Forums / Games / Halo Wars Series

Air is OP - Dedicated Thread

OP Viper Skills

  1. 1
  2. ...
  3. 5
  4. 6
  5. 7
  6. 8
  7. 9
  8. ...
  9. 10
EJGPharmMD wrote:
THEWALL766 wrote:
EJGPharmMD wrote:
It never ceases to amaze me how incompetent 343 is....all anyone has to do to determine if air is a problem is play 1 ranked game...when all 3 team members choose to max pop air...common sense tells you of the imbalance.
See, heres the thing. I have played ranked. I've actually played quite a bit or ranked. And I don't think im seeing the same thing as you.
I play team games every now and then and I still notice air is never a problem. The only difference between 1s and 3s is there is more LPs and communication is mandatory. The same principle works for a team spamming air as well as any 1v1 game. If their successful spamming air, it's either because you let them or you lack the coordination to fight it off. There is only a single time air is more powerful than it should be and that's T3 hornets but Reavers and Marines destroy them so easily.
And no, 1 v 1 and 3 v 3 are two completely different games. In 3 v 3 units inability to target multiple air units at a time is exacerbated when dealing with 2 or 3 population of air.

To units needed to effectively deal with air render your army useless for doing quite literally anything else. The goal of the match switches from destroy my opponents base to try to stop all the air. Marines and anti air are completely ineffective at destroying bases particularly late game t2 and t3 bases.

The only solution is to debuff airs effectiveness further against buildings and anti air, allow for increased spash damage from anti air, or increase overall usefulness of the anti air units (a.e. wolverines with volly).
Well here is where you are losing me. 3s is inherently unbalanced. There are far too many leader powers and the maps are too big for slow vehicles to be effective. But If you're going to argue that Air is broken because 3v3, you will only really get responses from experienced players like "3s is trash". Most people really only play 3v3 for kicks and giggles where 1s and 2s are seen as the "competitive playlists" because they are much more balanced. In those playlists, banshees are total garbage and hornets are useful. In the next patch we are seeing a reduction to wingman which will probably help but many people think that T2 air needs a buff because of how much of a non factor it is in a competitive game.
THEWALL766 wrote:
EJGPharmMD wrote:
THEWALL766 wrote:
EJGPharmMD wrote:
It never ceases to amaze me how incompetent 343 is....all anyone has to do to determine if air is a problem is play 1 ranked game...when all 3 team members choose to max pop air...common sense tells you of the imbalance.
See, heres the thing. I have played ranked. I've actually played quite a bit or ranked. And I don't think im seeing the same thing as you.
I play team games every now and then and I still notice air is never a problem. The only difference between 1s and 3s is there is more LPs and communication is mandatory. The same principle works for a team spamming air as well as any 1v1 game. If their successful spamming air, it's either because you let them or you lack the coordination to fight it off. There is only a single time air is more powerful than it should be and that's T3 hornets but Reavers and Marines destroy them so easily.
And no, 1 v 1 and 3 v 3 are two completely different games. In 3 v 3 units inability to target multiple air units at a time is exacerbated when dealing with 2 or 3 population of air.

To units needed to effectively deal with air render your army useless for doing quite literally anything else. The goal of the match switches from destroy my opponents base to try to stop all the air. Marines and anti air are completely ineffective at destroying bases particularly late game t2 and t3 bases.

The only solution is to debuff airs effectiveness further against buildings and anti air, allow for increased spash damage from anti air, or increase overall usefulness of the anti air units (a.e. wolverines with volly).
Well here is where you are losing me. 3s is inherently unbalanced. There are far too many leader powers and the maps are too big for slow vehicles to be effective. But If you're going to argue that Air is broken because 3v3, you will only really get responses from experienced players like "3s is trash". Most people really only play 3v3 for kicks and giggles where 1s and 2s are seen as the "competitive playlists" because they are much more balanced. In those playlists, banshees are total garbage and hornets are useful. In the next patch we are seeing a reduction to wingman which will probably help but many people think that T2 air needs a buff because of how much of a non factor it is in a competitive game.
You may be the only person on HW2 who feels 1s and 2s are more popular than 3s. Actually, thats the first time I've ever heard it. Take a look at the leader boards and see whether the "competitive playlists" like 1s and 2s are truly seen as that. Champion rank in 2s starts at 1600....and there are only 63 champs, primarily because 2s is a dead playlist...No one plays it...you are definitely part of a very very small niche if you feel 2's is "more competitive" than 3's. 3's has gone as far as having a "ranked team war" discord... 1 v 1 and 2 v 2 definitely offer a different dynamic you must play by, but "more competitive", hardly.

