Meteor vs Me262

Post by **IainMcNeil** » Fri Jun 17, 2011 8:53 am

In multiplayer I have a Metoer vs Me262 twice - both 0xp and full strength. The odds I'm getting are 7 to 2 against the metoer. This basically makes the 262 invulnerable.

Somethign seems wrong with the stats? I think one could have a small advantage if thats decided by the design but it needs to be 3v4 rather than 7v2 or the Germans can easily guarantee air superiroty. Unless of course the Me262 is ridiculously expensive so they can only afford 1 or 2 but the Metoer was about 500-600 so hardly cheap!

lordzimoa · Post by **lordzimoa** » Fri Jun 17, 2011 9:07 am

Me 262 cost me more than 900, so that is quite expensive but I had 5000 - 6000 to spend, So maybe more a problem in MP than in SP.

Kresimir I know Me 262 is best fighter in the game, but I`me chopping Iain his airforce into pieces. Costs are ok I guess, but a little tone down probably should solve it.

Post by **IainMcNeil** » Fri Jun 17, 2011 9:19 am

Yes at current casualty rates I'm going to need 5-1 odds to do anythign to you which is about 2500 vs 900.

I lose 9 damage for hits on the last attack!

I dont think making the me262 cost 2500 is a good plan so reducing its air attack seems the better option.

Kerensky · Post by **Kerensky** » Fri Jun 17, 2011 10:56 am

Sounds like Hylan Valley to me. If you have any comments or feedback about the map itself, I'm all ears.

Just to preempt any considers about the British being inferior in the air(Me262) and the ground(King Tiger), in the update the Germans start with 5700 and the British start with 6700, and the Germans have 13 open core slots (29 total) to start while the British have 14 (30 total). British also get to 'go first', as it were. Neutral flags are also placed in the update.

As for Me262, Meteor, and aircraft in general... well the only reason you are seeing air combat on that map is because the Meteor is the best Allied fighter of all nations. Highest initiative of any air unit, and the only one that can hope to stand a chance to the 262. As it is though, as you are experiencing, the Meteor still is not a cost effective solution.

474 per Meteor against 750 per 262, but you need 3 meteors minimum to successfully engage a 262, 16 initative vs 18 means 2 mass attackers will possibly tip the battle in favor of the first meteor, which will allow the two follow up attacks to sustain less damage even though they no longer shoot first.

As for air combat in all the other MP specific scenarios, I couldn't make them work to fit a tightly balanced game (Partly the fault of the Me262, FW190, and P47, but also from the general inability of tactical bombers to accomplish much outside of early war scenarios), so I omitted air combat almost entirely:

Bzura, 1 sided battle with only 2 air units for 1 player and 0 for the other.
Bersaglieri. Junky Italian fighters and bombers against terrible Russian fighters with fairly snowy weather.
Bocage. 1 sided battle with only 3 air units for 1 player and 0 for the other.
Hunters. This scenario is the most air heavy scenario (3 german, 5 allied with room for both sides to buy more), and it's plagued by cloudy and rain.
Huntress. Zero air units, one airfield that starts as neutral.
The Frozen North. 75% chance for snow, nuff said.
Urban Warfare. What's an 'airfield'?
Partisan uprising. Junky Italian fighters against just as bad French aircraft.
War Games. I guess this one has a few air units on both sides, except the P-47 unbalances the air war pretty badly here.

and

Hylian valley. The only map with abundant airfields, fairly clear skies, and enough prestige to buy lots of aircraft. Mainly because the Meteor is the only thing in the game with a chance in hell of challenging the Me262, and even then it does a terrible job of it. 16 initiative is as close as any allied fighter can get to the Me262's 18, which will absolutely devastate any other aircraft with it's 30 air attack value, even the otherwise ridiculous P-47N. 7 - 0 for the P-47N to attack a 262 because of the initiative imbalance.

Post by **IainMcNeil** » Fri Jun 17, 2011 1:31 pm

The meteor definitely needs to be better vs me262 based on those stats. Its actually very hard to get 3 vs 1 for a start, and the cost of 3 metors is way more than 1 me262. Also its far easier to lose a meteor than a me262 meaning you have to build a new unit, rather than me262 which is likely to escape damaged and be repaired.

The stats just need balancing so that the 262 has an edge but not so much of one.

Razz1 · Post by **Razz1** » Fri Jun 17, 2011 3:28 pm

We should try using 28 for attack and see how that works.

Iscaran · Post by **Iscaran** » Fri Jun 17, 2011 5:55 pm

I was just playing the 1945 Germany scenario...and I have to agree the Me262 is either "too strong" or the meteor "too weak" (or both).

I think the meteor actually should have more Air Attack.

The FW190D has Air attack 24, yet I dont think it was really considered that good an aircraft when compared to a P51D or the late war Hawker or spitfire models. These should have around the same values IMO.

The Meteor has a lower Air attack than even a FW190D and I am very sure that a meteor definitely outclassed the FW190D.

Whilst the ME262 as the only aircraft has the insane AA value of 30 !
Also whats with this experimental aircraft TA-152 ? it got 26 yet its barely that much better a design as the other late war non-jet aircraft. Maybe a tad better but not 30% ?!?

IMO Meteor needs to be around 25 AA. And perhaps increase cost to 500 then as well. Should be considerably more expensive than the other late-war allied non-jet fighters.

I would think that keeping the ME-262 @30 is OK as this was indeed one of the best fighters built during WWII. It was also a major inspiration in the development of after WWII jet-fighters of both the US and the soviet military.

uran21 · Post by **uran21** » Mon Jun 27, 2011 7:00 pm

I was thinking about Meteor vs Me262 issue and as allwas get deeper in it so for me it is not an issue about those two planes but conceptual issue. Stand alone singleplaer, campaign singleplaer and multiplaer all require different approach to the subject of unit balancing and all have their limitations. Making Me262 weeker will make RAF in scenarios where appears more competitive but will not do anthing significant for Soviets. Also if such bigg difference in stats is a problem, and for some approaches it is, than Poles have problem with too strong Bf109e to achieve balance in fighting for air superiorit . Some approaches go more straightforward, some go more historical. Reducing strength of Me262 is going to be compromise to soften the problem not to solve it.