US can only build static AA or bring in P-51's for air cover.

Wow, I can't believe that is true. How the heck is the USA suppose to deal with aircraft? On a small map it is probably not that big of a deal but once they get large you need an airfield every 1/10 of the map to be able to support your troops, that's just plain stupid.

Well the other civs have to stand a chance don't they? I mean a superior USA would be very boring you know...

Listen. Neither does Germany have mobile defence against air.

Immobile AAs are just WAAY too expensive, they take a long time to build and they aren't very potent either.

Germany may not have a mobile AA unit, but you have a unit that is mobile and can change in to AA if needed. Thats almost better

Germany has the 88mm Anti Tank / Anti Air gun. It is a great weapon, a few of those will bring down aircraft very effectively and you can convert them instantly then change them back into the anti tank mode and clear out the ground forces.

It makes no sense to me that you are forcing the USA to have aircraft as the primary means of AA. I understand the idea of combined arms and like the idea of major differences in strategies based on nationality but to me it seems that the USA is getting the weakest army all around and is forced into a combined arms strategy to survive. All that does it make general competitiveness more difficult with the USA cause as we all know the more you have to micro manage the more difficult it is.

Don't get me wrong, I am not saying that the USA should be the best at everything, I am saying that I think the USA needs some more balancing. Or perhaps I need to step back and reevaluate my play style. Anyway it seems to me that the USA has the hardest time competing due to the massive micro needed to use the combined arms approach I am attempting in the game.

Note: I am aware that this game does not only encompass WWII but since that is all that is available in the demo that is all I can judge it on

Quote:

Ahem, let me ask you if you remember what the US's main strenght is in the game (air power). Just build an air force already and rule the skies until you can destroy the enemy's airfields.

Quote:

The way you make it sound, the USA has to "resort to" building an air force. However, the air force is America's strenght, not weakness, so they should build an air force anyway. And with a strong air force, you won't really need AA tanks or anything.

Quote:

I don't see how that increases micromanagement.

I don't think that USA has so good Air force. UK can get the tech that improves their fighters. And even if the USA planes were great, they don't do much good near enemy base where they will get destroyed by enemey AA very easily

Quote:

Of course not, if they could take out bases by themselves they'd be way overpowered.

Combined arms, friend. You need ground forces, too, to take out a base. And prefferably a navy on top of that.

Quoted from Midgard Eagle:

Understood and as I said on a small map no big deal but on a large map your going to need air fields all the way across the map in order to move your air force with your army. They do return to the air field for refueling you know.

Quoted from Midgard Eagle:

So what your saying is that the first thing I should think about is an air force right? What if I want to attack with ground forces? Or is that just not an option for a USA player? Also have you seen how effective the German or UK AA is? I go out with a huge air force and run into a ground and air combined arms I am going to get wiped out unless they are dumb enough to let my nuke planes take their ground forces out. This forces me to go combined arms, both air and ground. That makes it much more difficult to control. Now if I as a German player run into an air patrol, unless I did not prepare for it, I can just turn my 88mm guns into flak cannons and take out the planes then keep going.

Quoted from Midgard Eagle:

The more types of troops that you have means that you need to deploy them effectively. If you cant see why that increases micro I don't know what to tell you.

Lastly I am not that impressed with the USA's air force. They are ok but not as obviously effective as the Germans King tanks.

USA can receive AA units in a trade with an ally. Unit trading should be a big part of this game for filling civ weaknesses. 1v1 should be on smaller maps where the P51's and static defense should be good. If USA cannot trade, it will have to push forward and build static AA and land mines for defense. Empires is about being resourceful and using combos to succeed.

USA players should be placing loads of mines to counter tanks.

[This message has been edited by javajeff (edited 09-25-2003 @ 09:15 PM).]

Sorry, Midgard, but I gotta agree with Raging Idiot on this one. Constantly clearing a way for ground forces with air is very difficult. And as Idiot has pointed out, by the time a fighter gets to the area, ten bombers could have wiped out the ground force, with, of course, the help of strafing planes. It seems to me that US having no mobile AA is a mistake. In real life, having just fighters is practical because you have individuals controlling each. In a game, it is too difficult.

My two cents

I agree...

The US Airforce isnt good enough. If they want to make the US better then make a better unit. I find the bombers really dont do squat to buildings and units seem to take damage fine from them..

Give US more alot more airtime vs other civs planes. The US has the bets airforce...give them that.

blech.

How can USA not have mobile AA? That's like........That's like........That's like...........Umm...........Yeah..........

USA needs mobile AA, enough said.

yep, US is the only one without it, it's one of their major fallbacks...I see the US as a support-only civ..

You guys don't seem to understand the whole "unique civs" thing. If every civ was given mobile AA then it would be quite boring. There are tons of ways to get around having no US mobile AA. You could as people have said, build an air-force. The US is good at air. Or in team games, GET MOBILE AA FROM ALLIES! This is why I keep stressing that there has to be teamwork in this game. I have beat a few opponents just because me and my allies worked together in the game instead of each playing our own game and hoping we win. Just think of how deadly a US and German allies would be if they would work together. US could have AT/AA and the Germans could have engineers repairing their tanks. Its all about teamwork.

Mustangs are the best fighter planes. A couple of those will take care of the enemy bombers.

People...first play USA then start speaking about USA...only people who play USA can understand USA problems...one of them is that enemy bomber/fighters kill your land army as flies.
Start playing USA and then speak about...

All the civs are different, US has the disadvantage of no AA. But US fighters will take down enemy's easily, and the game requires team work, one of the reasons why the game is so great. Played a game yesterday where the other team was bombing my citizens and airport. I held against their armada of planes with a few fighters while AzN sent a bunch of his AA guns to me. And I used artillery barrage and nukes to repulse multiple land attacks with army support

Angel Park y speak about a defensive situation...i said USA are weak when attacking (offensive situation).

...i mean weak against enemy's airforces (specially bombers...cause no aa mobile)...not weak in absolute

Quoted from ToXiC TaNK:

Are you telling me that if every civ had AA the civs would lose their uniqueness? Because I disagree. Every civ (I think) has a basic infantry unit. Does that make the game boring too?

Mobile AA for a computer game civilization is pretty basic, and having to get them from allies puts USA at a huge disadvantage.

A well-balanced ground force escorted by fighters is very deadly. USA’a economy should allow you a steady flow of P-51’s. Midgard Eagle said it best: Combined arms. That is the secret to succeeding with the US.

javajeff makes and excellent point too about trading units with your allies to make up for weaknesses. If your ally has Tanks, he’s gonna want one or two of your Engineers. That's a fair trade for some mobile AA.

[This message has been edited by Boggy SSSi (edited 09-26-2003 @ 03:09 PM).]

Quoted from Boggy SSSi:

Hmmmmm interesting. I would really love to see a replay of a good US player meeting a good German player and wining. This would need to be a game that gets past the rush and large forces are produced and engaged.

Oh and just because the USA may be effective with combined arms does not mean that it should be the only way to play them. The total lack of AA options makes them the weakest side in and of itself.

Quote:

i *do* play USA...they're my main civ...

and yeah, I'd like to see more trading, germany with engineers and US with mobile AA would be awesome

[This message has been edited by foolintherain (edited 09-26-2003 @ 04:07 PM).]