View Single Post
  #3  
Old March 4th, 2010, 07:15 PM
PhilosopherEight's Avatar

PhilosopherEight PhilosopherEight is offline
BANNED USER
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 14
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
PhilosopherEight is on a distinguished road
Default Re: Combined Arms Onslaught Awaits You!

I disagree for these reasons:

1) Air power today accounts for the majority of all battlefield casualties, and is the dominant force in any advance. This is seen in both Gulf Wars, and would be seen much more if there were any large war between major nations such as Germany, Russia, China, and USA. (thankfully we dont get to see this!)

2) We cannot use a realistically representational amount of air power in this game unless the air sorties are set high enough to permit the aircraft to actually penetrate enemy SAM defenses. This is a characteristic of the game, if not of real battle.

3) In the game, it is both easy and cheap to set up a completely impregnible SAM defense. A single well-placed Patriot SAM Platoon can take down 2-4 top-quality MiG-31s each turn without the MiGs even getting to fire a shot. Against MiG-29s the carnage is even worse.

4)This means that it is impossible to conduct normal Air Ops against an enemy with a decent SAM setup unless you have at least 6-8 Air Sorties with over a dozen aircraft.

5) Most of these dozen aircraft will get shot down by the SAMs, so that eventually a steady state is reached with SAM defense dropped to about 25%, and aircraft shot down to leave only 2-5 total aircraft left to actually operate on tanks and troops.

6) The result is a game which has a more realistic restriction on motion behind the lines. Tanks cannot just move around or they might get blown away. Infantry can not move around without being from attacked from the air.

7) To play the game without the potential for these losses behind the lines is intrisincally unrealistic, and reflects pre-1939 warfare more than modern warfare.

8) Many gamers are very unuccustomed to playing with any significant air power, and many are poor at air tactics, so I often hear these objections simply to cover the Commander's lack of tactical ability to conduct a full battle using all available weapons systems.

9) If you play a bit this way, you will like it after you get accustomed to it!

10) Meeting engagements are the simplest way to set up a fair fight. They are not intended to be realistic necessarily AS a "Meeting Engagement" but merely as an even battle between two forces.


I see your points, truly. But I hope you can see mine, and you will try my way out. I will send you a game.

<><>
Reply With Quote