Team Air Starts?

sort
AutoWar 9 years ago Should two guys go air in team games with a large number of playes on both sides? Should it be airfac-airfac for double ravens, or for a raven/hawks team play? Should it be airfac-gunfac? How should gunfac support airfac or vice versa? +0 / -0
FFC 9 years ago Rapier op +0 / -0
Saktoth 9 years ago All of these options should be viable in different ways. Multi air starts are really strong, three air facs even with say two plane players spamming fighters and the other spamming Banshees was dominant in the meta and nothing has changed much about that. What is really required is at least enough fighters to stop the enemy winning the air game. If you have less resources than the enemy on air factories, you will need to build ground AA, possibly a lot of it. +0 / -0
mojjj 9 years ago IF you dont control air, meaning you have less fighters and/or lose them, all air-invested ressources are useless to that point. meaning, all of your airplayers. the higher the air player count was, the higher thew uselessness. you MUST restrict enemy air at all cost, meaning at that point you need static aa cover. which you could have done if you did not have air. +0 / -0
Saktoth 9 years ago Not exactly true, the enemy must invest a lot into AA/fighters to shoot down all your fighters, and the time that it takes for them to wrest air control from you is time the ground players spend taking the map and securing positions. You can only really use AA from a well-secured and defended position, so if you can field enough fighters to delay the loss of air control (and the enemies switch to bombers/gunship ball) until the lines have met in the middle of the map, you have less problematic comm-snipes, better established positions for AA, etc. Meanwhile, trying to defend against air players building only 1 fighter to scout that you have no air then commsniping with Ravens and Banshee balls while you're trying to expand? That's an instant loss. +0 / -0
mojjj 9 years ago this is paper a calculation. it is not about who has more fighters. use them intelligently and defeat the enemiy aa or cover the comsnipe/sacrifice bombers for their fighters to get either the com or air superiority. this gives you advantage to either slow them by forcing static AA or by continue sniping coms. acting or reacting at the right moment is the key. increasing pressure instantly in key regions and supporting ground pushes. getting all time intel for the team is additional benefit. also, a single air player can react much better than two (maybe inexperienced) air players. i lost a battle, when my team had 2 air+1GS and the enemy 1air/1GS due to the 2 air players not working together and being killed one by one (replay was not saved due to yesterday server crash). +0 / -0
Saktoth 9 years ago Obviously, individual skill and cooperation is required for every strategy. This is pretty irrelevant to the discussion. An air player who loses the battle for air dominance has not rendered his air investments useless, he has stalled for valuable time and forced out a lot of fighters. Your original post sounded like "If you are going to lose the air war, you might as well not have air players". Someone always loses the air war so this is obviously untrue... +0 / -0
GoogleFrog 9 years ago AutoWar I think the answer is that nobody knows. Lots of people have opinions though. +0 / -0
Failer 9 years ago (edited 9 years ago) Well I remember a meta (which wasnt really popular for long) in games liek 4 vs 4 or 5vs5 on small maps (like Ravaged, in ''higher-eloed'' games), where all but one went planes. Ground player was supposed to do tiny expansion and mainly defend, while all air players rushed Shadows (except 1 who made AA) and simply sniped everything valuable that came into LoS. Most of teh game were won in few minutes. If enemy spammed AA every1 switcehd to groudn and enemy was left with tons of useless AA. This tactic, tho, required huge cooperation bewtween teammates, and I woudlt reccomend it to low-experienced players ^^. +1 / -0

Forum index > General discussion >