Quote:
PlasmaKrab said:
Quote:
These are the true kings of the battlefield that are very accurate and destructive easily killing 3-5 times their points worth before being destroyed (or fled from the battle field)
|
Well, that IS what they are made for, aren't they? You just have to know how to use them right and make the enemy lose his ones miserably 
|
Yes, that's exactly my point. Let me give you an example. I'm currently playing a USMC vs. Germany 2006 game. We agreed on using two attack helos. I bought two AH-1 Supercobras with vis40, EW8, TOW-2B AT-ATGM and two DAGR-cannons. They cost 464 a piece. My opponent bought two PAH-2 Tiger UHT with vis60, EW7, HOT-3 and SYROCOT for 415 a piece. I planned my whole strategy for countering the helos - that ment not buying a single tank and only a very limited amount of APC (which are all destroyed now). We both had 18k points to spend. The whole combination of my forces was as unrealistic as it gets but I'm winning the battle!
My opponent is very good in preserving his tanks and APC's but with superior helos I've been able to easily kill five (out of eight) of his Leo 2A6-EX tanks and dozens of APC's. My opponent spent heavily on AntiAir systems as well but my artillery has been effective against them as they're very vulnerable. My helos have now (turn 31/40) about 30 kills, most of them AFV's. Another of them got hit and fled, but the other makes sure my opponent can't show his tanks any more as they would be instantly killed. And my opponent is very good player, much more experienced and probably better than me. The explanation of my good situation lies solely of my tactic of not buying AFV's because of the helos. This made the game more one-sided and, in some way, I feel like I cheated somehow.
The helos of my opponent are both untouched and have killed lots of infantry (which I have plenty). I've been able to try to hit them with Stingers 12 times without any success.
So the helos were the single deciding factor in our game. Without VIRS we both stayed almost put for 20 turns until I made a large parachute drop which "opened" the situation. The helos, for the cost of less than 1000 or 1/18 of the points in the game have destroyed units for worth of more than 5k (about) with only 1/4 fled from the battlefield. This can't be right, can it?
There are three ways to correct the situation:
1. Make the attack helos less destructive
2. Make them more vulnerable to AA-guns
3. Rise the cost of them
I'm not an expert, so I don't know how realistic the two first are in the game. But at least the third is nearly a joke. The correct value of one new attack helo is maybe 3-6 times the best MBT there is IMO, so the accurate cost would be maybe 1500-3000 points for the best helos.
This would be problematic though, because losing one would be too big a setback and rest of the game would, in many cases, be just fighting against the inevitable.
I think the best choice would be the second option, to make the helos more vulnerable to AA-units. Maybe a 33% accuracy when firing with the best kind if Stinger or so would be suitable.
Well, these are just my experiences and ideas and might not be shared by the majority. But I've found out that many players like to play without attack helos and when playing with them, almost all players like to set strict limits to their numbers.
So, the Gunships are the kings of the battlefield, and rightly so, but wouldn't it be time to make them cost accordingly?
