[1.3] - Flak 88mm AT/AA Guns

[ElSpaldo]

I am not going to say they should be removed or whinge & whine to much...

But, after just playing a game against two 'defensive' people... Those 88mm guns need a bit of tweaking.

The tactic was to capture territory and keep building a 88mm gun at each point, making it near impossible to capture the point back. This is debatable if it should be possible or not, but the main issue I have is that they eventually got to a point where they could hit our main base and just destroy it without even sending units.

My suggestions are as follows:

a) Reduce the range of the 88mm guns

b) Reduce damage to tanks + take the ability to destroy buildings... these guns can kill AA/AT & buildings !

c) Please set a limit on how many guns you can build.

Thanks.

I have a screenshot if required.

[Fyei]

Are you out of your mind?

They're crap enough as it is!

Artillery owns them
Fireup + satchel owns them
Flanking vehicle/rest vehicles charge owns them
1 AT shot from an anti tank gun owns them
Strafing run owns them
Howitzers own them
Bombing run owns them
Caliopes barrage owns them

Need I go on?

[Blacksand]

88's are a horrifyingly expensive investment, in terms of resources -and- population cap.

If he had the ability to build so many and you don't have a viable way of taking care of them, you'd lost already simply by virtue of being outplayed.

[evotech]

If anything, their defence should be upped.

If you let them have that many i agree with blacksand

[Fonic]

Flaks are flimsy and very expensive. They do alright until the Allied player spots them; after which they don't last long.

[Falaris]

Screenshots aren't that useful... what doctrine did you play and what did you do to try to nail'em?

[Desacrasa]

88s arent to bad if your opponent isnt ready for it... they only costs 5 command points to get to... so you can get them early... 1-1-3.

[Karius]

Too bad they come attached with a 'SHOOT ME, I'M OVER HERE' function.

In all honesty, it feels like a gun barrel wrapped up in paper and they can be taken out easily. You go Airborne land a squad on top of it, satchel charge, kaput. You go Infantry, get a howitzer or a howitzer shot, kaput. Armor company is a little tricky though.....

Granted you can get them early, you are gonna lose them quite as fast without 2-3 bunkers, an infantry squad and ideally a sniper and a mortar team. So yes, you can get them early but they won't survive.

[0mar]

fireup + satchel charge. Pin Medal of Honor on the f**ker who threw it. That is all.

[Karius]

I wonder if Ostwinds can take out the paras prior to land. It would make fielding an 88 even more expensive though.

[Dark_Avenger]

I suggest to make it that they are not revealed after they shoot

[Sturmhaubitze]

I wonder if Ostwinds can take out the paras prior to land. It would make fielding an 88 even more expensive though.
Ostwinds do shoot at Paratroopers and AT crews as they descend, often killing several soldiers. This makes dropping an AT crew anywhere near an Ostwind a nice waste of manpower. Pumas with the 20mm gun also do the same.

[Vicious_CB]

Armor company is a little tricky though.....

Calliope barrage...kaput
Might take more than 1 if you are unlucky

[Falaris]

Ostwinds, if someone is insane enough to drop para's near them, is likely to be able to take out *all* of the squad before it hits the ground, unless it has to reload at a bad time. The puma is considerably less effective at this, but at least it fires at'em.

Still doesn't mean that a strafing run, bombing run, dropping the troops a little further off, etc. can't nail it too.

-----------------------
(sorry, I had to)

Humidity is rising - Barometer's getting low
According to all sources, the street's the place to go
Cause tonight for the first time
Just about half-past ten
For the first time in history
It's gonna start raining men.

It's Raining Men! Hallelujah! - It's Raining Men! Amen!
I'm gonna go out to run and let myself get
Absolutely soaking wet!
It's Raining Men! Hallelujah!
It's Raining Men! Every Specimen!
Tall, blonde, dark and lean
Rough and tough and strong and mean
-------------------------

[Mistenth]

As said:
[3CP]Airborne: Recon flight (or fireup the Paras in), Paradrop, Satchel, Free EXP.
[3CP/5CP]Infantry: Counter Artillery, or drop off-map Artillery
[5CP]Armour: Calliope Barrage Flak88 safely from behind a hill for 125 muns.

No counter eh?

[Victrix Legio]

The fact that the Flak 88 has less health than the Pak38 (the gun itself, not the crew) makes Victrix a sad panda.

