AI Air Defense

[scJazz]

Originally Posted by Suhiir

scJazz,

*SNIP*
(Note: Considering their relative value in game I have no clue why fixed wing air costs so much ... but that's another issue)
*SNIP*
Helicopters however are another case entirely.

While they can't travel with relative impunity vs anything other the the sort of rudimentary air defenses the VC (or NVA in the south) had they can be very useful.

Keep a couple with decent EW at the edge of MPAD range and pop them up to high altitude to soak off the hordes of MPADs the AI buys (never less then 9-15 for a battalion size battle), and spot any other AA weapons. Then use artillery to suppress any AA-Guns. After 3-4 turns of this you can do your air assault.

Attack helos can also be very useful. Personally I never allow then to op fire. During my turn I use them as airborne snipers to pick off opposition tanks and ATGM vehicles. And always, always buy ammo vehicles as battles vs the AI virtually guarantee you will run out of ammo long before you run out of targets. I tend to purchase one ammo vehicle per company and rotate one infantry platoon at a time back to rearm.

Now that you mention it I agree. Considering the worthlessness of Air Strikes they are too costly. Wanted: 50% off sale on Air Strikes for holiday season!

Ohhh how I wish I was fighting against rudimentary air defenses of the NVA and VC. I said Vietnam era, not Vietnam Actually, I'm fighting Cuba and USSR in a Cuban Invasion campaign. They have approximately 8 ****tons of AA units per platoon.

Sadly, none of these are MPADs, all guns. I don't have enough Helos to get them to run out of ammo OPFiring at me and since Vietnam gunships, if we could call them that, don't have EW even if I did it would be insane.

I try very hard not to use ATGM gunships vs the AI as I consider it kinda sorta cheating

[Suhiir]

Originally Posted by scJazz

I try very hard not to use ATGM gunships vs the AI as I consider it kinda sorta cheating

Depends who you're fighting with and against.
I tend to play the USMC a lot so I use very few tanks (one platoon per infantry battalion) and need the ATGM helos to make up for the lack or armor.

You are of course free to try to fend off 2 or 3 AI tank companies with a platoon if you desire

[FASTBOAT TOUGH]

Kinda said it already as others have but would add map study first, try to determine the lines of advance and likely cover fire areas (Kills me to say map and not chart but yes I understand the difference!?!), usually the AA units will be behind it or to the sides or in areas close (Backside of a slope for example.) to them to access those points quickly if not forward deployed, because even advanced AA to some degree needs clear fields of fire. CM arty prep those areas you might even knock out some reserve forces in the process. Then UAV or SEAD or use both in those areas. Hold back on air attacks until about turn 3 so you have time to assess/make damage estimates, if unhappy with the results you'll still be able to call off the air missions in time, radios work great for that. Even the AI most of the time won't send in in air assets much before that unless it's in assault mode. Modern air doctrine doesn't do this anyway look at the Iraq wars and Libya, alot of AA units, Command and Control and Logistic Centers were taken out by SUB/SURFACE/AIR launched cruise missiles and other standoff weapons before the traditional fighter bombers were "on the scene". And I have to disagree respectfully of course, that arty used in the CB role is a waste of time, look at how many tubes and rocket launched systems N. Korea, Russia and China and some other more worthy opponents have, you'll be thankful you did then. Arty today is about satellite data links, laser targeting and range finding, shells with cameras and GPS to auto adjust to hit the target while "on the way" and this isn't new it's been around for almost 25yrs now to some degree it has gone so far beyond windage and stadimeters now. All I can suggust again is adjust your artillery settings prior to a game or campaign, I never use more than 90% accuracy myself. The bottom line is really there's no right or wrong you just have to understand "for every reaction there is an equal or opposite reaction." I don't always use air sorties myself, <20% of the time but it's nice to know it's there, because it is I just have to "call it in". I play the game like chess and don't treat it as a "tank game", because in the real world and it works real well in the game, it's a combined arms game to me, personally speaking of course.
To Suhiir- I'll take those odds if I can use the Indian
SUPER ARJUN MBT as it's currently in the game! Though submitted as a reminder on my last PP, Don already had it on the fix list earlier this year as XXX(?) noted after the last patch release the HF armor value. Use it while you can!!
As side bar if you get the G4 channel look into
Bomb Patrol as it follows two separate EOD teams in Afghanistan, another reason I'm glad I'm retired now, well from the military anyway.
Enjoy the rest of your weekends!

Regards,
Pat

[Suhiir]

Originally Posted by FASTBOAT TOUGH

Kinda said it already as others have but would add map study first, try to determine the lines of advance and likely cover fire areas (Kills me to say map and not chart but yes I understand the difference!?!)...

You should a been a jarhead instead of a squid, we use both maps and charts and even know the difference!

Originally Posted by FASTBOAT TOUGH

Hold back on air attacks until about turn 3 so you have time to assess/make damage estimates, if unhappy with the results you'll still be able to call off the air missions in time, radios work great for that.

Not always possible. I often have "issues" with the number of game turns you get in AI battles. It's rare to have time for anything but a semi-blind frontal assault because you're given 15-20 turns to secure objectives 50 hexes away.

