I said that?
Really?
Odd. My gut reaction would be that is a bad idea. I generally desire to downplay aircraft because they cause so many issues.
Did I give a reason?
| Tactical Command http://www.tacticalwargames.net/taccmd/ |
|
| Aircraft on CAP at the start of the game http://www.tacticalwargames.net/taccmd/viewtopic.php?f=69&t=6607 |
Page 1 of 2 |
| Author: | CyberShadow [ Wed Nov 02, 2005 10:56 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Aircraft on CAP at the start of the game |
This thread is to discuss the following proposed rule - from Markconz. Allow CAP for aircraft at game start similar to how garrisons are allowed to start on OW. | |
| Author: | nealhunt [ Thu Nov 03, 2005 12:03 am ] |
| Post subject: | Aircraft on CAP at the start of the game |
I said that? Really? Odd. My gut reaction would be that is a bad idea. I generally desire to downplay aircraft because they cause so many issues. Did I give a reason?
|
|
| Author: | Legion 4 [ Thu Nov 03, 2005 3:11 am ] |
| Post subject: | Aircraft on CAP at the start of the game |
You all know my opinion ! CAS only for Epic ... CAP is another game and I agree with Neal ! 
|
|
| Author: | Markconz [ Thu Nov 03, 2005 3:26 am ] | ||
| Post subject: | Aircraft on CAP at the start of the game | ||
Actually it was me ?  But regarding your desire to 'downplay aircraft' - surely 'starting on CAP' (being a purely anti-air role) does just this!!! (ie it helps prevent those currently unstoppable first turn bomber activations). Nothing more frustrating than buying fighters to interfere with enemy air power, only to find out they can't intercept until its too late. |
|||
| Author: | CyberShadow [ Thu Nov 03, 2005 12:01 pm ] | ||
| Post subject: | Aircraft on CAP at the start of the game | ||
I am sorry about this (human error!). I have now given credit where due. Thanks. |
|||
| Author: | nealhunt [ Thu Nov 03, 2005 3:49 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Aircraft on CAP at the start of the game |
It gives the advantage to lower strategy armies when it comes to air defense. But regarding your desire to 'downplay aircraft' - surely 'starting on CAP' (being a purely anti-air role) does just this!!! (ie it helps prevent those currently unstoppable first turn bomber activations). | |
| Author: | Legion 4 [ Thu Nov 03, 2005 4:50 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Aircraft on CAP at the start of the game |
"The Law of unintended consequences" ?!?! ?
|
|
| Author: | Tactica [ Thu Nov 03, 2005 4:55 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Aircraft on CAP at the start of the game |
OK, this issue/recomendation is interesting. Although I kinda like the idea, (and I'm an air craft fan) I'm struggling to give a thumbs up after I give it some thought due to balance concerns. I think the concern is that a flier heavy army all the sudden could have a huge perceived strategy advantage. Take IG for example, not the highest strategy in the game and doesn't usually go first. They have some big toys and enemy like to target those big toys before they go off. If the toys could be guaranteed to almost always go off first in every game, how would that effect the potential to take counter measures or event to deal with certain formations? Example: If this CAP rule was in effect, I might take 2 or 3 tbolt squadrons at 150 each in say a 3K game. Deployed CAP would automatically put my Manticore and deathstrike formations in a much better way and would not force me to purchase hydras to block them. Hydras have a limited use, but do what they do well. Deployed CAP would allow me to sit on my planes all first turn, and wait for you to attempt to deal with the artillery that you know will cause you some pain, the artillery you know you have to deal with. Because they are dug in out of LOS from any angle - your only recourse is to either teleport in or use planes. Since you didn't have teleporters - or can't use that trick yet - your only recourse is planes. My CAP will cover the area suitably well and keep you at bay - serving as Hydra. Now, maybe I would deal with you, maybe I wouldn't. It does give a feeling that planes now have an advantage to be effective before they have been called into the battle lines. It also gives a feeling that each army already knew the others were on the field and sorties have already been launched. So all in all, is it a bad thing or a good thing... I don't know. Since there are other considerations around intercepts and caps - I would say we work on one tweak at a time, because one tweak may affect the value of another. At the moment, I like folks relying on AA ground cover if they want the early protection. It seems logical and tactically sound. Always assuming all planes are always available to a force at the beginning of every battle does seem a bit off and out of character to me. I'm leaning towards "no" on this rule proposition out of caution. Impact to the E:A game and army lists as a whole more than anything else. Strategic considerations are also at play and I'm not sure a given army is always 100% ready for battle - especially when it comes to air defenses. |
|
| Author: | Markconz [ Sun Nov 06, 2005 4:33 am ] | ||
| Post subject: | Aircraft on CAP at the start of the game | ||
Are Air assault craft and bombers not also 'big toys'? Why should they get to 'go off' without worrying about interceptors? I don't get it...
|
|||
| Author: | Markconz [ Sun Nov 06, 2005 4:36 am ] | ||
| Post subject: | Aircraft on CAP at the start of the game | ||
It definitely powers up interceptors. ?That changes the dynamics of the air war, but I can't see that it downplays it. | |||
| Author: | Tas [ Sun Nov 06, 2005 6:52 am ] |
| Post subject: | Aircraft on CAP at the start of the game |
I am in favour of the proposed rule. Why would I spend those points on CAP overhead if they cant be used straight up? And I am limited in my points availability for A/C anyway. Use of the aircraft as CAP in a defensive role, then removes its ability to be used offensively, so there are still pros and cons for both sides. The major dillemma I see is banks of a/c from both sides all on CAP causing a cascading effect of interceptions. I have always thought a pre-game start "Air Phase" would be in order as the furball develops overhead and on the ingress routes to determine who actually gets air superiority or even parity. It could be that those A/c never see the table but maybe they drive off those enemy "jabos" before they even get on the board to drop their bombs. It would be an added complexity, and yes it means that some of those lovely painted minis dont get on the table (bummer) but from a 'realism perspective' I think it would add another good dimension. Something simialr was suggetsed in the very early playtest days for Ortillery platforms juggling for position overhead in orbit |
|
| Author: | zak [ Mon Nov 07, 2005 6:52 pm ] | ||
| Post subject: | Aircraft on CAP at the start of the game | ||
The cascade effect isn't a problem , only _one_ CAP formation is allowed to intercept an enemy ground attack or air assault per turn. And i agree with Mark Conz , why should there not be a counter to the "Big Toys" of high strategy armies ? In the Sentry (garrison on overwatch)discussion on the old SG forum it was remarked ( i think by the Siege masters Champion?)that there should be a limit to how many formations should be allowed to start in Sentry. Perhaps formations starting in Sentry / CAP should be combined in the limitation i suggested of 1 formation for every 1000 points (or part thereof) ? |
|||
| Author: | primarch [ Tue Nov 08, 2005 1:06 am ] |
| Post subject: | Aircraft on CAP at the start of the game |
Hi! Balancing airpower in epic is always a hard thing. We went through an a whole cycle of very detail, to very simple to an optional add on to a standard add on over 8 years. People expect different things from airpower at this scale. There is no easy answer and I suspect that what we did in netepic, giving several options, was the only good solution. Primarch |
|
| Page 1 of 2 | All times are UTC [ DST ] |
| Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group http://www.phpbb.com/ |
|