[Karius]

Falaris, you beat me to it. Had me laughing for a couple of minutes there :-)

[FalseMyrmidon]

You can also build an AT gun and attack ground on where the Flak 88 which will kill it in one hit once it gets hit.

[Viper Strike]

in a 2v2 [1.3] lan game.... my ally went away for like 5 minutes on the phone.... and i had to defend the frontline with MGs, 1 Flak 88, 1 AT, 1 flaming half-track arty....

The thing is i didn't know that in 1.3 that crew of the 88 can be killed... i thought that the Flak get destroyed automatically...well the opponent airborne took the 2nd 88. Proceeded to take out my allies 6 stugs.... and then my friend bitch at me for not protecting the cannons....after he came back from his call.... :donny:

----

i think Flak 88 would be better balance if they don't reveal themselves and if they can shoot down planes faster.

[Karius]

No reveal perhaps. AA flaks no in my opinion.

[Virigoth]

I also recently found that 88 can be two shotted by a Pershing. Yup, a pershing can just drive right up, take 1 hit from 88 doing so, then fire off two shots while taking another 1-2 hits and then piss off with 1/2 health leaving a smoking ruin where your 88 was.

Add Pershing to the list of things that can be depended on to take out an 88.

[evotech]

how about haveing a stug there or 2?

A howitzer can be killed by a single walking stuka or any other artillery, like a firestorm, its just as vulnerable, isnt it? buff both then?

[Saunders]

howitzer is most often not on the front lines, and I thought it didn't reveal when it fired. 88s do.

[Ucross]

Both are revealed. THe 88mm's are quite effective, but not effective enough. Calliope barrage is harder to get off than you think because you need to be pretty close. At max range you're looking at 2-3 volleys to take out a pak, 1 if you're lucky.

Airborne does the trick nicely. If the 88 is alone, nade and take control and REALLY own them. If it's not alone, drop a satchel.

Infantry is pretty good at it too. An off-map barrage will do the trick.

The key with the 88s right now is to place them in great LOS positions where the enemy will not expect them. Having them fire off during a 4v4 tank battle could mean the difference between winning and losing the game.

I think they are a little fragile but that's it.

[KDR_11k]

Howitzers can be hidden in some corner of the map, 88s need a line of fire between them and the target which means most maps won't allow placing them in as many spots as you can put a howitzer.

[Mistenth]

It's quite easy to get off a Calliope Barrage vs an 88. There are usually buildings or hedgerows on most maps that obstruct LOS. In St Hilaire an opponent build 5 Flak88s. I destroyed them all with 6 Barrages. (it was a somewhat long game yea).

[FalseMyrmidon]

I've been playing with Flak 88s in a few games now. I feel that the current number of points required to get them is good as well as their cost and power.

Due to the nature of the Flak 88 requiring line of sight to be effective it generally needs to be placed near the front lines unless you're lucky enough to find a spot with long line of site somewhere. Currently the Flak 88 has very little health so dies very easily. I believe that there are two possible ways to rectify this problem: either leave it a glass cannon and remove the of sight or (the better solution) just give it more health. I can't say that I've once had the chance to recrew a Flak 88 so the critical hit bug seems to still be around.

Additionally, it seems odd that the Flak 88's counterpart, the Howitzer, has far more durability and does not need to be anywhere near the front lines.

[Deckard]

Ha ha ha this is another example of someone who loses a match and then comes on the forums asking for a nerf. FFS.

In general on this forum 88's are considered "weak" or poor at what they do bank for buck wise you your cries for an 88 nerf will fall on deaf ears.

Had you come on and asked other for a strategy to deaf 2 defensive players then I might have some respect for your opinion but now your just another imba baby.

[Klaus]

Personally I think these could use a little boost. It's a bit dumb how they get 1 shotted from the front by AT guns, when AT guns themselves can take more hits than a tiger.

[Demon_Eyes]

Victrix, could you post those numbers?

[TheDeadlyShoe]

He shouldn't. Those numbers are almost meaningless in a vacuum. It takes a lot more knowledge of the game files to accurately understand a given units stats in COH than it does in say DOW. For example the health of the flak gun is meaningless without a penetration breakdown and a comparison of how well it protects its crew.

[Demon_Eyes]

Just curious to see how different the HP values are, considering what kills the Flak88 quicker (57mm/RR) I am sure it is not just a matter of health, but I would like to know what it's HP is at, could always look it up as well though.

