Air attacks.

[Roman]

Hello. I have many doubts about the role of aircraft in this game.
Someone might tell me that air units are the best and what types of weapons are ideal for these attacks?
1) attack against infantry
2) Armored Attack
3) Attacks on artillery and antiaircraft units
The question is also for winspww2

Thanks

[Imp]

Wow big ask Roman & depends what you want or can afford stand of weapons or standard etc. For WWII generaly cannon vs armour MGs vs soft then look at secondary weapons.
Do same as for any other unit look at weapon stats kill for infantry AP or HEAT for armour.
Important planes only ever have HE ammo so do not use HEAT rating use AP one. Helicopters do use HEAT rating if have ammo for listed under AP.
At least thats the principle I work on.

[Suhiir]

Originally Posted by Roman

Hello. I have many doubts about the role of aircraft in this game.

To be honest given the cost of aircraft; the fact that the AI (and some human players) tend to purchase 3 to 5 times more AA (particularly MPADS) then a battalion to brigade size force would have in reality; the "issues" with air delivered weapons (i.e a single Maverick may "bounce off" an unarmored truck OR kill a platoon of MBTs); and the high probability of blue on blue by aircraft; the role of aircraft in the game is more cosmetic then practical.

They're fun to play with but very, very rarely worth the cost.

Originally Posted by Roman

Someone might tell me that air units are the best and what types of weapons are ideal for these attacks?
1) attack against infantry

I find that usually HE bombs work best.

Originally Posted by Roman

2) Armored Attack

AP Cluster Bombs.

Originally Posted by Roman

3) Attacks on artillery...

If towed HE bombs, if SP AP Clusters.

Originally Posted by Roman

3) Attacks on .. antiaircraft units

SEAD type aircraft specifically target AA weapons.

[Cross]

My perspective is really for WW2, because I probably don't have enough experience to give a credible opinion about MBT aircraft.

I agree with Suhirr in that I mostly choose aircraft for fun. But I do think they can provide valuable intel by spotting rear units (probably more than they should) and for this ability alone it's worth buying an aircraft or two, but not spotting aircraft.

I choose fast small aircraft, which seem to survive better, and only look at weapons last. My main objective is to gather some intel and harass the enemy. Which is most successful when the enemy fails to buy sufficient AAA. And I think aircraft can be psychologically effective against your opponent.

It can also be worth looking for aircraft that have armour.

cheers,
Cross

[Roman]

Thanks for your responses. I think planes are important if one knows how to use.
In two battles of ww2 that I remember were important. In a battle the enemy destroy me 1 Tiger, and damage another.
After another battle where I had air superiority, destroyed and began retreating many enemy infantry.
MBT know well in the arms of the helicopter but I do not know the utility of weapons of aircraft. I know the Maverick and Hellfire are very good against tanks.
I will investigate the weapons according to their characteristics.
regards

[Wdll]

In modern times they can easily win a battle for you. If done correctly, enough to make the opponent rethink if he can continue fighting the campaign against you.
What you need though are a few things.
a)Numbers. You need at least 10 planes.
b)Numbers. You need several missiles/bombs per plane. None of that 2 per plane crap, unless they are SEAD.
c)If the opponent has good AD, you need more than enough SEAD to go in first to either kill off or force the AD to waste their ammo on them instead of your strike aircraft.
d)Long term plan, at least in a PBEM campaign. You can never know when the game will give you the air sorties you will need, and the support points to go with. You need to save points from the repair points you get. Which means you need to sacrifice other things.
e)If the enemy AD is very good and easily outclass your SEAD planes, especially in EW, forget it.

Is it worth it to use planes? Hell yeah! But only if you are serious about them. If in a 45K (initial) army you get 2-4 planes and expect to win the battle with them...that's a waste of credits. You're far better off buying anything else.

[Mobhack]

Originally Posted by Wdll

In modern times they can easily win a battle for you. If done correctly, enough to make the opponent rethink if he can continue fighting the campaign against you.
What you need though are a few things.
a)Numbers. You need at least 10 planes.
b)Numbers. You need several missiles/bombs per plane. None of that 2 per plane crap, unless they are SEAD.
c)If the opponent has good AD, you need more than enough SEAD to go in first to either kill off or force the AD to waste their ammo on them instead of your strike aircraft.
d)Long term plan, at least in a PBEM campaign. You can never know when the game will give you the air sorties you will need, and the support points to go with. You need to save points from the repair points you get. Which means you need to sacrifice other things.
e)If the enemy AD is very good and easily outclass your SEAD planes, especially in EW, forget it.

Is it worth it to use planes? Hell yeah! But only if you are serious about them. If in a 45K (initial) army you get 2-4 planes and expect to win the battle with them...that's a waste of credits. You're far better off buying anything else.

Quoted in the Game Play Notes section of the Game Guide:
"The power of an air force is terrific when there is nothing to oppose it.", Winston Churchill: The Gathering storm, 1948.

Churchill's quote is so true. I once had a PBEM game with the original SPII, way back in the MS-DOS days, where I was UK and he was USSR, in a "what if the Cuban missile crisis went critical" war in 1968/9.

I got allocated 2 flights and bought 4 Hawker Hunters with rockets - and they come with 4x30mm Aden cannon and a fair bit of ammo too. That last bit was crucial.

I noted the lack of enemy AAA fairly quickly and after the game my opponent admitted that he had quite simply forgotten to buy any AAA cover at all. Plus his main vehicles just happened to be the relatively few Soviet ones without an AAMG (early T-62, BTR-60PB etc).

I was happily plinking his T-62 all game long with these, and getting no reply whatsoever. They probably each had 2-3 kills by game end each(including BTRS as well).

In that situation even a few planes could rove the battlefield entirely at will. I could even plot runs starting from his edge of the map with total impunity and thus have a high expectation of "up the kilt" shots on his heavies.

So always have at least a "fig leaf" of AAA cover, even if it is just some pintle mounted 12.7mm AAMG on Jeeps etc.

And a few planes can turn the tide - if your opponent cooperates !.

Andy

[Roman]

In a campaign of ww2 I have air superiority. 9 units. In the last battle bought many bombers of carpet and I do not think it was a good choice.
I'll see what happens. Before medium bombers and fighter-bombers used and I think it was better. They are vulnerable to antiaircraft but are more effective.
As I said I'll see what happens at the end of the current battle and I will draw better conclusions.

[Wdll]

The map size and size of forces in general is to be taken into consideration.
Also, the WWII air force has to be larger than for a similar size modern battle. They are not nearly as accurate, effective or deadly as modern planes.

[iCaMpWiThAWP]

And level bombers are pretty much useless to players, in a new tactic i wanted to try, i once used them against a friend, i set a few bombers to carpet bomb a small area then dropped a company of paras the same turn in there to kill the routed enemy and block the path of any enemies coming from the rear using the shell holes from the bombing as cover, yeah they got overrun by a tank platoon later, but still an unusual tactic that could have worked.