Like I said, my complaints are in relation to 3 v 3 where its most apparently broken. But 3 v 3 is also by far the most popular playlist. From my experience (which isn't much) hardly anyone goes max pop air in 1 v 1. But again, that's not where the problem is at it's biggest.

Again, I've played over 5000 games...I am an "experienced" player.
<p></p>
EJGPharmMD wrote:
THEWALL766 wrote:
EJGPharmMD wrote:
You may be the only person on HW2 who feels 1s and 2s are more popular than 3s. Actually, thats the first time I've ever heard it. Take a look at the leader boards and see whether the "competitive playlists" like 1s and 2s are truly seen as that. Champion rank in 2s starts at 1600....and there are only 63 champs, primarily because 2s is a dead playlist...No one plays it...you are definitely part of a very very small niche if you feel 2's is "more competitive" than 3's. 3's has gone as far as having a "ranked team war" discord... 1 v 1 and 2 v 2 definitely offer a different dynamic you must play by, but "more competitive", hardly.

Like I said, my complaints are in relation to 3 v 3 where its most apparently broken. But 3 v 3 is also by far the most popular playlist. From my experience (which isn't much) hardly anyone goes max pop air in 1 v 1. But again, that's not where the problem is at it's biggest.

Again, I've played over 5000 games...I am an "experienced" player.
<p></p>
I would think that how powerful air can become during a game simply depends on the player. I have had games where I have crushed a fleet of banshees, and also been wiped out by banshee fleets. Likewise I have gone full pop air before and had good and bad games depending on the enemy players. If you have enough AA and use leader powers carefully(plus scout) they can be dealt with pretty well.
EJGPharmMD wrote:
THEWALL766 wrote:
EJGPharmMD wrote:
THEWALL766 wrote:
EJGPharmMD wrote:
It never ceases to amaze me how incompetent 343 is....all anyone has to do to determine if air is a problem is play 1 ranked game...when all 3 team members choose to max pop air...common sense tells you of the imbalance.
See, heres the thing. I have played ranked. I've actually played quite a bit or ranked. And I don't think im seeing the same thing as you.
I play team games every now and then and I still notice air is never a problem. The only difference between 1s and 3s is there is more LPs and communication is mandatory. The same principle works for a team spamming air as well as any 1v1 game. If their successful spamming air, it's either because you let them or you lack the coordination to fight it off. There is only a single time air is more powerful than it should be and that's T3 hornets but Reavers and Marines destroy them so easily.
And no, 1 v 1 and 3 v 3 are two completely different games. In 3 v 3 units inability to target multiple air units at a time is exacerbated when dealing with 2 or 3 population of air.

To units needed to effectively deal with air render your army useless for doing quite literally anything else. The goal of the match switches from destroy my opponents base to try to stop all the air. Marines and anti air are completely ineffective at destroying bases particularly late game t2 and t3 bases.

The only solution is to debuff airs effectiveness further against buildings and anti air, allow for increased spash damage from anti air, or increase overall usefulness of the anti air units (a.e. wolverines with volly).
Well here is where you are losing me. 3s is inherently unbalanced. There are far too many leader powers and the maps are too big for slow vehicles to be effective. But If you're going to argue that Air is broken because 3v3, you will only really get responses from experienced players like "3s is trash". Most people really only play 3v3 for kicks and giggles where 1s and 2s are seen as the "competitive playlists" because they are much more balanced. In those playlists, banshees are total garbage and hornets are useful. In the next patch we are seeing a reduction to wingman which will probably help but many people think that T2 air needs a buff because of how much of a non factor it is in a competitive game.
You may be the only person on HW2 who feels 1s and 2s are more popular than 3s. Actually, thats the first time I've ever heard it. Take a look at the leader boards and see whether the "competitive playlists" like 1s and 2s are truly seen as that. Champion rank in 2s starts at 1600....and there are only 63 champs, primarily because 2s is a dead playlist...No one plays it...you are definitely part of a very very small niche if you feel 2's is "more competitive" than 3's. 3's has gone as far as having a "ranked team war" discord... 1 v 1 and 2 v 2 definitely offer a different dynamic you must play by, but "more competitive", hardly.

