My proposal to fix anti air

Anti air as it stand is the worst unit in atwar. I propose a very simple fix that will make it actually usable.

Increase anti air unit range from 2 to 4 so that with the mobile anti air upgrade, it will have a range of 7. The same as regular upgraded infantry.

This is a good idea because

1. Anti air can be used to contest neutral countries and cities against enemy spamming air units. Having some anti air attack a city with infantry will give players an edge over air unit spammers.
2. Anti air if can you afford them, can be moved with the main army stack providing some air protection. Especially useful against DS helicopters. Right now the low range hinders your ability to do this.
3. Anti air still remains quite expensive at 180 so it won't be spammed to the point where air units are useless.

M8 just no, AA are strong enough as they are. Do you have any idea how strong it is to an imp or pd with money? The most that should be done is incorporation of the range upgrade into the normal unit.

Napísal ROYAL, 09.02.2016 at 22:33

1. Anti air can be used to contest neutral countries and cities against enemy spamming air units. Having some anti air attack a city with infantry will give players an edge over air unit spammers.

No one simply spams air units, you have to get and keep the income before you can even think of making half your units air.

Napísal Xenosapien, 10.02.2016 at 03:40

M8 just no, AA are strong enough as they are. Do you have any idea how strong it is to an imp or pd with money? The most that should be done is incorporation the range upgrade into the normal unit.

Napísal ROYAL, 09.02.2016 at 22:33

1. Anti air can be used to contest neutral countries and cities against enemy spamming air units. Having some anti air attack a city with infantry will give players an edge over air unit spammers.

No one simply spams air units, you have to get and keep the income before you can even think of making half your units air.

Yes AAs are so strong I never see them used. Especially turk fighting sm ukr. Funded turk doesnt even use it. Range is less of a problem with turk since you can move them very quickly using transport. Yet I do not see them at all. This suggestion only has +2 range, I doubt that will change anything.

No it would not be overpowered for imp or pd. The only difference between now and this suggestion is 2 range. I do not see pd or funded imp spam these units because it sucks. Regular infantry is FAR more cost efficient at defending againsts air units than anti-air. Even against helicopters, pd and imp infantry still beats anti air in terms of cost efficiency. Infantry gets the advantage of not bring shit versus ground unit and can attack.

The point of this suggestion is to make anti air decent enough so that you see 1-5 of them when you're playing sm or ds.

Even with imp, anti air still cost 150 and you get a 1 attack unit that is useless against anything but air units. Everybody still gonna spam tanks and inf regardless of funds simply because they are more versatile.

A 1 attack unit is not OP xeno and wont change the meta if at all. I fail to see how adding 2 range to an underused unit breaks the meta game in anyway.

Incase you're wondering, sm and ds spams plenty of air units. The point here is that they spam enough air units when they attack you for the niche application of anti air to be used. Having 1-5 bombers or helies attack is enough to give some consideration to anti air.

Napísal ROYAL, 10.02.2016 at 07:43

Napísal Xenosapien, 10.02.2016 at 03:40

M8 just no, AA are strong enough as they are. Do you have any idea how strong it is to an imp or pd with money? The most that should be done is incorporation the range upgrade into the normal unit.

Napísal ROYAL, 09.02.2016 at 22:33

1. Anti air can be used to contest neutral countries and cities against enemy spamming air units. Having some anti air attack a city with infantry will give players an edge over air unit spammers.

No one simply spams air units, you have to get and keep the income before you can even think of making half your units air.

Yes AAs are so strong I never see them used. Especially turk fighting sm ukr. Funded turk doesnt even use it. Range is less of a problem with turk since you can move them very quickly using transport. Yet I do not see them at all. This suggestion only has +2 range, I doubt that will change anything.

No it would not be overpowered for imp or pd. The only difference between now and this suggestion is 2 range. I do not see pd or funded imp spam these units because it sucks. Regular infantry is FAR more cost efficient at defending againsts air units than anti-air. Even against helicopters, pd and imp infantry still beats anti air in terms of cost efficiency. Infantry gets the advantage of not bring shit versus ground unit and can attack.

The point of this suggestion is to make anti air decent enough so that you see 1-5 of them when you're playing sm or ds.

Even with imp, anti air still cost 150 and you get a 1 attack unit that is useless against anything but air units. Everybody still gonna spam tanks and inf regardless of funds simply because they are more versatile.

A 1 attack unit is not OP xeno and wont change the meta if at all. I fail to see how adding 2 range to an underused unit breaks the meta game in anyway.

Incase you're wondering, sm and ds spams plenty of air units. The point here is that they spam enough air units when they attack you for the niche application of anti air to be used. Having 1-5 bombers or helies attack is enough to give some consideration to anti air.

