The reasons why T2 air is broken.

Way to much HP for air units.

Sad to see two units define the whole game ATM.

I'm sure it will get a reduction in some trait.

I agree whole heartedly with you that bombers too too much damage individually. However unless they are prevented from stacking, their potential combined damage will remain unlimited. We might reduce their individual damage, but if they can all occupy the same spot in a bombing run as they converge on a single target then it won't matter what their individual stats are, so long as you can make them in huge enough numbers to instantly kill anything the swarm sets its sights on.
If they don't stack as they converge, then we can put a number on the max damage a single bomber can do to the ground and therefore work to balance that as you suggest.

So we don't get confused you are talking about the T2 bomber right? not the T1?

The biggest problem whit air there is right now is: there is no mobile AA T2 (advanced)!

Advanced mobile AA would fix a lot of balancing to start with.

No.....no that just attempts to paste over the existing problems.

Like what the current flak does, fixes a problem that should have been fixed at the source.

For instance, try playing a game with a friend without using T2 air or T2 flak, and watch the balance....


You might be surprised how very very close that is to being the perfect kind of balance, it really is amazing.

I agree with everything the OP is saying, but I think we need to emphasise point one, which isn't talked about enough: air is bloody fast and it negates all the interesting map control tactics. Rebalancing costs and the like won't change that you clump your air force in your base and just rush the blob out as required. Reduction to speed, a significant reduction, would not only lead to more of the maneuvering style of play you see on the ground, it would immediately buff all ground AA by giving them more time to hit aircraft.

It is ok that someone stacks 15 bombers to kill one building/unit. That is incredibly risky, especially with flak cannons.

That's called force multiplication. More stuff = MORE DAKKA. As it should.

They need nerfed. Individually NERFED. Period.

Even if aircraft are slower they still negate any interesting map control tactics. If my planes are slower I'll just build MOAR so my blob covers more ground at once. (I see the largest problem with air being OP is the row of factories on global patrol)


I think we need to leash aircraft to rearm/refuel facilities. Now you'll care about angle of attack and the distance back to your carrier or airfield. Until we do they are just ground 2.0 without any of the "silly" limitations like terrain, water, lava, walls, etc.

Here is the issue, the faster you get, the stronger you are. Why bother making slower units if you can have harder, better, faster, stronger units. Well, not harder since the speed:hp/metal ratio balance is mostly right

To find a solution, an excellent example to look at is Starcraft Brood War. Ground anti-air units were better in destroying air units and thus, resulted in dynamic gameplay.

To sum up, to get a good balance, the faster unit must generally have lower dps and health ratio to its cost

All my yes.

It's a problem with balancing both as it makes it impossible to know how much damage Air can deal upon any particular spot of ground, but which becomes a problem more quickly with the stacked damage of heavier T2 bombers.

This is exactly how land works, it's slow so you end up with lots of smaller groups rather than one death blob because otherwise you're completely outmaneuvered. Air isn't magic and isn't exempt from speed, it only appears that way because of how ball breakingly fast it is right now.

I don't understand the idea that, no, a speed reduction won't change anything because now I'll invest in MOAR air. But... that is a change, you just had to spend more to achieve the current effect.

But that's not how Air should work. You shouldn't have to risk your entire airforce to take out a target. If they're forced to spread out and can't all converge and overlap on one target, then each unit's damage can be balanced and we can have units punching their weight. Otherwise you need to nerf individual units to account for stacking, which will make them individually useless. You also shouldn't have to worry about losing an entire airforce to Flak - it's completely unrealistic. Imagine if you lost an entire army to one Laser turret.

Every unit in this game is independently USELESS except for bombers.

Why should it be different?

I both have, and do.

Also as the player with the airforce, it's your choice when to engage, so risking your entire airforce depends on how you set yourself up.

If your planes die, it's your fault for putting them in that situation.

not only that but for the Intel or the thing your bomber destroys it can assist in dmging the others eco or allow for your ground army to function much much better then without the assistance plus its quick and costs smallish amounts of metal

Well not really. You send a T2 Leveller next to some undefended T1 Eco and it will do damage.

But broadly, I agree. They should be balanced to act in groups - just not balanced to all drop bombs simultaneously on a single target. They should carpet bomb entire areas, or be able to attack a single target but one after another.

The point is, we don't balance Ground or Naval based upon the fact that they can deal infinite damage - because they can't. Having Air stack on attacks makes it fundamentally extremely difficult to balance as you can never put a number on the maximum damage Air can deal, and therefore determining what the damage of an individual in a swarm should be can be near impossible. Solutions like Flak solve the problem somewhat, but tend to invalidate Air and don't solve the problem of potentially infinite damage to anywhere not defended by Flak.

Of course it is, just as it's your fault if you lose an army on a risky engagement. I just feel it's far to easy too lose an entire airforce due to forced balancing for stacking. AOE AA is fine, but it's silly to be able to lose a near infinite number of stacked planes to massed Flak. Planes shouldn't fly into a shredder when it comes to flak.
Yes, Flak should be highly effective. In fact I don't even think it needs any major alteration - perhaps even a range increase. The only difference needs to be that Air can't be killed as a blob when they overlap. The best way to do this is to prevent overlap, and have them stack based on altitude.
Blaming players for not accounting for game mechanics that don't obey the laws of spatial physics is a bit of a cop-out to me.

The current point of flak IS to kill overlapping units.

And even then it's kinda hard to avoid, sure losing an air force to a single flak turret is kinda silly, but as long as you are not inferring that aircraft be able to hover over a base for a minute without taking huge if not total casualty's.

Find a way to prevent stacking, change the flak turret to actually be balanced with other AA (That or make all AA OP) and then have aircraft be actively punished for sitting on a location with AA (Like a long weapon cool down).

That's why I feel Flak is only a secondary solution to the issue of stacking. Stacking will still instantly kill an army or an exposed Commander, or for that matter anything, not defended by Flak or Air. And it's the instantly that bothers me - the unlimited damage aspect. Obviously anything undefended should be screwed, and anything defended should cut swathes in a carpet bombing run.

I discussed solutions for stacking at length in the Balancing Air - Continued! thread - broadly it involves stacking by altitude, circling and carpet bombing entire areas in formation - attack only being possible when there is a clear path from a Bomber to the ground.
Also: Collisions - as Airspace is finite (like ground and naval), which prevent games turning into infinite Air-Spam contests.
As far as the community goes, giving Air physical parameters and preventing stacking was the most popular option in the poll.