Anti-Air disparities

I'm kind of confused. The only Soviet AA from what I understand is the Quad Cannon on the M5 Halftrack. It takes a long time for those 4 very large guns designed for AA to take aircraft down. So long that it's rarely if ever useful.

In contrast, Germans have 5 sources of AA. The MG42 on a StuG. The MG42 on a PzIV. The MG42 on a Panther. The MG42 on a Tiger. The Ostwind. I also believe the vanilla Scout Car can work as AA, but I've not had one survive long enough to see. So that makes 6 sources. All of these kill aircraft almost instantly. In fact, my MG42 mount kill aircraft so fast the only thing I notice is the plane crashing into my units and killing everything.

Anyhow, there's an extremely obvious disparity here. Germans have 5 different anti-air sources, at least one of which is guaranteed to make a show in any given game, as a supplemental upgrade to a tank. It will kill any aircraft that make a pass, more or less instantly.

The Quad Cannon take so long, abilities can sometimes run their full course when you have it on the field. As the soul source of anti-air, the fact its on a very vulnerable platform, and the fact it has 4 massive guns not make it more in line with German's AA?

Was this before or after the patch ? Because with the new patch the M5 shreds German planes (one of my own stukas crashed straight into my damaged panther killing him) :/

4 "massive" guns are actually .50 calibre (12.7mm) which has less firepower than a P51 mustang's 6 X .50 cals.

Compare this to a 37mm of the ostwind or the 20mm of the scout car you can catch my drift.

But Soviets do get some AA later on like the DsHk on the ISU's and the IS2's

IS-2 and ISU-152 are great at taking down air unit as well.

Doctrine specific super heavies. Not exactly practical, but seeing as I included the Tiger in my original post, I suppose they go in.

The German AA is also of less practical use because the Soviet plane strikes don't linger as long.

Seems like what you are really observing is a weakness in Soviet AA specifically. Quad does a good job. Perhaps there could be something else but it's workable the way it is.

Plus all Plane strikes are doctrine specific and you definitely don't want a situation where it's like "oh he got a quad, now all my strikes are useless cause it will just shoot them down".

The MG42 takes down plans so quickly that they tend not to drop their payload at all. If it's a long way in front, then they might drop it, but if the payload is on or near or behind the tank, it's not gonna happen.

I'm not exactly arguing for buffs or nerfs, I'm just stating that there is a confusing difference between the AA functionality that isn't really consistent. If anything I'd look for a buff to the Quad and a nerf to the other AA types. Taking so long that a planes can still complete a load of runs without going down is stupid, but going so fast that planes are totally nullified is just as bad.

Cyridius, did you miss where peter explained how AA actually works in a mechanics sense? Each shot has a certain small percentage of bringing down a plane. Planes don't have hitpoints, they don't take cumulative damage. They are balanced based on how many shots are fired. An Ostwind has a higher per-shot chance of bringing down a plane and a Quad has a smaller per-shot chance. It's balanced by the Ostwind firing fewer shots per barrage than the M5. Pintel-mounted MGs have yet a smaller chance because that is not their main function.

Can Ostwind really shoot down IL2 before it drops its bombs ? I must definitively try it, is it possible to predict where the plane will be coming from, to position AA accordingly ?

I think it is technically *possible* if the positioning was right and you were lucky, to shoot a plane down before it did anything at all. The per shot chances are low enough though that it is pretty unlikely. It is much more useful to shoot down loitering strafe planes from either side.

Cyridius, did you miss where peter explained how AA actually works in a mechanics sense? Each shot has a certain small percentage of bringing down a plane. Planes don't have hitpoints, they don't take cumulative damage. They are balanced based on how many shots are fired. An Ostwind has a higher per-shot chance of bringing down a plane and a Quad has a smaller per-shot chance. It's balanced by the Ostwind firing fewer shots per barrage than the M5. Pintel-mounted MGs have yet a smaller chance because that is not their main function.