[Bricks9]

I think the Flak 88 should be on wheels with a tractor and come as an off map unit.

http://www.militaireluchtvaartmuseum.nl/collectie/restauratie/flak88/images/Flak88-3-groot.jpg

[Tuco]

What I would give to drive that thing down I-85 one day...

I'd create a whole NEW defintion of "road rage"

[FalseMyrmidon]

He shouldn't. Those numbers are almost meaningless in a vacuum. It takes a lot more knowledge of the game files to accurately understand a given units stats in COH than it does in say DOW. For example the health of the flak gun is meaningless without a penetration breakdown and a comparison of how well it protects its crew.
Seeing as how I've never seen the gun outlast the crew I don't think it matters how well it protects the crew unfortunately...

[Rifleman89]

Go Download Botee vs Ahenian from the Silver Replays of www.gamereplays.org (http://www.gamereplays.org) underm CoH forums. 25 min into the fight he gets a 88 up here is a synopsys of its short life.

Shots and effect
#1, 2 & 3 : miss or bounce off a 57mm AT gunshield
#4,5, & 6 : shoot at inf squads killing 3 (1@shot)
#7 kills a P47 before it is halfway across the map, but the recon and fog is lifted AS IT BURNS AND FALLS TO PIECES until it crashes where the allied player is able to drop an airborne unit right next to it (This needs fixing--dead vehicles and squads shouldn't have any LOS)
#8 & 9 : point blank in the middle of the airborne unit BOTH MISS and no splash damage--one even lands at the feet of 1 trooper
Airborne unit drops demo charge on it and it explodes.

I've seen Volks squads get owned while standing to the side of a Sherman where the barrel couldn't depress (reality I know) so the close range of the 88 to Airborne isn't a factor. What is a factor is the 88's inf value of 6 vs the Sherman's 5 but it isn't near as effective.

So how is that for 400MP and 70Fuel? I think you're way off base. It needs a bit more survivability and even increased damage. If not, then reduce the cost--why fuel?? It needs Ammo instead and it is a static defence.

[Vicious_CB]

Seeing as how I've never seen the gun outlast the crew I don't think it matters how well it protects the crew unfortunately...

Unless they charge the gun with inf. kill the crew with rifles and take it over.

[Noble]

I think the biggest problem with the 88 is its near complete innability to take down aircraft. As it stands the 88's biggest threat is airborn armed with satchels, its pretty silly to see airborn infantry being dropped right on top of an anti air battery.

[Falaris]

I believe it has to basically aim the direction the aircraft is going to come from allready to shoot it down. There's a trick to it mentioned in the guides but I suspect that's for AI aircraft only... ?

[Noble]

I am one of the few people who actually build 88's pretty frequently, and I have only seen them shoot down planes a handfull of times, almost never. As it stands, ostwinds are better at it than 88's.

I've never tried getting the 88 to face the direction of the aircraft, I'll have to give that a go.

[Demon_Eyes]

The puma takes down aircraft at a decent rate as well.

[Dread Moose]

why should someone even be able to counter a doctrine specific unit.

Its not like i can shootdown your tiger before it gets on the map.

They already pay a load for infantry with a huge reinforce cost and lackluster anti infantry capabilities, the AT gun suffers from everything an AT gun suffers from. Supplies can be stolen.


Why cant i kill a stormtrooper squad before it gets on the map, or why cant i blow up a stuh or block your artillery before it launches.

Airborne suffer from all thier abilities being able to be shot down. Strafing run is nice, but there are times when it hits absolutely nothing for no reason, or doesnt even work. Bombing run is good, but also suffers from the fact that the 5% armor bug usually saves thier armor rather than destroying it like a normal artillery hit would because of the amount of shells being dropped.

[Noble]

why should someone even be able to counter a doctrine specific unit.

Its not like i can shootdown your tiger before it gets on the map.

Tigers cant be airdropped anywhere on the map.

[Dread Moose]

Its not like Airborne get anything even as tough as a tiger for an ability either.

[Demonic Spoon]

I'd say FREE munitions and fuel (as well as super cheap HMgs and mortars) every 2 minutes is pretty damn powerful.

[Noble]

Airborne suffer from all thier abilities being able to be shot down. Strafing run is nice, but there are times when it hits absolutely nothing for no reason, or doesnt even work. Bombing run is good, but also suffers from the fact that the 5% armor bug usually saves thier armor rather than destroying it like a normal artillery hit would because of the amount of shells being dropped.

