That Laser Missile.

[Gilmund]

If it was realistic, they wouldn't score direct hits all the time in the first place. Also, we are not talking bombings from 1500 planes here...

They don't. A bit of panick and one HS 129 turns very innacurate.
If we start lowering down the accuracy of HS 129 or other planes i fear you'll have to bring other at/armor assets into infantry decks having them as at response. Turning infantry decks in something else than infantry in the process. I feel they are fine right now, maybe deadly in A but very fragile against figthers due to their speed. Decks like 101st airborne/6th Airborne have assets to bring them down.

 

[Herr_Robert]

They don't. A bit of panick and one HS 129 turns very innacurate.
If we start lowering down the accuracy of HS 129 or other planes i fear you'll have to bring other at/armor assets into infantry decks having them as at response. Turning infantry decks in something else than infantry in the process. I feel they are fine right now, maybe deadly in A but very fragile against figthers due to their speed. Decks like 101st airborne/6th Airborne have assets to bring them down.

I'm not suggesting any changes; I'm just pointing out that the accuracy of air-to-ground attacks are unrealistic for all planes in SD. Now that I'm used to it, I'm happy with how planes work in SD. The HS was problematic before, but I think its fine since the resilience nerf it received some patches ago. IIRC it was also able to kill vehicles without a visual before.

 

[Gilmund]

I'm not suggesting any changes; I'm just pointing out that the accuracy of air-to-ground attacks are unrealistic for all planes in SD. Now that I'm used to it, I'm happy with how planes work in SD. The HS was problematic before, but I think its fine since the resilience nerf it received some patches ago. IIRC it was also able to kill vehicles without a visual before.

Sure but can we make planes useful to play with without this unrealism ? I feel too they are pretty much ok now, some were too overpowered in the past but since they got a nerf and since AA has been up, it seems fine.

 

[451]

There is no possible human who could have pulled off that series of shots, under fire, with enemies tracking in, on a field he hadn't seen before. I get there are sacrifices for the fact that this is done on computer, but it's not that hard to program a half-second delay between kill and reaquisition. If I was playing a modern combat sim, maybe this "feature" would make sense.

As a person who flies realistic WW2 air combat sims this is not at all unrealistic.

While piloting a N1k2 with 240kg bombs under my wings I was able to identify two Sherman’s with a Wirblwind nearby (mixed sides), all piloted by humans and was able to bomb both the Sherman’s on the same shallow dive slope. Both crews were killed instantly by overpressurication from the near misses.

Similarly, in a non mixed side sim, I was able to destroy 3 t34 tanks with a ju87 armed with 37mm cannons despite them starting to spread out and that was also with 37mm anti air present amongst the column.

The list goes on and on where columns, formations and active combat units have had multiple tanks destroyed in one run. A skilled pilot can make said maneuvers easily.

That said, air power in SD is severely weakened (for balance purposes which I agree with). I was listening to a game caster the other day where he said it takes 6 P47s to take out a German heavy tank.

That is 5 too many in real life.

So in summation it sounds like you need to adjust your game. Bring AA closer, boost it with commanders or have an ASF on standby.

If you’re still adamant that you played perfectly then post a replay.

 

[Protosszocker]

That said, air power in SD is severely weakened (for balance purposes which I agree with). I was listening to a game caster the other day where he said it takes 6 P47s to take out a German heavy tank.

That is 5 too many in real life.

Wouldnt say its 5 too many, not every attack of a p47 killed a german heavy tank, but yeah bomb effectiveness is quite low.

 

[IronHat]

It's not just the HS 129 that's unrealistic. The accuracy of air-to-ground attacks of planes in general in SD is extremely unrealistic. When pilots claimed 100s of tank kills during WW2, they probably didn't even kill 1/10 of that.

http://ftr.wot-news.com/2014/04/04/ground-attack-aircraft-myth-of-the-tank-busters/

you mean the accuracy of air to ground cannon is unrealistic.