Like I said, my complaints are in relation to 3 v 3 where its most apparently broken. But 3 v 3 is also by far the most popular playlist. From my experience (which isn't much) hardly anyone goes max pop air in 1 v 1. But again, that's not where the problem is at it's biggest.

Again, I've played over 5000 games...I am an "experienced" player.
<p></p>
First off, plenty of people play 1s and 2s. The 2s leaderboard is small because it is brand new and everyone had to start at a CSR and MMR of 0 this season. If you join any of the competitive discords, a majority of the competition is based around 1s and 2s. There are more people that play 3s because most of the people that play this game, do so casually. 3s allows you to rely on teammates and get away with making a lot more mistakes. That is fine, people are totally allowed to play casually. But the developers that balance the game stated that the goal is the balance around 1v1s with consideration of 2v2s, because that's where the competitive people play. If you don't believe me, please join BtC, Team Respawn, Halo Wars Tournament Central, or The Banished discords and see for your self. Also, just because you have played through a lot of games, does not mean you inherently have a better understanding than other people.
I feel the fact that so many 3v3 games are descending into mass core air vs core air games is evidence enough that there is still a problem with air in 3’s - I’m dismayed by the number of players that create a starting “army” of infantry/ base crackers and hero and then transistion, without fail, into air...

Time and time again people will argue “you shouldn’t let it get to that point” (RE the unstoppable critical mass)... failing to see the hypocrisy when they then complain that mass Kodiaks/Infantry/any super unit etc is “OP”.

Air has the distinct accolade of being very hard to stop with anything other than a counter air army - which leaves you unable to push bases due to lack of damage (whilst attempting to hold off leader powers, leader units and constant reinforcing of air).

Any other army, being ground based, can be stopped (LP/ artillery/ opposing army) or even outplayed through clever map usage - then allowing a push to the base and actual base damage.

My suggestions (combination or singular); nerf base damage; nerf damage to AA (patch looks promising); increase pop cost; add power cost; bring back missile splash damage (why is it okay to punish grouped ground vehicles with artillery but not lazy grouped air units?); or increase AA rate of fire to mitigate missile waste.

Edit: Worth adding that I’m not advocating the balancing of the game around 3’s, I’m merely expressing my opinion on the current state of the game, and how I would like to see it changed.
I feel the fact that so many 3v3 games are descending into mass core air vs core air games is evidence enough that there is still a problem with air in 3’s - I’m dismayed by the number of players that create a starting “army” of infantry/ base crackers and hero and then transistion, without fail, into air...

Time and time again people will argue “you shouldn’t let it get to that point” (RE the unstoppable critical mass)... failing to see the hypocrisy when they then complain that mass Kodiaks/Infantry/any super unit etc is “OP”.

Air has the distinct accolade of being very hard to stop with anything other than a counter air army - which leaves you unable to push bases due to lack of damage (whilst attempting to hold off leader powers, leader units and constant reinforcing of air).

Any other army, being ground based, can be stopped (LP/ artillery/ opposing army) or even outplayed through clever map usage - then allowing a push to the base and actual base damage.

My suggestions (combination or singular); nerf base damage; nerf damage to AA (patch looks promising); increase pop cost; add power cost; bring back missile splash damage (why is it okay to punish grouped ground vehicles with artillery but not lazy grouped air units?); or increase AA rate of fire to mitigate missile waste.

