I think it should be slightly different.
If the spaa cannot kill tanks, make it 70sp. If it can kill tanks (example being the gepard) it should be 140 or 150.
3 Likes
Paying 150-200 SP to larp as not one, but three buildings just hoping something spawns that you can shoot at…
All the while being a massive sitting duck to basically any ground unit that comes close.
1 Like
issue with that is then you have things like SLM that is 70SP when it has more range then any CAS plane in game, its simillar to how people begged for CAS SP costs to go up I think heavy SPAA should have an increase in SPAA
I feel like AA vehicles with high tank destruction potential should get spawn cost adjustments depending on the ammunition they carry, similar to planes and helicopters.
Keep the low spawn cost if the player voluntarily chooses the HEI-T (or whatever low pen HE ammo) belt and increase the spawn cost if the player chooses the APHE/APDS/HVAP/whatever belts.
2 Likes
That makes sense
I would say a 150SP cost is more then justified for SPAA like the SLM
1 Like
Should be 100SP at most. There is no justification for vehicles that are incapable of destroying ground vehicles and cannot help their team unless there are planes to cost more than MBTs, light tanks and even tank destroyers.
Similar to the ammo SP factor, maybe there should be a SP factor for the amount of launchers you take into battle.
1 Like
Is it better than the hq-17 and the TOR ?
have to remember most people spawn SPAA as there second or third life by then MBTs or IFVs are costing 300-400 points I think 150 that doesnt go up in SP cost with other tanks is fair since then means people are only gonna spawn them when there are planes up, or if they want to do SPAA they can
That’s just not the case though. CAS can still easily outrange the SLM. people just choose to fly straight to the battlefield as low as possible instead of sky climbing out of its range.
Spaas also have low cost because it has less destructive potential. CAS can kill literally everything, be it planes or tanks. It’s also easier to defend in.
Spaas like the SLM can only target planes, and have no way to defend itself from tanks which are usually the majority of enemies.
It’s basically less SP for less kills (aka less RP and SL) but you make the game easier for your team.
Less reward for an easier match, so the SP is lower.<
1 Like
40km compared to the max range of 30km on the TGP and even less max range of things like MAVs that are around 22km, the only thing that does out range it is the KH38 and maybe Hammers. I have also seen the SLM completely wipe out entire payloads of weapons since more guided weapons are a max of 6, when the SLM has 16 ready and another 16 that can be loaded.
if a plane costs 900SP which most planes with FnF ATGMs are now costing near to that, I think an SPAA that completely out ranges it and can intercept all of its CAS pretty easily should cost a little more then 70SP
yeah thats kinda the hard counter to them?
SPAA should simply be weaker. There’s no other scenario where it makes sense for it to cost less.
it shouldnt
start playing ground vehicles in the ground mode instead
8 Likes
Cas Mains:
13 Likes
probably years atp
You always had to defend yourself if the Russians weren’t on your team. Speaking of top tier. Only kh38 carriers were and are unpunished. That’s the reality :D
2 Likes
SU34 pov: V, zoom in, space space
1 Like
Am I going insane?
SPAA has one purpose: destroying planes, some of them can destroy other ground vehicles, but a lot of others cannot destroy the ground vehicles at their BR at all.
Planes can easily destroy many ground vehicles, most of which cannot retaliate at all. Planes can also destroy other planes.
Most ground vehicles can destroy other ground vehicles, but unless they are a light vehicle with IRST and/or certain missiles, a 155mm howitzer with proxy shells or a dedicated anti air vehicle, they cannot really deal with planes.
Which one do you think should cost the least and which one should cost the most?
Should the vehicle that can only really attack a vehicle that isn’t guaranteed to appear cost more or less than a vehicle that can destroy the main vehicle type in ground battles?
I’ve asked this before and I guess I’ll have to ask it again:
How are you going to justify vehicles that are incapable of destroying other ground vehicles costing more than vehicles that are capable of destroying other ground vehicles?
4 Likes
Stronger vehicles should cost more.
Yes, but that’s usually where his game ends. :D