Should AIr be limited in number with support mechnism?

Discussion in 'Balance Discussions' started by moonsilver, March 2, 2014.

  1. moonsilver

    moonsilver Member

    Messages:
    65
    Likes Received:
    38
    To be better explain, this is just an idea, People might hate it.

    I feel like air units are really just flying tanks with immunity to ground weapons. Gunship is just a flying bot with immunity to ground weapons.

    What if bombers and gunships had limited ammo and had to return to an airport style location. Each airport could only support up to a certain number of air units.

    I feel this limit would allow air units to be very powerful, because they are limited. I know it kind of goes against the traditional style of how total annihilation plays. But I feel this would automatically push air into a support role, rather than an all dominating force, which as flying tanks they basically are.

    It would let u make a giant carpet bombing unit if u wanted too, because u had so few it would be justified you wouldn't be able to just mass produce them to the point of critical mass. Land units are limited by space, air units are not.

    With this u can make air units as powerful as u like, u just limit how many u can have. With limited ammo, they can't just keep circling infinitely around a base, it would be a proper air strike, rearm and then attack again.

    people probably won't like it, but somehow has to make the suggestion.
    godde and ace902902 like this.
  2. frostybytes

    frostybytes New Member

    Messages:
    18
    Likes Received:
    7
    Something very similar has already been suggested elsewhere. I'll just repeat what I said there: This sort of change would make air units not so much units as an alternate type of artillery.

    I also find that Betteridge's law of headlines applies, even though this is a forum topic and not a newspaper article: "Any headline which ends in a question mark can be answered by the word no".
    Geers likes this.
  3. Quitch

    Quitch Post Master General

    Messages:
    5,885
    Likes Received:
    6,045
    No.
    sypheara likes this.
  4. Geers

    Geers Post Master General

    Messages:
    6,946
    Likes Received:
    6,820
    Not a fan of this idea. At all.
  5. igncom1

    igncom1 Post Master General

    Messages:
    7,961
    Likes Received:
    3,132
    Currently the bombers use a reload system that uses energy to recharge bombs.

    But the system is underused, and the recharge times are too fast, and the energy cost is far too little.

    That needs to change.
    godde and stuart98 like this.
  6. stuart98

    stuart98 Post Master General

    Messages:
    6,009
    Likes Received:
    3,888
    Gunships need to be flimsy units that can massacre units with no AA protection but are massacred themselves by a small amount of AA.

    Bombers should be for taking out strategic targets before using a real damage dealer like a ton of PHAATTIs, a nuck, or an SXX.

    +1 for this idea being applied to bombers and maybe even peregrines, -1 to using it on kestrels.
    kayonsmit101 and Quitch like this.
  7. c4ptainpronin

    c4ptainpronin Active Member

    Messages:
    108
    Likes Received:
    127
    /thread
    Devak, sypheara and stuart98 like this.
  8. ace902902

    ace902902 Active Member

    Messages:
    548
    Likes Received:
    212
    could work, but they would have to do it automatically to remove micro. maybe tie the units to the airport, so they come there by themselves after they run out of ammo/bombs.
  9. brianpurkiss

    brianpurkiss Post Master General

    Messages:
    7,879
    Likes Received:
    7,438
    Anything that limits the number of anything is a bad idea.

    PA is supposed to be about MASSIVE scale.
    Geers likes this.
  10. bmb

    bmb Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    1,497
    Likes Received:
    219
    The limit would simply be switched from the amount of units that you can build in a factory to the amount of support structures you can plonk down. I'm reasonably intrigued by the idea. Finding new ways of adding logistics to these types of games without making it tedious to manage is always interesting.
    vyolin and stuart98 like this.
  11. moonsilver

    moonsilver Member

    Messages:
    65
    Likes Received:
    38
    Air is a form of artliery isn't it? a bomber is basically the launcher of a giant bomb. Bombers do the same job as artliery, take out large blobs of units and destroy buildings. So yes I would rather have bombers be artliery and not be flying tanks.

    As it stands regardless of what people do, the game will always be get lots of air and win. Nothing can beat air except air, that will never change because they are flying tanks. Either be nerfed to be useless, have a hard coutner introduced making them blow up in seconds. Or it will be games decided by, I forgot to build flak now I'm dead in 2 seconds.

    I understand a lot of people don't like it but, look at the air units. If we want flying tanks and flying bots, why not build bots with jetpacks, or hover tanks. That's what air units are. I don't like the idea of having very fragile units that are very powerful, isn't that exactly how artliery is designed yet again.

    I understand PA is about mass production, but lets face it, air as it stands will never get balanced. If u make a unit that's immune to the weapons of others, you always end up with this problem. How do u justify having a unit that is the fastest, most powerful, immune to 90% of all weapons in the game. You want a mega bot, u got one its called a bomber.

    If u like gameplay that is decided on always having to build air or flak, that all games will eventually be decided by air, then don't change a thing. To me that playstyle gets boring fast. At the same time I don't want to see air become useless, because its nerfed into the ground cos people complain. I want it o have a proper balanced role.

    Sorry if someone already suggested this I guess I didn't search well enough.
    Its not a headline its a topic title. I tried it to make as clear and concise about what this topic was about. Sorry for trying to be clear and concise next time I just write blah blah blah.

    If u don't like my suggestion, whats your idea????? I want the game to be fun, not a one strategy wins all type game which so many end up as. I would like to see a combined arms on the field of battle. Not just swarms of aircraft, and forts with dozen nukes surrounded by flak guns.

    Honestly I don't understand your rejection of the idea. What is it about having a air units effectively as super units that is so good? They basically like fragile megabots.
  12. godde

    godde Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    1,425
    Likes Received:
    499
    Like igncom1 says, a similar effect can be achieved by increasing the time it takes for bombers to reload their bombs. I'm not sure if gunships should use the same mechanics as they might become too similar to bombers if they do.
  13. sypheara

    sypheara Member

    Messages:
    92
    Likes Received:
    93
    May as well just remove air at the rate this community is calling for endless air nerfs, even after patch after patch running numerous balance passes over them.

    It's getting a bit silly now, it could certainly do with some tweaking, but air isn't the utter game ender it was a few patches ago. Ground based AA feels alot more effective.

    Would it not pay to see how Gamma settles in this regard first?
  14. igncom1

    igncom1 Post Master General

    Messages:
    7,961
    Likes Received:
    3,132
    It's how forums work dude, small amount of people, constantly talking.

    We are only the vocal part of the community, and only want the best for the game.

    No need to jump the gun.
    sypheara likes this.
  15. sypheara

    sypheara Member

    Messages:
    92
    Likes Received:
    93
    I know that, my post probably came off a bit more angry than I actually was. I just don't want to see it swing the other way with air completely marginalised, and that's my worry really.
    igncom1 likes this.
  16. igncom1

    igncom1 Post Master General

    Messages:
    7,961
    Likes Received:
    3,132
    Neither do I, I want air to be a set of the greatest support and raiding units in the game.
    sypheara likes this.
  17. carnilion

    carnilion Member

    Messages:
    131
    Likes Received:
    9
    no.

    just wait till we get better aa stuff.... air should be able to blast everything with no aa immediately...but since we have no shields it should be absolutely useless if something is guarded by decent aa. im pretty sure we will get this in the future, so just wait :)
  18. vyolin

    vyolin Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    631
    Likes Received:
    479
    Count me in on logistics!

Share This Page