Give Stealth to Anti-Air

Decent idea, horrible presentation. It really is a pretty good idea, keeping with that theme and I can't think of a reason it would be unbalanced.

Stealth in mountains, hills, or urban terrain, or any combination of those, I'd support.

anti-air is shooting plane down with tracer round. so, if they fire, they give their position away.

is that you called with "Stealth" ??

militia and anti-tank attack enemy in close range, that's why they are visible if you lock them in melee combat

----------

Tracer rounds, which are usually loaded as every fifth round in machine gun belts, provide essential information to Soldiers firing at an enemy target by creating a line-of-sight that allows them to track the trajectory of their bullets and adjust their aim.

Also, AA will typicaly be positioned in open areas for obvious reasons. It will hardly ever be stealthed.

Tolol_aja wrote:

anti-air is shooting plane down with tracer round. so, if they fire, they give their position away.

is that you called with "Stealth" ??

militia and anti-tank attack enemy in close range, that's why they are visible if you lock them in melee combat

----------

Tracer rounds, which are usually loaded as every fifth round in machine gun belts, provide essential information to Soldiers firing at an enemy target by creating a line-of-sight that allows them to track the trajectory of their bullets and adjust their aim.

Additionally, huge lengths were taken by both/all sides to hide AA batteries.

Also in this game stealth is gone once the unit engages so my point still holds up with your argument

Gameplay reason why not to:

When a militia or anti tank is fighting, it is revealed for the duration of the fight. So the enemy knows that he was ambushed by these units.

Planes do not lock units into combat when they attack. So when those stealth anti airs defend, they would remain invisible. Players would be puzzled why and where their aircrafts took huge damage when no enemy was in sight, reports about this would spike.

freezy wrote:

Gameplay reason why not to:

When a militia or anti tank is fighting, it is revealed for the duration of the fight. So the enemy knows that he was ambushed by these units.

Planes do not lock units into combat when they attack. So when those stealth anti airs defend, they would remain invisible. Players would be puzzled why and where their aircrafts took huge damage when no enemy was in sight, reports about this would spike.

A plane taking extensive damage from a stack with an AA unit of higher level than the plane (and not seeing it) is still a reasonable thing to expect. It's true of the other stealth units versus their potential revealers.

JTRoulin wrote:

freezy wrote:

Gameplay reason why not to:

When a militia or anti tank is fighting, it is revealed for the duration of the fight. So the enemy knows that he was ambushed by these units.

Planes do not lock units into combat when they attack. So when those stealth anti airs defend, they would remain invisible. Players would be puzzled why and where their aircrafts took huge damage when no enemy was in sight, reports about this would spike.

Could this not be resolved by adding the 'reveals stealth units' mechanic to the other planes? I don't suspect it would drastically affect balance if every plane could see what's exposed to the air below it (It makes sense to me, except perhaps for strategic bombers).

A plane taking extensive damage from a stack with an AA unit of higher level than the plane (and not seeing it) is still a reasonable thing to expect. It's true of the other stealth units versus their potential revealers.

You wouldn't mask them...they would be treated the same way other stealth units are treated in battle: Revealed while in combat.

JTRoulin wrote:

Could this not be resolved by adding the 'reveals stealth units' mechanic to the other planes? I don't suspect it would drastically affect balance if every plane could see what's exposed to the air below it (It makes sense to me, except perhaps for strategic bombers).

A plane taking extensive damage from a stack with an AA unit of higher level than the plane (and not seeing it) is still a reasonable thing to expect. It's true of the other stealth units versus their potential revealers.

But if all planes can reveal all anti airs: What's the point then to make them stealth in the first place? The planes could see the anti airs before atacking and steer away.

I'm not very convinced of this idea yet.

freezy wrote:

Right now scout units reveal only stealth units of the same level. If we keep that, then it could still happen what I wrote above. Or we break with this and make it level-inependent, although it is inconsistent then.

But if all planes can reveal all anti airs: What's the point then to make them stealth in the first place? The planes could see the anti airs before atacking and steer away.

In the early game, players regularly neglect interceptors, and for good reason: Even if they can't spot hidden units in a stack, nothing hidden there could really be a threat to a solo bomber stack...unless anti-air was stealth and it was the appropriate terrain type.

Though the example takes place in the early game, the concept is present throughout.

freezy wrote:

I'm not very convinced of this idea yet.