I agree that the strafing run and the bombing run need to be alot better, but as it stands, allies really dont suffer from their abilities being shot down, since it almost never happens.

Right now, airborn have quick and easy access to any area on the map, and I think it would be cool to be able to hamper that a bit.

[Dread Moose]

true, but that ability is nothing compared to raid. ohhh, someone dropped paratroopers, or oh damn, someone is taking a point with a quad 50. No where near as good, and you dont even get a calliope and pershing.

We are getting off topic now though. 88s need love, esp for being a stationary target. I think everyone agrees, they can be good, but hell any unit can be good given the right circumstances, but those circumstances might be very rare.

[Demonic Spoon]

Airborne suffer from all thier abilities being able to be shot down. Strafing run is nice, but there are times when it hits absolutely nothing for no reason, or doesnt even work. Bombing run is good, but also suffers from the fact that the 5% armor bug usually saves thier armor rather than destroying it like a normal artillery hit would because of the amount of shells being dropped. That's not the 5% thing (and it's not a bug). It's simply that bombing runs are not SUPPOSED to destroy full-health tanks in one go.

Yes, it can't kill tanks like other types of artillery can, but here's the thing:

1) There is only ONE way your opponent can possibly stop a bombing run, and that is with anti-air, and even then, you can just blow up the AA. Normal artillery almost always lets you retreat away from it.

2) It has a far larger area of effect than other artillery.

Besides, Airborne gets a bonus 100 munitions every 2 minutes (that's almost like having 2 OPed high munition points)...So, in effect, bombing/strafing runs are exceedingly cheap.

[TheDeadlyShoe]

Seeing as how I've never seen the gun outlast the crew I don't think it matters how well it protects the crew unfortunately...

Actually, that's because it does an extremely good job of protecting its crew. Guns that do a poor job of crew protection, like HMGs, tend to get the crew killed first.

88s are extremely good. The main problem being that people overestimate how much they cost in resources. An 88 only needs to kill a single Sherman to more than pay for itself. The critical weakness of the 88 is the popcap, not the performance...

[Kratos]

The problem with the 88 is, it is to vulernable for its cost.
There are more than one easy and more cost efficient counter on all doctrines for the allys.

[TheDeadlyShoe]

It's not too vulnerable. It's not a tank, no, but nor should it be considering its range and power. Try building sandbags around it.

[Falaris]

It's a tangent, but relevant to the discussion as such. Watch the game replay in ToH 11 for how effective para doctrine can be in the hands of skilled players. Bombing and strafing runs takes out so much hardware and infantry it's sick.

My problem with the 88 is... not so big, either way.

*checking stats*
100 range, 90% accuracy at max range, which is pretty darn good. AT guns has 60 range, most tanks 35-45. At guns, comparatively, have 60% accuracy at distant (longest) range. 225 damage, reload 3.5 sec. Allied at gun 150, 3.5 sec reload, axis 115, 2.4 sec reload.

It has a *vision* range of just 35 (like other similar units), so it needs spotters to use its range effectively, obviously.

HP 410. This is, I believe, for the crew and not the gun itself. (Quick comparison - keep in mind various strengths and weaknesses: Pak 38 & Allied AT gun 510, sherman 636, allied halftrack 630, axis halftrack 315, M10 400, StuG 400, Panzer IV 600, Panther 742).
--------------
Advantage to Flak 88:

360 degree swivel. No 'lift, scuttle around, set down, fire' thing. Just 360 degrees of meanness, and it turns pretty quickly too.

Best range and firepower of any direct fire gun. Period. Those two in combination - veery nice.

Disadvantages:
High cost. 400 manpower is one thing, it's high but not exorbiant for a unit this powerful. 75 fuel is an entirely different kettle of fish. It means it *CANNOT* be used as a last ditch defensive gun because you won't have the fuel for it, which is where you'd probably really want it. It's almost the exact cost of a Panzer IV (410 manpower, 80 fuel).

Immobile. If it's badly placed, you're out of luck. Hopefully your enemy will do you a favor and blow it up. With 3 you should be able to cover nearly an entire map.

Map errors/limited elevation. On many sites which *SHOULD* be great vantage points to put them - the hill overlooking the passing in Vire, the area just south of the aixs base in Lorraine, IIRC, for two examples, they actually can't fire. (They can fire with attack-ground, they just can't attack units.). COmbined with immobility, that's bad, but that's a bug, of sorts, so shouldn't really count in unit balance.