I must just be ridiculously lucky with my mounted MGs then. It's almost instant every single time I've faced a plane with my MG42.

You would be very lucky to take down a plane with a pintle. The chance per shot is <1% I believe. The Ostwind has a 17% chance, although I would have to double check that number to confirm.

The Ostwind has slightly better AA than the Quad, they both should take down planes at a reasonable rate to one another in either event.

does the 2cm cannon on the scout car work as AA?
you'd think it'd be pretty good

So, issue resolved. AA is roughly equivalent.
Seems Ostwind slightly better than M5 AA, which makes sense at cost.
(Pintles at <1% are negigible and ost munis.)

There is however an outstanding glaring disparity in:
Sov=
- ZiS Barrage
- Su76 Barrage
- Katyusha
- 82mm Mortar
(- Doctrinal 120mm mortar)

Ost=
- Panzerwerfer
- 81mm Mortar
(- Doctrinal Mortar HT)

So, issue resolved. AA is roughly equivalent.
Seems Ostwind slightly better than M5 AA, which makes sense at cost.
(Pintles at <1% are negigible and ost munis.)

There is however an outstanding glaring disparity in:
Sov=
- ZiS Barrage
- Su76 Barrage
- Katyusha
- 82mm Mortar
(- Doctrinal 120mm mortar)

Ost=
- Panzerwerfer
- 81mm Mortar
(- Doctrinal Mortar HT)

Ill finally bite

T2/T4 for Sovjets is rarely seen as you dont have good anti infantry capabilites. This leaves most games where you have 2 options of indirect fire as Sovjet.
German indirect fire is superior to sovjet in rof and ability cooldown.
What about rifle nade, thats indirect fire right? with good range.


Sorry for being a "fanboy" and you probably "don't care"

Ah you came up with a new "witty" insult I see

no, mate i'm sorry to say he's right, you literally said nothing useful

No insult there.

Your tier argument was irrelevant, because overall, Ost still has less, regardless of tier selection.

Your "rarely seen" argument was irrelevant, because its subjective.

Your German Panzerwerfer/Mortar/Howitzer "indirect" fire rate of fire and cooldowns argument was irrelevant, because it is accounted for commensurately by Sov alternatives having asymmetric equivalence in terms of more damage and AoE.

Your argument of RNade as an indirect fire option is irrelevant because a Molotov can also be thrown indirectly, and furthermore is asymmetrically balanced due to no minimum range and superiority vs buildings as well as potential to crit the armor reliant Ost troops.

So no insult there. Just an observation that your post really meant absolutely nothing at all.

No insult there.

Your tier argument was irrelevant, because overall, Ost still has less, regardless of tier selection.

Why is this a bad thing? I'm saying the options germans have are fare more superior to the Sovjet ones.

Your "rarely seen" argument was irrelevant, because its subjective.

Yes and finding the disparity a problem is also subjective. Atgun barrage is expensive and su76 is not a great tank overall

Your German Panzerwerfer/Mortar/Howitzer "indirect" fire rate of fire and cooldowns argument was irrelevant, because it is accounted for commensurately by Sov alternatives having asymmetric equivalence in terms of more damage and AoE.

-Panzerwerfer has lower cooldown and fires all it's missiles in one go > more damage and higher AoE
-German howitzer is VASTLY superior to Sovjet one. Sovjet fires only 8/9 shells while the german fires a lot more and has only ~30 sec cooldown. That is a lot more damage total
-German mortar might be balanced against soviet one but feels stronger, let's say they are balanced

That gives 2 extra nondoc units for Soviets
ATgun barrage, expensive but okay damage
SU76, weak tank with okay damage

Your argument of RNade as an indirect fire option is irrelevant because a Molotov can also be thrown indirectly, and furthermore is asymmetrically balanced due to no minimum range and superiority vs buildings as well as potential to crit the armor reliant Ost troops.

You were listing all the indirect fire options even though you would never see all of those in a normal game. Might as well include more