Needlejets and Choppers

[It'sLikeThat]

What's the advantage of one over the other? What's the significance of putting on armor to air units? Are air transports worth designing? And does anyone really build airbases?

[big_canuk]

quote: Originally posted by It'sLikeThat on 03-14-2001 01:07 PM What's the advantage of one over the other?

Noodles can stay in the air for 1 turn, when out of base, but they only get to attack once. They are better for providing cover for units, and for longer distance attacks against very strong defenders.

Choppers must end their turn in a base on airbase, otherwise they "crash" loosing 30% of their strength (ie, they can crash 3 times and still make it back to base 90% damaged). However they can attack as many times as movement points they have left. They are better for shorter attacks against multiple weak units, and for very long "suicide" missions.

quote: What's the significance of putting on armor to air units?

Armour is almost always a waste on air units. It only helps when they are in a base and attacked. Interceptors would only use their armour against non-air attacks. Generally much more efficient to build a separate defender.

quote: Are air transports worth designing?

Yes for specialized missions, but drop transports are almost always better except against territory heavily defended by areocomplexes and other air interdiction.

quote: And does anyone really build airbases?

Yes, in OCCs to protect your crawlers
Yes, in regular games against humans, if you are infiltrated to hide your forces whereabouts.
Yes, for the specialized case of AA hunting with the drop-trance transport and the former. The transport drops and unloads the former which builds an airbase. The transport then pops the pod, and if an AA, transports it back home from the airbase. <>

Otherwise, no.

[It'sLikeThat]

So air units are not good defenders? Is there a reason to create a
<1>-6-10 Needlejet? Should SAM be put on it?

[dfilpus]

Needlejets - Run automated bombing missions.
Interceptors - Automatic air defence of areas around cities.

Choppers and drop squads are great for taking out bases without air defense. Run a chopper up to the base, use all but one movement point to kill all of the defenders, drop a defender into the base and use the last movement point to land the chopper in the base. Spend a few turns healing the chopper and moving in a nondrop defender and repeat. I have had campaigns with a fleet of choppers and drop squads taking two to three bases a turn.

[knowhow2]

Choppers and drop squads are great for taking out bases without air defense. Run a chopper up to the base, use all but one movement point to kill all of the defenders, drop a defender into the base and use the last movement point to land the chopper in the base. Spend a few turns healing the chopper and moving in a nondrop defender and repeat. I have had campaigns with a fleet of choppers and drop squads taking two to three bases a turn.

[/quote]


This tactic only works when you are attacking bases near by.

It'sLikeThat,

All interceptors has SAM. Airbases could be quite useful when you want a "In-between" place to land if you wanna attack someone far away without building an additional base somewhere near the enemy.

[Garth Vader]

It'sLikeThat,

Interceptors fight weapon-weapon, so armor is useless unless you indend them to be attacked by ground units while in a base.

Interceptors attack other jets weapon-armor but putting armor on bombers is costly and the benefit is very little.

As mentioned the advantage of choppers is multiple attacks per turn.

The advantage of jets is that a SAM unit is needed to attack them. If you sit a jet over a stack of ground units it can't be attacked without a SAM unit. If you have air power and your opponent does not, you can't be attacked.

[big_canuk]

quote: Originally posted by It'sLikeThat on 03-14-2001 01:38 PM So air units are not good defenders? Is there a reason to create a <1>-6-10 Needlejet? Should SAM be put on it?

*Definitely* do not use the above unit. If I saw it in a base, I would send a cheap 4-1-10 noodle over and attack(probably much less than 1/2 the cost of your interceptor). Your interceptor would scramble fighting my 4 attack noodle with your 1 attack (SAM planes defend against air attack with their weapons strength). Even if I loose my noodle next turn to your next interceptor, I am winning the industrial fight(I would send another noodle to chew up your more expensive interceptor).

Small arguements can be made for a 1-6-10 noodle for defense. It could be made AAA/police for example, to quiet drones in your most recently captured bases and defend against air attacks. Generally I use a 1-6-1 drop/police instead. Cheaper, and if you spend that much on armour, it better be for the reason that it will be attacked, and that you will loose some. Actually, I would generally use 1-1-1 drop police along with 1-6-1 drop/AAA and/or drop/comm jammer depending on the resistance I expect.