Edit: Worth adding that I’m not advocating the balancing of the game around 3’s, I’m merely expressing my opinion on the current state of the game, and how I would like to see it changed.
Wingman hornest bring too much power to a fight. A lot of people agree with that. It is getting nerfed next patch, almost everyone is happy about that.

Banshees are terrible. They are so beyond terrible as units. I cannot fully express the disappointment that I have felt trying to make banshees as a T2 transition. If you are losing to banshees in the mid game, that is very much an issue with you not being able to react well to a week but mobile threat.

T2 Air is almost useless as a transition and I really hope we can see it buffed in the future.
Looks like most people agree that Air is OP.

It is.
Air has no disadvantages, no counters, and only positive aspects.
Pro's:
  1. Core Air units are cheap, they cost only supply which is the less "strategic" resource compared to power.
    Often i see players build "supply" bases with all slots filled with supply pads and spam air.
  2. They are the fastest units in the game + they can traverse any terrain + have the best vantage point(vision)
    They can attack a minibase/base, destroy it and leave before a ground army even arrives. Air can chase down and kill any other unit, no other unit can chase down an air unit.
  3. They can attack any and all units in the game, while many units can't attack air at all, and even the counter unit(AA) is weak against air.
    I have had games where I do scouting and find that the enemy is building air units in mass. So i switch to building mass AA. Guess which side loses miserably?
    The one that builds cheap core units with no idea what the enemy is building, or the player who knows that the enemy is building air and counters it with supposedly the most effective unit. Of course, the side building AA will lose. I have noticed that it works the other way too. If i build mass air, then whenever the enemy starts wasting resources on building AA units/turrets, I gain the upper hand. Players that counter my air units with other air units are far more successful.

  4. Counter units to air are less effective and cost more(power)
  5. When Reavers fire the volley of missiles, often 90% of the missiles will miss because their target has already been destroyed. Air on the other hand never misses.
    Assigning new targets to missiles after their current target is destroyed would improve the AA's effectiveness greatly. This is something where Halo should learn from other RTS games where air units are much more expensive, have very little HP( they almost never survive an encounter with AA unit) and serve only strategic purpose. (make a bombing run against high-value targets and return for rearming)

  6. Air units can use terrain or base structures to "hide" from other units. Attack a base, if counter units try to attack your air units, move them to the other side of the base. Keeping the base in between air units and AA will keep AA out of range. How to Fix: "If you can see it, i can shoot it". Apply the Kodiak moto to AA.
  7. Air is generic - it is good against everything. You don't need to scout and know what you are flying into(although you can always sacrifice 1 air unit to scout)

Cons: I don't know any.

In general, if you see players consistently build 1-2 types of units only, then its a sign of those units being OP. In a good strategy game, building only 1 type of unit should mean that you will almost certainly lose. Countering enemy unit mixes is the essence of any strategy game.
Even the game tip constantly reminds you "unit mixes are harder to defeat"...but never the less, full pop air wins every time.

So far, most games tend to fall into 2 categories.
1) very unbalanced matches -> where you get rushed with anti-building units within first minutes and game ends there
2) infantry push failed, the game drags out a bit longer -> you get an incoming hornet/banshee swarm -> game ends there
The third category of losing to unit mixes doesn't happen that often, but if it does, then it's a good game.

How to fix air.

Don't reinvent the wheel. Look how it works in other RTS games and do the same.
Air is a high tech unit, make it available in t3( or t2 with a tec-upgrade )
T1 - mostly infantry( cheap in terms of pop cap)
T2 - vehicles added to the mix. scout aircraft available( consumes an average amount of pop cap)
T3 - air units become a strategic asset(high pop cap cost)

1) Air units should be the most expensive units in the game( like in real life and in other RTS games )
2) Air units should be much more powerful( have high damage ), be much weaker( 1 or 2 hits - you are dead )
3) Air units should require re-arming after dropping their payload.(just landing near a supply pad would do the trick)
4) No other unit except AA should be able to attack air effectively.
Tbh outside of 3s which are a mess Air is NOT OP. At this point I find it unlikely to diswade any of the folk that believe the opposite with words, so instead I invite you all to please play with me and I'll show you that air is VERY counterable.

