I find it odd though,nobody considers that in "real life" there are military spy satelites that can pick out a vehicle with missles and even ID them, and then deal with them accordantly,before an air strike is ever called,could be why there is less aircraft losses.

This is an land forces game most of all and air forces and naval are really just eye candy.

Playing PBEM exclusively i rarely waste pt.s on fixed wing air, expect for Helo's,
If my opponent does, a few manpads or mobile missles will deal with most and those that get thru are mostly ineffective imo.
But i don't play a battle after the mid '80's.

Re: AI Air Defense
 

In real life? If you are talking about losses of American aircraft against third world countries, yes. If you search for results from other countries, then the losses are quite high for both, if they have aircraft. Iraq vs Iran, and India vs Pakistan for one. Or even the wars with/against Israel. Air defenses work when they exist and are part of a proper network and the "defender" is willing to use them instead of saving them. (like what Serbia did)

The thing with USA battles is they are clever and they do not initiate fights with forces they know they are going to have problems with, ie loss of aircraft. Even Iran (if there is a war with Iran) is doubtful if they will manage to pose much problem since while they have a few good systems, they are too few for the land/installations they need to cover and they do not actually cover each other. They are deployed in the same moronic(?) way Iraq did. Too spread out with not enough radars and networking between installations and systems without backups. It's almost like the air defenses are part of a Feudal system, if that makes any sense. lol

When the defender has fewer top quality systems than 3 attacker planes have missiles for, then you know they are in trouble.

And that's what the AI tries to do (personal guess of course). You need to have a too large number of them or else it's like you have nothing.

Re: AI Air Defense
 

The last example was Libya, where the Libyan air defense network was pounded by Tomahawk missiles from subs before any bombing campaign was started. Apparently even less than modern networks are considered too great of a risk for aircraft alone to deal with. So perhaps the game is reflecting what could happen if a defender is waiting, as in the case of the VC ambushes of American air assaults....

Re: AI Air Defense
 

A good case for not bothering using fixed wing eh?

I mean if you spend the scads of points on them and they don't produce much for thier high cost, then you lost pt.s you could've spent on other assets.

Helo's are another matter,give me an Cobra or Apache with tows and i can garrante there be burning vehicles.

Re: AI Air Defense
 

As stated many times before.

The game does not allow for a weeks-long suppression of enemy air defences campaign pre-game. (Only exception - AI buy of area/medium SAM for Iraq in the invasion since it's historically true).

The AI does not know about ammo trucks, so will not resupply any systems bought, unlike a human player. Nor will it move them about in a shell game like a human player al that much. So the human player will be able to "tease out" any existing ammo relatively easily or simply determine the launch area and splatter with arty before sending more air in. So the AI requires a decent amount of ADA in order to give it a sporting chance against a human player. And that amount is easily dealt with by a thinking player (one recce strike to determine the area of launch, then apply arty).

But SP series games start in ground artillery range. Therefore, there really is no requirement for fixed wing air whatsoever. Tube and rocket artillery is the most cost-efficient way of delivering bangs on target. Fixed wing is therefore really only relevant for scenarios - where the designer can determine that the enemy ADA has been attrited by previous SEAD campaign etc., or human v human battles with some sort of agreement by the other side that sure, he wont buy any ADA and is happy to let your planes run riot...

Aircraft are therefore rather irrelevant in generated battles as and until the ADA assets are reduced - they cannot give any meaningful contribution until they (or others like say an SAS raid) have dealt with these. (Helos can at least use terrain masking etc to contribute to the land battle while staying out of the envelope of medium or larger SAM).

So in stand-alone battles, it is best really to spend arty points on tube and rocket batteries, since those are in range and tend not to get shot down. Arty is an all-weather asset as well (planes may not have night vision).

Fixed wing air in non scenario battles are really only useful if you have a total technological superiority of some sort between your aircraft and the enemy ADA. (e.g. fighting the VC or Taleban who usually only have AAAMG). Or against a PBEM opponent who totally forgot to buy any ADA whatsoever :)!

Planes would be useful in a corps or division level map campaign, for their ability to be concentrated on a decisive point from airbases many miles away from the front. But this is not that sort of a map game. (And then you would still have to play an SEAD campaign before biffing targets most likely). The PROSIM games available from Shrapnel do that sort of thing I think ("operational" level).

