Loading...
  OR  Zero-K Name:    Password:   

Post edit history

Refumble: Planes

To display differences between versions, select one or more edits in the list using checkboxes and click "diff selected"
Post edit history
Date Editor Before After
5/16/2026 1:36:11 PMDErankStiofanKingofAwoo before revert after revert
5/16/2026 1:36:02 PMDErankStiofanKingofAwoo before revert after revert
5/16/2026 1:26:31 PMDErankStiofanKingofAwoo before revert after revert
5/16/2026 1:24:14 PMDErankStiofanKingofAwoo before revert after revert
Before After
1 [quote] [quote]I think it would be nice if we ended up in a place where Aerial AA, or switching to gs/air is better than just making ground AA.[/quote] 1 [quote] [quote]I think it would be nice if we ended up in a place where Aerial AA, or switching to gs/air is better than just making ground AA.[/quote]
2 How so? Air-based AA is its own counter, so if it is the go-to counter, then whoever makes more of it just wins. Ground AA does not cover the whole map in the same way as fighters, and can be raid targets for ground forces.[/quote] 2 How so? Air-based AA is its own counter, so if it is the go-to counter, then whoever makes more of it just wins. Ground AA does not cover the whole map in the same way as fighters, and can be raid targets for ground forces.[/quote]
3 The nested quote misses the following bit: 3 The nested quote misses the following bit:
4 [quote]It technically already is! But from a sort of practicallity and qol standpoint it could improve.[/quote] 4 [quote]It technically already is! But from a sort of practicallity and qol standpoint it could improve.[/quote]
5 \n
6 I acknowledge that fighters are already more efficent AA than ground AA. They don't need to be better at killing planes, and ground AA will always eventually crowd out fighters. 5 I acknowledge that fighters are already more efficent AA than ground AA. They don't need to be better at killing planes, and ground AA will always eventually crowd out fighters.
7 The critique is not that they cannot do their job in isolation, but that they have too much difficulty doing their job in context with even little ground AA. Investment in fighters only has an efficent window at the very start of the game, or when introducing air to a ground only game. 6 The critique is not that they cannot do their job in isolation, but that they have too much difficulty doing their job in context with even little ground AA. Investment in fighters only has an efficent window at the very start of the game, or when introducing air to a ground only game.
8 The intent is to move the threshold up on how much ground AA is needed to deny aerial AA from usage, to give people more room to use and be effective with those units and interact in aerial combat. 7 The intent is to move the threshold up on how much ground AA is needed to deny aerial AA from usage, to give people more room to use and be effective with those units and interact in aerial combat.
9 \n 8 \n
10 Air to air combat even in, or more because of context with ground AA and flex AA, is interesting when you get to do it, probably the most interesting air combat can get. 9 Air to air combat even in, or more because of context with ground AA and flex AA, is interesting when you get to do it, probably the most interesting air combat can get.
11 Issue is that you quickly get into a position where trying to to use fighters in that context bleeds them off too quickly to be useful/a good trade. 10 Issue is that you quickly get into a position where trying to to use fighters in that context bleeds them off too quickly to be useful/a good trade.