Thank you for your time.
Air is unconditionally overpowered.
Wow wtf I sat at my base for 20 minutes letting the entire enemy team all make supply bases and tech up to 3, buy plasma torpoedos/wingmen, and then make 120 pop each of air units why did I lose
Air is unconditionally overpowered.
Yes, officer. This post right here.
Air is unconditionally overpowered.
I challenge you to a 1v1 if you truly believe that.
EJGPharmMD wrote:
THEWALL766 wrote:
EJGPharmMD wrote:
THEWALL766 wrote:
EJGPharmMD wrote:
It never ceases to amaze me how incompetent 343 is....all anyone has to do to determine if air is a problem is play 1 ranked game...when all 3 team members choose to max pop air...common sense tells you of the imbalance.
See, heres the thing. I have played ranked. I've actually played quite a bit or ranked. And I don't think im seeing the same thing as you.
I play team games every now and then and I still notice air is never a problem. The only difference between 1s and 3s is there is more LPs and communication is mandatory. The same principle works for a team spamming air as well as any 1v1 game. If their successful spamming air, it's either because you let them or you lack the coordination to fight it off. There is only a single time air is more powerful than it should be and that's T3 hornets but Reavers and Marines destroy them so easily.
And no, 1 v 1 and 3 v 3 are two completely different games. In 3 v 3 units inability to target multiple air units at a time is exacerbated when dealing with 2 or 3 population of air.

To units needed to effectively deal with air render your army useless for doing quite literally anything else. The goal of the match switches from destroy my opponents base to try to stop all the air. Marines and anti air are completely ineffective at destroying bases particularly late game t2 and t3 bases.

The only solution is to debuff airs effectiveness further against buildings and anti air, allow for increased spash damage from anti air, or increase overall usefulness of the anti air units (a.e. wolverines with volly).
Well here is where you are losing me. 3s is inherently unbalanced. There are far too many leader powers and the maps are too big for slow vehicles to be effective. But If you're going to argue that Air is broken because 3v3, you will only really get responses from experienced players like "3s is trash". Most people really only play 3v3 for kicks and giggles where 1s and 2s are seen as the "competitive playlists" because they are much more balanced. In those playlists, banshees are total garbage and hornets are useful. In the next patch we are seeing a reduction to wingman which will probably help but many people think that T2 air needs a buff because of how much of a non factor it is in a competitive game.
You may be the only person on HW2 who feels 1s and 2s are more popular than 3s. Actually, thats the first time I've ever heard it. Take a look at the leader boards and see whether the "competitive playlists" like 1s and 2s are truly seen as that. Champion rank in 2s starts at 1600....and there are only 63 champs, primarily because 2s is a dead playlist...No one plays it...you are definitely part of a very very small niche if you feel 2's is "more competitive" than 3's. 3's has gone as far as having a "ranked team war" discord... 1 v 1 and 2 v 2 definitely offer a different dynamic you must play by, but "more competitive", hardly.

Like I said, my complaints are in relation to 3 v 3 where its most apparently broken. But 3 v 3 is also by far the most popular playlist. From my experience (which isn't much) hardly anyone goes max pop air in 1 v 1. But again, that's not where the problem is at it's biggest.

Again, I've played over 5000 games...I am an "experienced" player.
<p></p>
Wall is not suggesting that 1s or 2s is more popular than 3s, only more viable competitively.

1v1 and 2v2 are both more balanced from a competitive point of view because 3v3 is a mode in which there are 6 leaders, all of which have unique units and leader powers, on large maps. The leader powers become an issue by way of sheer numbers. You can effectively destroy an entire person's army with the abilities available to your team alone. Leader power spam undermines the presence of units, their compositions, and their interactions.

Additionally, because 3v3 is only played on larger maps, vehicle and infantry play is inherently limited when being constantly out-maneuvered by large amounts of air. You can utilize hit and run tactics with staggeringly positive results, losing perhaps only a few units in the process, while setting back your opponent's economy/production for a minute or more.

