Current Unit Balance

You could offer up your consensus of your thoughts without violating any sort of "It shouldn't be shared" unspoken rule. "In my opinion based on what I've seen discussed I think <x>" isn't particularly hard. =p

My thoughts aren't fully representative of the thread and other people's opinions. There are also plenty of threads within the General Discussion on the topics of Air units and Air balance, might be worth checking some of those out yourself.

Mike

Do you just not want to put our your own thoughts at all? =p

I'm not asking for a fully representative view. I'm asking for your thoughts since you actually got to read the discussion.

I don't exactly have the time to combine all my posts on AA and such into a convenient format for you, in the end there needs to be options and they need to be able to work together as well as separately and the exact implementation also heavily depends on the specific Implementation of Air units and whether or not there are any shifts to overall unit balance, particularly between Basic and Advanced units(is is difficult to understand exactly what Uber intends at this stage because we only have a small amount of the planned units and most of what we have now are very similar between thier Basic and Advanced counterparts).

Mike

You don't need an opponent to build a "concentrated base" to win economically with a Pelter creep. Opponent has built one laser turret to protect a factory and a couple of mexxes? More than the cost of a Pelter right there. It's not hard to position more than a Pelter's worth of enemy units within range of a Pelter. And bombers are pretty ineffective at the moment. You need five bombers to kill a Pelter in a single pass, which not only cost almost as much as a Pelter, but explode given even the slightest fighter attention. Obviously if you have air superiority they'll work (but not be that effective economically, since you can count on losing all of your bombers to rocket turrets and the reclaim all ends up in enemy controlled territory), but if there's any resistance at all you'll probably lose more bombers taking it out than it's worth, so even if you win, you lose.

The real counter to Pelters is to raid effectively so that your opponent doesn't have the chance to park a bunch of engineers outside your base and build up, but most players are massive derps who rely on laser turrets for defence.

IDK - if you loose bombers to demolish only long-range defense capability of the opponent - than it's surely worth it, as now you can follow-up with ground troops and wipe the enemy - or at least: harm his economy.
Yes- if everything you have is just a few bombers to take down Pelters than it is pointless, but otherwise? It can be only a win-win.

See if you'd just said that at the start we could have saved everybody two hours.

You seem to be under the mistaken impression that Pelters are a defensive unit. They're not. They're actually a pretty poor defensive unit due to their high cost and low DPS and how they can be easily micro'd around. But there are no mobile counters to T1 turrets, so it's a good thing the only stationary counter can very easily make back its cost by blowing up a couple of buildings.

I use pelters if they're going ground before I can get T2 factories up. Then I switch to Hopkins. Massed units die crazy fast to them.

I have the beginnings of a method that may provide the balance we have all been talking about. You can find it here.
https://forums.uberent.com/threads/unified-cost-benefit-analysis-of-pa-units-and-structures.56310/