Currently doesn't get veterancy except through experience. Lots and lots of experience. As in 'never going to get enough for level 1 in normal play' experience.

Kind of terribly vulnerable. THe combination of being weaker than a regular AT gun, and *also* being immobile makes it more vulnerable than either. WHen you add the cost of the thing - 75 fuel in particular - it makes building one more of a gamble than most.

[FalseMyrmidon]

Actually, that's because it does an extremely good job of protecting its crew. Guns that do a poor job of crew protection, like HMGs, tend to get the crew killed first.Actually, I think it's because they tend to blow up the first time they get hit by anything.

[RayLiota]

Actually, that's because it does an extremely good job of protecting its crew. Guns that do a poor job of crew protection, like HMGs, tend to get the crew killed first.

88s are extremely good. The main problem being that people overestimate how much they cost in resources. An 88 only needs to kill a single Sherman to more than pay for itself. The critical weakness of the 88 is the popcap, not the performance...
I think this is a very good point... Flak88's need only kill 1 Sherman to pay for itself..

Maybe look at lowering its pop-cap to 8... Its currently 12?

S.

[TheDeadlyShoe]

Actually, I think it's because they tend to blow up the first time they get hit by anything.

It's nice that people keep saying this, but in my experience it's just not true. The only thing that really puts the kibosh on flaks are AT guns, and if AT guns are sneaking up on you, you either placed the gun horribly wrong or you have bigger problems.

[Battlebadger]

Try this: place an allied AT gun in a wide open map down a road from an 88 at a point further than the 88's max range. Place a sniper to spot for the 88 out to the 88's max range. Now tell the AT gun to directly at the 88 and record the results!

There is a greater chance of the AT gun winning in this example than the 88, despite the AT gun not having a spotter. Sniping 88's with AT guns is not only incredibly cost efficient, but it is an exceedingly easy and reliable strategy, even when done in conditions that are entirely in favor of the 88 (no LOS used when moving the AT gun into position, spotter in a perfect position, 88 may begin firing on the AT gun from max range). I hardly think this is a case of AT guns "sneaking up on you", try it out! Similarly, a sherman may be placed in these conditions instead of an AT gun, and have a very good chance of closing the distance and killing the 88 or it's crew before the 88 can kill the sherman (due to shermans moving so fast and having excellent HP/deflection they can easily close the distance with no obstacles).

Those things said, the 88 is *only* good with strong, dedicated defenses around it to prevent AT guns from simply sniping it and tanks from charging it. When the axis player dedicates units to defend the gun, it may still be easily killed by artillery of all types or an airborne drop.

[TheDeadlyShoe]

^Even if you accept that as accurate (which it isnt in my experience), a bunker or two (one front one behind facing the flak) and a Volks squad is all it takes to defend a flak. Maybe some mines. Spotting can easily done by captured points. Besides which, it doesn't reflect actual game conditions, since the first use of a flak gun should always come as a surprise to your opponent and you should have your squads out pressuring (and therefore screening the flak battery) whenever possible. Plus, relying on a single unit for AT, however powerful, is not a good idea. At the very least, you will encounter tanks before you can assemble the CP for a Flak gun, and you will need PaKs and schrek grenadiers or Stugs or something.

Losing a flak gun (400 manpower, 75 fuel) to an airborne drop satchel (400 manpower, 75? munitions) is an even trade. And that doesn't even count the cost of discovering the flak gun in lost units or munitions cost for a recon flight. And it IS possible to shut down an airborne drop entirely and prevent it from satcheling. There's a delay before they the unit activates where its vulnerable to incoming fire. And supression will slow down the throw, even if the player Fires Up, since Fire Up slows it down too.

[FalseMyrmidon]

Why aren't Howitzers as vulnerable to damage as 88s then DeadlyShoe?

[TheDeadlyShoe]

Because the crew always dies first.

[Texture]

My lord, the nonsense being spouted here. All it takes is a bunker or two, some mines, and maybe a volks squad to defend an 88? Sweet flaming airborne monkeys, you have got to be jerking us around. All it takes to defend a delicate flower that cost 75 fuel is an additional (150 mp * 2 for bunkers, 280 mp for Volks, 50 ammo * 2 for bunker guns, 25 ammo for a mine) 580 mp and 75 ammo! Wellllllll sweeeeeet. Sign me up! That sounds like a bargain, and I get to help out my allied friends by having now clustered a majority of my resources into an entirely static defense that can be targetted en masse by arty.