To tie the two issues listed above (leader power spam, mobility), air units are simply faster and can dodge leader powers effectively. Aside from splitting units (which air can also do), there is very little that can be done about dodging leader powers on the ground, especially with cumbersome vehicles.

Hope this helps clear things up.
EJGPharmMD wrote:
THEWALL766 wrote:
EJGPharmMD wrote:
THEWALL766 wrote:
EJGPharmMD wrote:
It never ceases to amaze me how incompetent 343 is....all anyone has to do to determine if air is a problem is play 1 ranked game...when all 3 team members choose to max pop air...common sense tells you of the imbalance.
See, heres the thing. I have played ranked. I've actually played quite a bit or ranked. And I don't think im seeing the same thing as you.
I play team games every now and then and I still notice air is never a problem. The only difference between 1s and 3s is there is more LPs and communication is mandatory. The same principle works for a team spamming air as well as any 1v1 game. If their successful spamming air, it's either because you let them or you lack the coordination to fight it off. There is only a single time air is more powerful than it should be and that's T3 hornets but Reavers and Marines destroy them so easily.
And no, 1 v 1 and 3 v 3 are two completely different games. In 3 v 3 units inability to target multiple air units at a time is exacerbated when dealing with 2 or 3 population of air.

To units needed to effectively deal with air render your army useless for doing quite literally anything else. The goal of the match switches from destroy my opponents base to try to stop all the air. Marines and anti air are completely ineffective at destroying bases particularly late game t2 and t3 bases.

The only solution is to debuff airs effectiveness further against buildings and anti air, allow for increased spash damage from anti air, or increase overall usefulness of the anti air units (a.e. wolverines with volly).
Well here is where you are losing me. 3s is inherently unbalanced. There are far too many leader powers and the maps are too big for slow vehicles to be effective. But If you're going to argue that Air is broken because 3v3, you will only really get responses from experienced players like "3s is trash". Most people really only play 3v3 for kicks and giggles where 1s and 2s are seen as the "competitive playlists" because they are much more balanced. In those playlists, banshees are total garbage and hornets are useful. In the next patch we are seeing a reduction to wingman which will probably help but many people think that T2 air needs a buff because of how much of a non factor it is in a competitive game.
You may be the only person on HW2 who feels 1s and 2s are more popular than 3s. Actually, thats the first time I've ever heard it. Take a look at the leader boards and see whether the "competitive playlists" like 1s and 2s are truly seen as that. Champion rank in 2s starts at 1600....and there are only 63 champs, primarily because 2s is a dead playlist...No one plays it...you are definitely part of a very very small niche if you feel 2's is "more competitive" than 3's. 3's has gone as far as having a "ranked team war" discord... 1 v 1 and 2 v 2 definitely offer a different dynamic you must play by, but "more competitive", hardly.

Like I said, my complaints are in relation to 3 v 3 where its most apparently broken. But 3 v 3 is also by far the most popular playlist. From my experience (which isn't much) hardly anyone goes max pop air in 1 v 1. But again, that's not where the problem is at it's biggest.

Again, I've played over 5000 games...I am an "experienced" player.
<p></p>
Wall is not suggesting that 1s or 2s is more popular than 3s, only more viable competitively.

1v1 and 2v2 are both more balanced from a competitive point of view because 3v3 is a mode in which there are 6 leaders, all of which have unique units and leader powers, on large maps. The leader powers become an issue by way of sheer numbers. You can effectively destroy an entire person's army with the abilities available to your team alone. Leader power spam undermines the presence of units, their compositions, and their interactions.

Additionally, because 3v3 is only played on larger maps, vehicle and infantry play is inherently limited when being constantly out-maneuvered by large amounts of air. You can utilize hit and run tactics with staggeringly positive results, losing perhaps only a few units in the process, while setting back your opponent's economy/production for a minute or more.

To tie the two issues listed above (leader power spam, mobility), air units are simply faster and can dodge leader powers effectively. Aside from splitting units (which air can also do), there is very little that can be done about dodging leader powers on the ground, especially with cumbersome vehicles.