Cheers
Andy

Re: AI Air Defense
 

......or hold them back for use late in the battle to help in the final coup de grâce. There are a lot of ways to handle this and as others have noted it CAN work when done "right"

Or we could re-write all the picklists so there are far less anti air assets so that human players can pound the crap out of the AI but then we'd get a whole new crop of people complaining.

Yes ?

As much as we have said this in the past it bears repeating.... we cannot make everyone happy. The game cannot be everything to everyone and it cannot be easy for newbies and challenging for experienced players at the same time but we do work to a keep things even as much as possible but there is no perfect sweet spot where every setting and every picklist and every unit cost makes everyone happy


Don

Re: AI Air Defense
 

Also - AI pick lists have a random element built in.

So just like it may decide to "go large" on MBT purchases one time, the pick may buy more (or less) AAA items one pick as against the next, with exactly the same points and circumstances. That may arise from choosing cheaper (or horribly expensive) units if a formation of type X is picked, or by skipping the formation at the "buy type X formation" decision point.

Numbers also depend on the other "meat and potatoes" formations bought - e.g. if it bought cheaper APCs and second line MBTs and militia coys instead of say elite paratroopers then it may have more buy points remaining for expensive auxiliary platoons (attack helos, SAM, arty etc) - if less then the auxiliary formation buy may be a section of say 106mm RCL Jeeps or AAA trucks or whatever.

To examine the pick behaviour, simply set up the battle in the generator (set points and opponents, and date, type of battle, perhaps air strikes to a number, not XXX).

-Set computer player for both sides
-set computer purchase for both sides
-choose human deploy for both sides
-generate battle

Now - since you break into the game at the AI deployment, you can see what was picked by it this time.

Exit the battle after examining the AI force pick. (Or end deploy for the AI and look what at the AI auto bought for your side, if interested, then exit the generated game)

Now, repeat the process a significant amount of times (20 or so buys, if not more).

Repeat the process for several sets of buy points if required (one run at say 6K points, 12K, and 18K. Amount will vary as to era - 6K of 1950 hardware is a bigger force than 1980 obviously).

AI picks can vary by opponent too. USA versus VC in 1970s is likely to differ from a pick against the Soviets at the same time point for example. That includes flak units (Some armies may only buy a "fig leaf" of AA against some opponents - say USA v VC or vs Mujadeen). Iraqi AI pick in 2003 will tend not to buy area SAM (as it was neutralised by the Allied air campaign).

Cheers
Andy

Re: AI Air Defense
 

I keep forgetting the rest of the world defines "Air Support" differently then the USMC.

"In 1947, the United States Air Force became a separate service, intent on strategic bombing. U. S. Air Force Forward Air Control expertise existed only on paper. Their doctrine ranked air operations importance as being primarily concentrated on strategic bombing, with interdiction operations secondary, and close air support last. The Air Force believed in central control of close air support originated by FACs within Tactical Air Control Parties assigned to the Army at regimental and divisional level.

By contrast, the U. S. Marine Corps placed its TACPs down to battalion level. When deployed on operations each USMC infantry company is allocated an FAC.

The greatest practical difference between the two systems lays in their very definition of close air support.
The Air Force considers air strikes anywhere within artillery range of friendly units to be close air support.
The Marines defined it as air strikes within 50 to 200 yards of friendly troops, delivered within fifteen minutes of request."

Up until the invention of laser guided artillery (and even now) the USMC has preferred their version of close air support over artillery because a Marine pilot can place a bomb where it's needed, on a target, instead of somewhere in the vicinity like artillery.

Re: AI Air Defense
 

Let's not forget the Vietnam War term "Broken Arrow" which brought all available air assets regardless of who was flying it into the fray for close in air support as happened in the Ia Drang Valley (Danger Close.) in '65. But I have to think the CORPS and Navy lead the way and perfected it as much as the technology would allow for the concept in WWII such as at Iwo. The battle of Kursk was not only the largest tank battle of WWII but also one of the largest air battles as well where close in air support made a difference more so on the Russian side. And now "fiiget a bout it" it's so deadly.

Regards,
Pat

Re: AI Air Defense
 

I always get a laugh out of the Army Air Corps attempts to use B-17 to hit ships during WWII. As I recall they did hit a couple (like two, TOTAL) by accident.
I've never understood how they expected to hit a ship when they considered 50% of their bombs landing within one mile of a stationary target (during the infamous 1000 plane raids) pin point accuracy.
Classic case of "I have a cause to champion; AIRPOWER WINS WARS ! So don't bother me with the facts" I guess.