The Typhoon AT's capability at killing tanks is highly unreliable, the HE rockets on the thunderbolt more so.

The kill potential of even the SAP rocket is far from those that of the HS129.

 

[apwall21]

As a person who flies realistic WW2 air combat sims this is not at all unrealistic.

While piloting a N1k2 with 240kg bombs under my wings I was able to identify two Sherman’s with a Wirblwind nearby (mixed sides), all piloted by humans and was able to bomb both the Sherman’s on the same shallow dive slope. Both crews were killed instantly by overpressurication from the near misses.

Having played the game now even longer, I am surprised that nobody pointed out the obvious, that planes DON'T auto target ground troops. Never the less your claim in this event wouldn't have mattered, the pilot in your situation planned to drop two bombs from the outset of the run, the pilot in the game was firing until it killed and then turned perfectly and fired 1 volley.

I would close this thread as I misunderstood the mechanics at work, and am shocked nobody mentioned this. Still, the surety of kills from this plane is utterly frustrating, especially when they get proper AA backing to counter your fighters, and that complaint may or not be worth a nerf. I still want to play this game.

 

[Gilmund]

Having played the game now even longer, I am surprised that nobody pointed out the obvious, that planes DON'T auto target ground troops. Never the less your claim in this event wouldn't have mattered, the pilot in your situation planned to drop two bombs from the outset of the run, the pilot in the game was firing until it killed and then turned perfectly and fired 1 volley.

I would close this thread as I misunderstood the mechanics at work, and am shocked nobody mentioned this. Still, the surety of kills from this plane is utterly frustrating, especially when they get proper AA backing to counter your fighters, and that complaint may or not be worth a nerf. I still want to play this game.

Planes have missions. Harassing enemy supply lines were precise missions, i'm fine thinking there is no auto-target along the way. And of course, when they do their mission/ reach their target in the game, possibilities are purposely more limited than irl due to their poor amount of ammunition. Or planes would be even stronger than they are now, bombing and strafing everything in area in groups. To some point, if you compare Steel Division to a board game, each unit in the game do represent more than one unit irl. It is obvious for infantry (there is no such thing as one 9 infantry men squad covering large area of trees, one 9 infantry squad do indeed represent multiple squads at once), it is a bit less obvious for panzers (well one tank could be seen as one tank). But you get the idea for planes. With analogy, when planes do bomb a location you may think they are doing their mission against multiple targets at once (entire colums or something) on precise locations and your plane do represent more than one plane (they were never flying alone afaik). The game does represent their success.

That said, the HS 129 in the game is really unable to get a kill or nothing more than one kill if you have some AA nearby (their accuracy is decreasing very quickly when their red bar start to grow).You should always have some AA nearby against infantry decks having this plane. Be prepared cause they will come. People is whining cause this plane is able to get 3-4 kills in a row with its amount of ammunition IF uncontested. And it's a big if. This plane is strong in such way cause these infantry decks have no more than stugs and paks to deal with enemy armored divisions.
If you have no AA at all and no figthers to get air superiority in the sky when you're facing these decks, it is a big mistake on your part imo and you should always get punished.

After all, strafing is a word coming from the german word strafen, meaning punish. So, get good or get strafed

 

[Hidden Gunman]

The prevalence of light mobile AA later in WW2 was as a result of ground troops being brassed up during the first half of the war when there was (relatively) little light mobile AA, and in situations where air-ground tactical attack was prevalent, it was because the user had air superiority at best, or air parity at worst.

Those two things pretty much apply thematically in the game...you need to take precautions, basically, or you can pay the price.

 

[Person012345]

>HS129
>Too slow mustangs

Hahaha.

Look, if you know your opponent is probably packing HS129's and you've "struggled" to field a tank you want, be prepared for it. Have your fighters loiter as the tank approaches the front line, guard the tank hard with AA, don't just wave your tank-peen around in front of the enemy recon. If you're not careful enough you'll lose the tank. They'll lose a plane if you play it right.