[Sir Hawkeye]

One might consider air defenders for vastly large and roadless/pre-magtube empires, or for irritating one's enemies by crushing his unarmored formers and crawlers, then bugging him further by killing some of his interceptors(not many, unless you've got great tech). I find them quite bemusing, like hovertank transports and SAM foils, even if they're usually not that useful.

-Rale Hawkeye

Edit:Spelling
[This message has been edited by Sir Hawkeye (edited March 14, 2001).]

[Blake]

Advantages of Airbases over Bases:

An Airbase does not show up on the map.
Airbase's can't be probed.
Airbases can't be nervegassed to death.
Units defending in airbase get +50% defense bonus from fungus/rocky.

Disadvantages:

Units in airbase don't heal like in a base
Less defensive multiplier. (No +100% Perimeter, Aerospace bonus)
Airbases can be captured and used against you once emptied of your units.

So if you use the plop a flying pod down against a human opponent he can:
Mind control it (if on coast then cruiser probe has 7 range, 9 with MT SP, elite probe 9 move in fungus with XE Dome), then you could have your jets come back at you!

Nerve gas it to death (would only take 1 succesfull attack). Your jets now either have to return home or suicide.


One interesting idea is building an airbase first, then once your enemy has noticed it build a base on it. That way if your base is nerve gassed your jets can stay in the airbase.

[It'sLikeThat]

quote: Originally posted by dfilpus on 03-14-2001 01:56 PM Needlejets - Run automated bombing missions.

Could you explain this further?


Another thing, does a chopper with SAM fight weapon-weapon also?

[Garth Vader]

Airbases show up when an opponent has sats. I don't know if they only when a sat is launched, or all the time.

[dfilpus]

quote: Originally posted by It'sLikeThat on 03-15-2001 12:35 AM Could you explain this further?

There is a hot key, I think "B", which turns the cursor into a bomb, which then allows you to select a square. The needlejet will monitor the square and fly out and bomb units that show up in that square. It can take the micromanagement of a sustained aerial campaign against an inferior, but well defended, opponent.

[johndmuller]

When I first started out with regular SMAC and no patches, armor on jets was not as expensive as it became later (I don't know when because I jumped to SMAC v4 next where the armor had become rather expensive). Anyway, while it was cheap, I got in the habit of using armored interceptors (with high weapons ratings too) as guards for my (unarmored) needlejet sorties; I would stack them all together, set the interceptor to be the primarly defender and maybe use its turn to destroy enhancements or go after a really weak unit. This seemed to work pretty well for me against the AI as the intercepter would usually handle at least one AI interceptor attact; I attributed it to the armor as I have never really bothered to analyze the combat stats very closely.

I've read various threads which touch on the matter of Air Armor and Air to Air Combat and have generallly gotten more confused than more enlightened due to posts that at least appear to be contradictory. Perhaps I'm getting it now. If I'm reading this thread right, I was wasting my money on armor, but getting my money's worth on the interceptors' weapons ratings; the key factor is the Air Superiority (or the inappropriately named in this case, SAM) attribute.

So I guess that the rule for Air to Air is:
---Without SAM, a plane defends against other planes with its Armor
---With SAM, a plane defends against other planes with its Weapons;
that would mean that if you wanted to armor anything, it would be the attack planes without SAM rather than the escorts with SAM. What also needs to be mentioned in here is that using SAM incurs a 50% attack penalty against non-air targets which is why you don't just SAM them all.

I gather also from posts, that a plane (with or without SAM?) would also use its Armor if attacked by a land unit while in a base. What about attacks in the open by land (or naval) units with SAM? My experience suggests that the planes are all using their armor ratings for defence as I never seem to have trouble shooting them down and while I've seen high attack planes, Ive never attacked any high armor ones.

Then there are choppers. Do they behave the same regarding attack/defence and SAM/noSAM as needlejets? I think I've also seen references which said that any land (or naval?) unit could attack a chopper if it is stopped in the open - if that is true, would that be the Armor rating too?
[This message has been edited by johndmuller (edited March 19, 2001).]

[Ned]

If airbases work like aerospace complexes, they will prevent airdrops for up to a distance of "3" from the base. Providing an outer perimeter of airbases may be critical to defending against a combined copter/drop assault, particularly after the enemy has obital insertion capability.

[The Commodore]

Just a crazy little thought...has anyone tried a probe on a Noodle or Chopper? ...probably wont work...but has anyone tried?