Re: AI Air Defense
 

Yes, but the navy pilots didn't have few million angry Germans shooting at them, did they?
Cause if they used same tactics over land there would be no one left.

Re: AI Air Defense
 

Having been directed to this thread by MobHack...

(NOTE: I tend not to play campaigns in the modern era where clusters, TI, etc mean instant doom to any non-American army)

IMO using Air Sorties is foolish. As Mobhack already pointed out, "Tube and rocket artillery is the most cost-efficient way of delivering bangs on target". The AI would appear to be spending rather large amounts of points on AA assets. OK you could use a single sortie early to identify AA concentrations. Then suppress them with Artillery and finally SEAD them out of existence. Eventually, clearing the way for Air strikes on targets of interest. In a way this makes sense. Unfortunately, I would end up spending far to many points on a goal of suppressing enemy AA when my main plan is to deal with enemy ground pounders.

So, ignore Air Sorties would appear to be the plan. This makes the use of Vietnam era Helicopter gunships suicidal. So that platoon of same that I purchased sits basically unused. Worse, if I manage what looks like I break through exploiting it becomes crazy as hell since AA gun > IFV and even sometimes MBT. So what is a guy to do?

Re: AI Air Defense
 

scJazz,

Yes, fixed wing air is pretty much a waste of points when playing against the AI. it's one of the "features" of the game. Artillery is far more effective and cost effective. (Note: Considering their relative value in game I have no clue why fixed wing air costs so much ... but that's another issue)

On reflection my comments a couple posts ago about how 99% of the world views and uses close air support makes how WinSPMBT handles the situation probably the best solution available.

Helicopters however are another case entirely.

While they can't travel with relative impunity vs anything other the the sort of rudimentary air defenses the VC (or NVA in the south) had they can be very useful.

Keep a couple with decent EW at the edge of MPAD range and pop them up to high altitude to soak off the hordes of MPADs the AI buys (never less then 9-15 for a battalion size battle), and spot any other AA weapons. Then use artillery to suppress any AA-Guns. After 3-4 turns of this you can do your air assault.

Attack helos can also be very useful. Personally I never allow then to op fire. During my turn I use them as airborne snipers to pick off opposition tanks and ATGM vehicles. And always, always buy ammo vehicles as battles vs the AI virtually guarantee you will run out of ammo long before you run out of targets. I tend to purchase one ammo vehicle per company and rotate one infantry platoon at a time back to rearm.

Re: AI Air Defense
 

I would love to have an option to set each of my AA units what to fire upon on its own. So that I can set to fire at planes or helicopters. Hmm.

Re: AI Air Defense
 

Now that you mention it I agree. Considering the worthlessness of Air Strikes they are too costly. Wanted: 50% off sale on Air Strikes for holiday season!

Ohhh how I wish I was fighting against rudimentary air defenses of the NVA and VC. I said Vietnam era, not Vietnam :) Actually, I'm fighting Cuba and USSR in a Cuban Invasion campaign. They have approximately 8 ****tons of AA units per platoon.

Sadly, none of these are MPADs, all guns. I don't have enough Helos to get them to run out of ammo OPFiring at me and since Vietnam gunships, if we could call them that, don't have EW even if I did it would be insane.

I try very hard not to use ATGM gunships vs the AI as I consider it kinda sorta cheating :)

Re: AI Air Defense
 

Depends who you're fighting with and against.
I tend to play the USMC a lot so I use very few tanks (one platoon per infantry battalion) and need the ATGM helos to make up for the lack or armor.

You are of course free to try to fend off 2 or 3 AI tank companies with a platoon if you desire :p