They will almost certainly be used mid to late game, in fact just yesterday I played a turkey that made a not insignificant amount of AAs. Even just a few to take the edge off is powerful. It's attack is pretty much irrelevant as it's a purely defensive unit, it's almost as wasteful as using solely inf on an attack. Cost efficiency is not the point of a high power unit, it's reinforcement efficiency which it's very good at. Allowing AA to have the range of inf means that you don't have to think carefully about using AA when you have the money, and the enemy has to be quite wary of the AA you have, not being sure where you will place them.

I'm kinda split on this issue of boosting AA's. Currently many players don't even use the upgrade, like i even know some r8s and 9s that haven't even unlocked it, which is kinda shocking. Personally I think AA's are pretty OP, you can only really use them if you get funded and know your enemy is going to attack a specific place. It's a nice surprise and tends to be very effective. I agree with xeno that its a purely defensive unit, they aren't meant to be used to attack, simply defend in a stack. Currently if you have all the ups the range on them isn't too bad, like you could move them from 1 balkan country to another, or from turk to ukr with a trans. It would be nice though to make it more appealing so that others would use it more. However it is a niche unit and I don't think it will really ever be popular. Overall i think its a lack of knowledge, many players don't know what their missing out on and I'd encourage them to start using it, even if it isn't going to be boosted.

This was actually meant to go through with the last round of strat upgrades, but there was some objection.

Xrnosapien raped mah turk in gold tournament, made like 7 Anti air unit, and I lost the tourney because of it. I support buffing aa range.

AAs are fine as they are.Not op nor useless.

Either increase the range of decrease the cost, otherwise it'll stay purely underrated unit.

Only ever time I used AA was in 50k game being triple rushed by noobs playing SM. It didnt change anything to the outcome...
The way I see it AA is expensive and highly unpredictable if u have 2-3 it might not even make u kill more bombers than regular inf. In big stack probably work better but given the cost u ll never have 10+ AA in a stack...
Edit: my point is AA are useless

So because nobody uses AA it means it isn't good enough? Lmao this is a ridiculous statement to make.

Same complains were made about, RA, BLITZ and GW, and I think we all know what happened with those strats, right?

You know the saying: '' A donkey never hits the same stone twice'', Well by making a thread like this, you'd even outruled the statement ''as dumb as a donkey''

Anti Air is a PURE defensive unit. You don't see very many mobile defense anti air guns just driving around. That's silly.

Napísal PleaseMe, 10.02.2016 at 14:32

Anti Air is a PURE defensive unit. You don't see very many mobile defense anti air guns just driving around. That's silly.

Their rockets have range of hundreds of miles instead, use your brain for once mate.

Napísal Evic, 10.02.2016 at 14:41

Napísal PleaseMe, 10.02.2016 at 14:32

Anti Air is a PURE defensive unit. You don't see very many mobile defense anti air guns just driving around. That's silly.

Their rockets have range of hundreds of miles instead, use your brain for once mate.

Then maybe they should add long range anti air?!?!? But if you used your walnut brain you would notice that in this game they are pure defense unit.

Napísal PleaseMe, 10.02.2016 at 14:32

Anti Air is a PURE defensive unit. You don't see very many mobile defense anti air guns just driving around. That's silly.

What is point of defensive units when you cant move them fast enough to where they need to defend.

If im not mistaken, isnt there plenty of mobile anti air units in real life? Even in WW2 the half track was a mobile anti air vehicle.

Napísal ROYAL, 10.02.2016 at 16:00

Napísal PleaseMe, 10.02.2016 at 14:32

Anti Air is a PURE defensive unit. You don't see very many mobile defense anti air guns just driving around. That's silly.

What is point of defensive units when you cant move them fast enough to where they need to defend.

If im not mistaken, isnt there plenty of mobile anti air units in real life? Even in WW2 the half track was a mobile anti air vehicle.

Yea but there is a difference between long range anti air, and anti-air that is mobile.

Napísal PleaseMe, 10.02.2016 at 16:17

Napísal ROYAL, 10.02.2016 at 16:00

Napísal PleaseMe, 10.02.2016 at 14:32

Anti Air is a PURE defensive unit. You don't see very many mobile defense anti air guns just driving around. That's silly.

What is point of defensive units when you cant move them fast enough to where they need to defend.

If im not mistaken, isnt there plenty of mobile anti air units in real life? Even in WW2 the half track was a mobile anti air vehicle.

Yea but there is a difference between long range anti air, and anti-air that is mobile.

Explain how this line of reasoning proves AAs do not need a buff

Napísal ROYAL, 10.02.2016 at 16:34

Napísal PleaseMe, 10.02.2016 at 16:17

Napísal ROYAL, 10.02.2016 at 16:00

Napísal PleaseMe, 10.02.2016 at 14:32

Anti Air is a PURE defensive unit. You don't see very many mobile defense anti air guns just driving around. That's silly.