Hope this helps clear things up.
We had a good talk on Xbox and sorted everything out. We are all friends no that we were able to articulate our points to each other
EJGPharmMD wrote:
THEWALL766 wrote:
EJGPharmMD wrote:
It never ceases to amaze me how incompetent 343 is....all anyone has to do to determine if air is a problem is play 1 ranked game...when all 3 team members choose to max pop air...common sense tells you of the imbalance.
See, heres the thing. I have played ranked. I've actually played quite a bit or ranked. And I don't think im seeing the same thing as you.
I play team games every now and then and I still notice air is never a problem. The only difference between 1s and 3s is there is more LPs and communication is mandatory. The same principle works for a team spamming air as well as any 1v1 game. If their successful spamming air, it's either because you let them or you lack the coordination to fight it off. There is only a single time air is more powerful than it should be and that's T3 hornets but Reavers and Marines destroy them so easily.
And no, 1 v 1 and 3 v 3 are two completely different games. In 3 v 3 units inability to target multiple air units at a time is exacerbated when dealing with 2 or 3 population of air.

To units needed to effectively deal with air render your army useless for doing quite literally anything else. The goal of the match switches from destroy my opponents base to try to stop all the air. Marines and anti air are completely ineffective at destroying bases particularly late game t2 and t3 bases.

The only solution is to debuff airs effectiveness further against buildings and anti air, allow for increased spash damage from anti air, or increase overall usefulness of the anti air units (a.e. wolverines with volly).
3v3s are chaotic and more likely to devolve into mass air spam, but the solution isn't to nerf air into the ground; rather, the proper solution here is to make other late game options viable because, frankly, air is abysmal T2. A handful of Wolves/Reavers shred air, and the current infantry/hero meta means that more soft counters to air are on the table when transitioning to T2. T3 air is a common game-ender because you can trade those +3 air hornets/banshees quickly and rather effectively once you've been building up a sizable army for several minutes.

**TL;DR** 3s are lower-skill = tiny brain strats. Air sucks until very late game, so other late game stuff needs to be improved.
Hello Halo Wars 2 community,

Because it is such a hot topic with strong opinions on both sides, this thread is now the dedicated thread for discussion of air vs. anti-air (or any other unit) interaction. Is air overpowered? Underpowered? Why or why not?

Please keep all discussion of air units confined to this thread.

Thank you
i confirm the air units it OP!
Cistola wrote:
Hello Halo Wars 2 community,

Because it is such a hot topic with strong opinions on both sides, this thread is now the dedicated thread for discussion of air vs. anti-air (or any other unit) interaction. Is air overpowered? Underpowered? Why or why not?

Please keep all discussion of air units confined to this thread.

Thank you
i confirm the air units it OP!
The guy confirming air units are OP cant write a proper sentence. I'll not take your word for it without an educated explanation.
Air is a necessity to continue breathing and thus, living.

I agree air is OP.
I dont care if 99% of the population says air is OP or even a Moderator says it's so and definitely will NEVER listen to someone say "air is OP" when they never played this game in their life. No disrespect of course but AA does a very good for it's job and air does not. People such as Nakamura and THEWALL766 have proven this many times.
Dude, she’s making a joke.
Air OP please nerf
Air is a necessity to continue breathing and thus, living.

I agree air is OP.
I dont care if 99% of the population says air is OP or even a Moderator says it's so and definitely will NEVER listen to someone say "air is OP" when they never played this game in their life. No disrespect of course but AA does a very good for it's job and air does not. People such as Nakamura and THEWALL766 have proven this many times.
Woooosh
Thats the sound of mass air going over your base.
Air is a necessity to continue breathing and thus, living.

I agree air is OP.
I dont care if 99% of the population says air is OP or even a Moderator says it's so and definitely will NEVER listen to someone say "air is OP" when they never played this game in their life. No disrespect of course but AA does a very good for it's job and air does not. People such as Nakamura and THEWALL766 have proven this many times.
Woooosh
Thats the sound of mass air going over your base.
Woosh BANG. Thats the sound of my AA beating your army.
  1. 1
  2. ...
  3. 5
  4. 6
  5. 7
  6. 8
  7. 9
  8. ...
  9. 10