Or that losing a flak is an even trade for a FREAKING AIRBORNE SQUAD? How often has ANYONE played this game and said "Well shucks... I just blew 75 fuel on nothing but at least that pesky airbone squad is dead." Do you enjoy wallowing in the filthy depths of depraved and indifferent comments like that, or do you just shower more frequently than most people?

75 fuel != 75 ammo. Not even on opposites day, not even using the metric system of measurement.

Go away. You are equal parts silly and infuriating.

What Falaris said is extremely interesting. The fact that those totally key elevated points introduce a firing bug is really crippling. One viable strategy that would help you recoup the cost of that glass cannon is to put it on that elevation in Lorraine, where it would have tremendous control with a spotter. Of course, if it can't auto-attack then that is out the window. Also, it damn well better kill that first Sherman, because Lorraine is pretty fuel poor, and you aren't likely to be able to afford a tank to back you up any time soon if you bought an 88.

[TheDeadlyShoe]

My lord, the nonsense being spouted here. All it takes is a bunker or two, some mines, and maybe a volks squad to defend an 88? Sweet flaming airborne monkeys, you have got to be jerking us around. All it takes to defend a delicate flower that cost 75 fuel is an additional (150 mp * 2 for bunkers, 280 mp for Volks, 50 ammo * 2 for bunker guns, 25 ammo for a mine) 580 mp and 75 ammo! Wellllllll sweeeeeet. Sign me up! That sounds like a bargain, and I get to help out my allied friends by having now clustered a majority of my resources into an entirely static defense that can be targetted en masse by arty.

No, that would just be a typical defensive setup. The bunkers and stuff are built first for their own utility in locking down an area. But it's the kind of stuff you need if you want to massacre an airborne squad before it gets off a satchel.

Fuel is more important than munitions. But not so much more important that 400 mp/75 fuel isn't an even trade for 400mp/75 munitions. Especially when someone cant drop an airborne squad on the flak until he knows its there, which presents its own problems. It's just part of the risk of building one.

You would be surprised how wide a field of fire you can get when your shots blow through walls and hedges.

It would be very, very easy to overpower to flak gun. Half the reason it has such a pop cost is to prevent a Defensive player from spamming them all over the map...

[Saunders]

FYI, you can just place down a strafing run to kill the crew of an 88. If you feel like it, use that instead of a stachel and recrew with the airborne you drop.

[Virigoth]

@Deadly Shoe
But not so much more important that 400 mp/75 fuel isn't an even trade for 400mp/75 munitions.
It's 375 manpower for a Paratrooper squad, and you're not going to lose all of it's members either, you retreat the moment satchel is tossed.

More like 200MP+75Mu traded for 400/75Fuel.

You must be a half brained monkey if you do not see this as a good trade off.

As to spending +590 MP and X amount of ammo to protect an 88 with 590+400MP. 1000MP is often a majority what you spend on MP troops for entiriety of 1vs1 round as Axis. Rest goes to tier upgrades and buildings. If you tie up so much MP in one spot begging to be artied you're going to get owned hard.

Stop arguing just to be right with vacuum filled arguments.

[TheDeadlyShoe]

FYI, you can just place down a strafing run to kill the crew of an 88. If you feel like it, use that instead of a stachel and recrew with the airborne you drop.

edit- Nice in theory, but it will only work against a completely undefended flak gun. With bunker reinforcement, any nearby axis infantry squad can massacre the airborne and take back the gun and recrew it in fairly short order - even if they're not close enough to recrew it before the airborne land.




As to spending +590 MP and X amount of ammo to protect an 88 with 590+400MP. 1000MP is often a majority what you spend on MP troops for entiriety of 1vs1 round as Axis. Rest goes to tier upgrades and buildings. If you tie up so much MP in one spot begging to be artied you're going to get owned hard.