WinSPMBT assumes motorized/mechanized forces and pure infantry assaults are impossible because you can't even get to to objectives in the number of turns the game allows for a battle. It would be nice if the game code took the map size into account when determining the number of turns to allow for a battle. ((hint, hint))

Originally Posted by FASTBOAT TOUGH

Modern air doctrine doesn't do this anyway look at the Iraq wars and Libya, alot of AA units, Command and Control and Logistic Centers were taken out by SUB/SURFACE/AIR launched cruise missiles and other standoff weapons before the traditional fighter bombers were "on the scene".

For my part I'd like to see Area SAMs removed from the game, they don't belong in a tactical game of WinSPMBT's scale. But we all know that ain't gonna happen.

Besides, like bombers they are handy for scenario building if nothing else.

Originally Posted by FASTBOAT TOUGH

And I have to disagree respectfully of course, that arty used in the CB role is a waste of time, look at how many tubes and rocket launched systems N. Korea, Russia and China and some other more worthy opponents have, you'll be thankful you did then.

We're in total agreement here. I usually buy an MLRS/HIMARS or similar system and never use it, I leave it for exclusively for counter-battery; since the AI tends to think an artillery regiment per battalion is the proper ratio.

Originally Posted by FASTBOAT TOUGH

I play the game like chess and don't treat it as a "tank game", because in the real world and it works real well in the game, it's a combined arms game to me, personally speaking of course.

And for my part I tend to play infantry heavy, combined arms ... suprise, suprise

Originally Posted by FASTBOAT TOUGH

To Suhiir- I'll take those odds if I can use the Indian SUPER ARJUN MBT as it's currently in the game!

Sorta like using the M1A1(HA) Abrams vs Iraq in 1991 ... I keep wanting to paint a big res "S" on them instead of the inverted chevron.

Originally Posted by FASTBOAT TOUGH

... Bomb Patrol as it follows two separate EOD teams in Afghanistan, another reason I'm glad I'm retired now, well from the military anyway.

You an me both !

[DRG]

Yes, the two Arjun's been corrected. Still not sure how that number got in there as it was 64 previous. I'm guessing 75 was entered as a cut and paste only on the first digit and it ended up being 754 and that would be automatically reduced the maximum of 255 when saved

Only very naughty boys and girls would use those two units ( 20 and 21 Indian OOB )in a game knowing the HF armour should be 75 not 255 and I'm sure all the responsible players who knew about this have already made the change.

Don

[Suhiir]

Originally Posted by DRG

Yes, the two Arjun's been corrected. Still not sure how that number got in there as it was 64 previous. I'm guessing 75 was entered as a cut and paste only on the first digit and it ended up being 754 and that would be automatically reduced the maximum of 255 when saved

Only very naughty boys and girls would use those two units ( 20 and 21 Indian OOB )in a game knowing the HF armour should be 75 not 255 and I'm sure all the responsible players who knew about this have already made the change.

Don

Must be talking to someone else ... I don't think I've ever used India except in a couple of the canned scenarios.
And I think I'm the only girl that haunts these sacred male halls

[scJazz]

[quote=Suhiir;788943]

Originally Posted by FASTBOAT TOUGH

Not always possible. I often have "issues" with the number of game turns you get in AI battles. It's rare to have time for anything but a semi-blind frontal assault because you're given 15-20 turns to secure objectives 50 hexes away.

WinSPMBT assumes motorized/mechanized forces and pure infantry assaults are impossible because you can't even get to to objectives in the number of turns the game allows for a battle. It would be nice if the game code took the map size into account when determining the number of turns to allow for a battle. ((hint, hint))



For my part I'd like to see Area SAMs removed from the game, they don't belong in a tactical game of WinSPMBT's scale. But we all know that ain't gonna happen.

Besides, like bombers they are handy for scenario building if nothing else.



We're in total agreement here. I usually buy an MLRS/HIMARS or similar system and never use it, I leave it for exclusively for counter-battery; since the AI tends to think an artillery regiment per battalion is the proper ratio.



And for my part I tend to play infantry heavy, combined arms ... suprise, suprise

The only two changes I make to AI Campaigns are...
1) Increasing turns to a minimum of 30, generally 40.
2) Decreasing tree values to something approximating NOT wall to wall forest, Amazon jungle.

I stopped playing modern games with TI, CM, MLRS and UAVs. In fact for years I wouldn't play SPMBT and stuck with WW2. However, I can't find my SPWW2 CD anymore and now I'm kind of entertained by MBT

[Suhiir]

Originally Posted by scJazz

The only two changes I make to AI Campaigns are...
1) Increasing turns to a minimum of 30, generally 40.

The problem here is the AI sometimes isn't smart enough to know when it's been beaten so you have to cycle thru 10 or 20 turns doing basically nothing to get the battle to end. So sort of a damned-if-ya-do-damned-if-ya-don't thing.

Originally Posted by scJazz

2) Decreasing tree values to something approximating NOT wall to wall forest, Amazon jungle.

Since you have the CD go into the map editor and set the tree cover value to something less then rainforest