What is point of defensive units when you cant move them fast enough to where they need to defend.

If im not mistaken, isnt there plenty of mobile anti air units in real life? Even in WW2 the half track was a mobile anti air vehicle.

Yea but there is a difference between long range anti air, and anti-air that is mobile.

Explain how this line of reasoning proves AAs do not need a buff

You can't have both OP defense and OP range. You have to pick one or the other. And since there is no point in having OP range, they stuck to having good defense.

Napísal PleaseMe, 10.02.2016 at 16:53

Napísal ROYAL, 10.02.2016 at 16:34

Napísal PleaseMe, 10.02.2016 at 16:17

Napísal ROYAL, 10.02.2016 at 16:00

Napísal PleaseMe, 10.02.2016 at 14:32

Anti Air is a PURE defensive unit. You don't see very many mobile defense anti air guns just driving around. That's silly.

What is point of defensive units when you cant move them fast enough to where they need to defend.

If im not mistaken, isnt there plenty of mobile anti air units in real life? Even in WW2 the half track was a mobile anti air vehicle.

Yea but there is a difference between long range anti air, and anti-air that is mobile.

Explain how this line of reasoning proves AAs do not need a buff

You can't have both OP defense and OP range. You have to pick one or the other. And since there is no point in having OP range, they stuck to having good defense.

Nc destroyers have OP range attack and defense.

Also it is hardly op when it only counters one kind of unit. When fighting ground or naval, it is hardly better than militia for 6x the cost.

Napísal ROYAL, 10.02.2016 at 17:04

Napísal PleaseMe, 10.02.2016 at 16:53

Napísal ROYAL, 10.02.2016 at 16:34

Napísal PleaseMe, 10.02.2016 at 16:17

Napísal ROYAL, 10.02.2016 at 16:00

Napísal PleaseMe, 10.02.2016 at 14:32

Anti Air is a PURE defensive unit. You don't see very many mobile defense anti air guns just driving around. That's silly.

What is point of defensive units when you cant move them fast enough to where they need to defend.

If im not mistaken, isnt there plenty of mobile anti air units in real life? Even in WW2 the half track was a mobile anti air vehicle.

Yea but there is a difference between long range anti air, and anti-air that is mobile.

Explain how this line of reasoning proves AAs do not need a buff

You can't have both OP defense and OP range. You have to pick one or the other. And since there is no point in having OP range, they stuck to having good defense.

Nc destroyers have OP range attack and defense.

Also it is hardly op when it only counters one kind of unit. When fighting ground or naval, it is hardly better than militia for 6x the cost.

So maybe there should be an anti-air strategy, since we have a destroyer strategy, a bomber strategy, a tank strategy, and a marine strategy.

Napísal PleaseMe, 10.02.2016 at 17:22

Napísal ROYAL, 10.02.2016 at 17:04

Napísal PleaseMe, 10.02.2016 at 16:53

Napísal ROYAL, 10.02.2016 at 16:34

Napísal PleaseMe, 10.02.2016 at 16:17

Napísal ROYAL, 10.02.2016 at 16:00

Napísal PleaseMe, 10.02.2016 at 14:32

Anti Air is a PURE defensive unit. You don't see very many mobile defense anti air guns just driving around. That's silly.

What is point of defensive units when you cant move them fast enough to where they need to defend.

If im not mistaken, isnt there plenty of mobile anti air units in real life? Even in WW2 the half track was a mobile anti air vehicle.

Yea but there is a difference between long range anti air, and anti-air that is mobile.

Explain how this line of reasoning proves AAs do not need a buff

You can't have both OP defense and OP range. You have to pick one or the other. And since there is no point in having OP range, they stuck to having good defense.

Nc destroyers have OP range attack and defense.

Also it is hardly op when it only counters one kind of unit. When fighting ground or naval, it is hardly better than militia for 6x the cost.

So maybe there should be an anti-air strategy, since we have a destroyer strategy, a bomber strategy, a tank strategy, and a marine strategy.

Or how about we just add 2 range to AA so it is more usable.

I have the perfect fix for AA: take them out. Then no more discussion how to fix it...
Why is there anti air units and no anti tanks anyway??

Napísal Kraigg, 11.02.2016 at 01:44

Why is there anti air units and no anti tanks anyway??

pd

Also there needs to be specific counter or air units because unlike tanks, they can fly over water.

Napísal Kraigg, 11.02.2016 at 01:44

I have the perfect fix for AA: take them out. Then no more discussion how to fix it...
Why is there anti air units and no anti tanks anyway??

there are but they are rares