That's...not how it works. Bunkers lock down the map and provide reinforcement (or medics), and the squad is just SOP. And all in one spot? What? The strategy assumes people know how to put together a defensive layout! And with a layout like that, you can stop an Airborne drop in its tracks. You can kill it before it even gets off the satchel if you're even reasonably on the ball. If an airborne squad can drop on your flak gun and get away with almost no casualties, You're Doing It Wrong. But you don't need a layout like that to use a flak gun. You're incredulous that you need different units to kill different targets. If someone says that they're having trouble killing infantry with an AT gun, and it is suggested they pair infantry with it, noone says "But that costs 600 MP! Are you kidding?"

A Howitzer is the obvious primary counter to Flaks and nothing can be done about it. There simply won't ever be a flak gun that isn't going to get its ass kicked by a howitzer.

Flak Guns best suit an infantry centric strategy. If you only buy some initial squads and hard tech to Sturm and pump out Pumas and StuGs, then no flak guns and their fuel cost arn't for you.

[Mistenth]

Fire-Up Airborne = GG Flak88.

[TheDeadlyShoe]

Fire Up doesn't make them immune to bullets. And if they are droppig directly on to the gun, Fire Up actually slows down the satchel.

[RayLiota]

Maybe Im just wacko, but when I build a flak88 I build it close to the front with not much defending it, usually just 1 squad of Mp40 Volks and as soon as its built I attack with whatever I have... Flak88 is outstanding support.... I assume it will be destroyed, and use it to kill as much armour as quickly as I can..

Granted its not as good a late power like the Tigers the other Docs get but its far from useless.. Against an Armour Company player its very effective....

[TheDeadlyShoe]

That's an entirely proper way to use flaks. I just prefer bunkers because I like bunkers. :)

[Bennigans]

Do you think that a repair bunker would repair the flak gun?

[Brendan]

I have to agree, 88s are fine as is.

[KDR_11k]

I think being able to load them on a Hanomag would still be nice.

[Quercus]

You should be able to protect an 88 without having half your army sat next to it.

Maybe you could switch the 88 between AA and AT rounds and when on AA it turns slightly quicker and is thus more effective against airborne drops very close to it.

And I agree with KDR - have a hanomag upgrade variant that can be moved (although very slowly - the same speed as a camouflaged sniper for example) but limit it to one (in the same way you can only have 1 Tiger Ace).
Even if it moves slowly and takes 20 seconds to deploy before it can be used it would be better than a purely static version.

[Battlebadger]

Fun tip: if your enemy places bunkers near his 88, approach the 88 with your tanks by placing the bunker between yourself and the gun, the 88 cannot fire through/over the bunker! Essentially placing bunkers close to an 88 just provides you with a shield to cover your armored attacks!

[TheDeadlyShoe]

Fun tip: if your enemy places bunkers near his 88, approach the 88 with your tanks by placing the bunker between yourself and the gun, the 88 cannot fire through/over the bunker! Essentially placing bunkers close to an 88 just provides you with a shield to cover your armored attacks!

A good point, but that's a matter of placement more than anything else.

[Battlebadger]

Really it's more of a question of proximity, the bunker gives you an arc of safety, the size of which depends on it's distance.

[Mr Pink]

i agree that 88's are pretty much fin as is... again it's a risk to build one, but if you build it right, it will pay off.

for those of you that want a movable 88, just beg relic to introduce Lancia da 90's...
they are sweet, an 88 on the back of a truck, that can pack up, move then set up again... now THAT wuold be awesome... and cost a bucket too...

[Porta]

i lost an 88 the other day to a single AT shot, after my 88 had put 2 rounds into it.......i wept

[FalseMyrmidon]

That's normal NAK. Apparently it's ok for 88s to die to a signle AT shot.

[KnowsKnone]

Lol, I think its depressing, 88mm AT round cant peirce a 57mm shield thats Id say 40mm thick, the the 88's shield is at least 60mm inches thick. I mean even the shells of the 88 are 2x if not more the size of the 57's... Anyway they are like children, you always have to keep your eye on them and keep them out of trouble. Otherwise its like you just left em to die in the trash can next to the HQ....

[Crazy Ivan]

Apperantly I found the Flak Cannon of d0000m last night.

It's point Du Hoc and the game is pretty close so I up and build a 88 in a feild that has been a massive staging ground thus far. I happen to have a Panzer IV parked nearby taking repairs.
Now a pair of M60's bound across the hill side and fire on my Pope Gun...and both shots bounce off. The gun revs up and blows a M60 to hell while the other takes a shot at my Panzer. A moment later and the combined panzer/88 has incinerated the M60.
Over the course of action my 88 would see 3 more M60's and 2 Shermans and sevarl squads of BAR riflemen and with the accompianment of either an MG42 or a Panzer IV would routinely decimate all these threats.
Of course it's cousin to the north was just brand new built and became Rifle Man fodder cauesing me to WTFPWN the area with some Defensive Artillery on the nearby point cauesing the death of all involved.