Re: AI Air Defense
 

Kinda said it already as others have but would add map study first, try to determine the lines of advance and likely cover fire areas (Kills me to say map and not chart but yes I understand the difference!?!), usually the AA units will be behind it or to the sides or in areas close (Backside of a slope for example.) to them to access those points quickly if not forward deployed, because even advanced AA to some degree needs clear fields of fire. CM arty prep those areas you might even knock out some reserve forces in the process. Then UAV or SEAD or use both in those areas. Hold back on air attacks until about turn 3 so you have time to assess/make damage estimates, if unhappy with the results you'll still be able to call off the air missions in time, radios work great for that.:shock: Even the AI most of the time won't send in in air assets much before that unless it's in assault mode. Modern air doctrine doesn't do this anyway look at the Iraq wars and Libya, alot of AA units, Command and Control and Logistic Centers were taken out by SUB/SURFACE/AIR launched cruise missiles and other standoff weapons before the traditional fighter bombers were "on the scene". And I have to disagree respectfully of course, that arty used in the CB role is a waste of time, look at how many tubes and rocket launched systems N. Korea, Russia and China and some other more worthy opponents have, you'll be thankful you did then. Arty today is about satellite data links, laser targeting and range finding, shells with cameras and GPS to auto adjust to hit the target while "on the way" and this isn't new it's been around for almost 25yrs now to some degree it has gone so far beyond windage and stadimeters now. All I can suggust again is adjust your artillery settings prior to a game or campaign, I never use more than 90% accuracy myself. The bottom line is really there's no right or wrong you just have to understand "for every reaction there is an equal or opposite reaction." I don't always use air sorties myself, <20% of the time but it's nice to know it's there, because it is I just have to "call it in". I play the game like chess and don't treat it as a "tank game", because in the real world and it works real well in the game, it's a combined arms game to me, personally speaking of course.
To Suhiir- I'll take those odds if I can use the Indian
SUPER ARJUN MBT as it's currently in the game! Though submitted as a reminder on my last PP, Don already had it on the fix list earlier this year as XXX(?) noted after the last patch release the HF armor value. Use it while you can!!:)
As side bar if you get the G4 channel look into
Bomb Patrol as it follows two separate EOD teams in Afghanistan, another reason I'm glad I'm retired now, well from the military anyway.
Enjoy the rest of your weekends!

Regards,
Pat

Re: AI Air Defense
 

You should a been a jarhead instead of a squid, we use both maps and charts and even know the difference!

Not always possible. I often have "issues" with the number of game turns you get in AI battles. It's rare to have time for anything but a semi-blind frontal assault because you're given 15-20 turns to secure objectives 50 hexes away.

WinSPMBT assumes motorized/mechanized forces and pure infantry assaults are impossible because you can't even get to to objectives in the number of turns the game allows for a battle. It would be nice if the game code took the map size into account when determining the number of turns to allow for a battle. ((hint, hint))

For my part I'd like to see Area SAMs removed from the game, they don't belong in a tactical game of WinSPMBT's scale. But we all know that ain't gonna happen.

Besides, like bombers they are handy for scenario building if nothing else.

We're in total agreement here. I usually buy an MLRS/HIMARS or similar system and never use it, I leave it for exclusively for counter-battery; since the AI tends to think an artillery regiment per battalion is the proper ratio.

And for my part I tend to play infantry heavy, combined arms ... suprise, suprise :D

Sorta like using the M1A1(HA) Abrams vs Iraq in 1991 ... I keep wanting to paint a big res "S" on them instead of the inverted chevron.

You an me both !

Re: AI Air Defense
 

Yes, the two Arjun's been corrected. Still not sure how that number got in there as it was 64 previous. I'm guessing 75 was entered as a cut and paste only on the first digit and it ended up being 754 and that would be automatically reduced the maximum of 255 when saved

Only very naughty boys and girls would use those two units ( 20 and 21 Indian OOB )in a game knowing the HF armour should be 75 not 255 and I'm sure all the responsible players who knew about this have already made the change.

Don

Re: AI Air Defense
 

Must be talking to someone else ... I don't think I've ever used India except in a couple of the canned scenarios.
And I think I'm the only girl that haunts these sacred male halls :rolleyes:

Re: AI Air Defense
 

[quote=Suhiir;788943]The only two changes I make to AI Campaigns are...
1) Increasing turns to a minimum of 30, generally 40.
2) Decreasing tree values to something approximating NOT wall to wall forest, Amazon jungle.

I stopped playing modern games with TI, CM, MLRS and UAVs. In fact for years I wouldn't play SPMBT and stuck with WW2. However, I can't find my SPWW2 CD anymore :mad: and now I'm kind of entertained by MBT:)

Re: AI Air Defense
 

The problem here is the AI sometimes isn't smart enough to know when it's been beaten so you have to cycle thru 10 or 20 turns doing basically nothing to get the battle to end. So sort of a damned-if-ya-do-damned-if-ya-don't thing.

Since you have the CD go into the map editor and set the tree cover value to something less then rainforest :p