Best 88 EVAR.

[Nanor]

88s can decimate anything. As long as you have the sightline. Just have a motorbike or a stealthed sniper about. The 88s have a massive range and do a helluva lot of damage. As long as they're protected by MG's and a sniper and a couple of mortars nothing will be able to break through.

Flaks are seriously underused, and it's certainly not Relic's fault for this, it's the players for not realising it's power!

[BlackLabel]

2 Things bug me about the 88´s. First the got destryed by AT guns with ONE single shot, AND i had a 88 shell deflected by a setup machine gun...i mean WTF...:puppy:

[Fonic]

Lol, I think its depressing, 88mm AT round cant peirce a 57mm shield thats Id say 40mm thick, the the 88's shield is at least 60mm inches thick.

I'm confused. What's a Millimetre Inch? Do you mean 60 mm or 60 inches? Because the latter is waaaay off. Besides the shield wouldn't stop the gun blowing apart if a shell hit it; it would only give the crew some cover from small-arms fire.

AT Guns have seriously tough frontal armour, especially the 57. This is the only way to make them a suitable substitute for other Tanks in the AT role. Flaks dont have the same armour because otherwise they'd be ridiculously powerful. But considering that they're a stationery target, after a shot or two is fired they become easy bait for the Allies.
They really could do with a boost to their defence; namely because they're so vulnerable to anything that catches them off guard, and Artillery. But so is everything else, it's just that the 88 has no way of avoiding it and is very costly.

I think they just need something to give them a better edge. Be it a reduced MP/Fuel/Pop cost or an armour boost; right now they're far too fragile and expensive.

I'd like to see Portable Flak 88s. I.E. On the back of a truck or something; but since that isn't going to happen, what if Flak 88's could be dissassembled by Pioneers for a full Resource refund? That way they could be rebuilt elsewhere, so as not to be so easily targetted by Enemy Arty/Paras.

[KDR_11k]

I think AT guns should damage 88s like they do other AT guns, you can just use small arms to decrew the 88 so AT guns shouldn't be a neccessary counter.

[Texture]

That is pretty reasonable. AT is tuff as hell vrs anything but infantry from behind, make an 88 the same.

Of course, it's really an AA gun, didn't have armor like that in reality, etc.

Oh well. I have only once lost to someone who used an 88, and that was in a 3v3 where the only purpose the 88 served was to kill any infantry I'd managed to break out of my base after repulsing an enemy attack. (we were basically locked into our bases at this point)

You'd think after all this time, someone would outline a realistic strat that makes them attractive and throw up a replay in the strategy section.

[Porta]

i think a good mod for the 88 would be to give it different ammo options, ie HE for infatry and those pesky paratroopers (dam them all to hell) and AP for armour....just a thought

[Vicious_CB]

The 88 just like the 88 on the tiger has a massive blast radius, more then the sherman gun which is just fine for inf. You want true anti-inf get a MG. The 88 is fine against all targets.

Now its armor,thats another story.

[DsrtEagle]

The 88 just like the 88 on the tiger has a massive blast radius, more then the sherman gun which is just fine for inf. You want true anti-inf get a MG. The 88 is fine against all targets.

Now its armor,thats another story.

It does not have armor, and it should not. You want it to have armor then get a Tiger. The 88 was a defensive weapon. Probably why it is on the defensive tech tree

It was designed to be mobile and effective against aircraft first, then after being used in Spain, France and Africa was found to work out very well at taking out armor in a static position.

In the real world it has a 6 men crew, in the game it has a 3 man crew. In the game give it is 6 men crew, this would in turn add to its "armor" value, being able to fend off some infantry units. They can be used very well in a large team match game, being well protected with sandbags, wire, mines and some form of anti-infantry.

Here is some info on the real 88 itselfs for those interested:

German 88mm gun is probably the best known artillery piece of World War II. First time 88mm saw combat was in Spain during the Civil War in 1936, where it proved itself to be not only excellent anti-aircraft gun but also ideal tank killer due to its high muzzle velocity and efficient heavy projectile.

It again proved to be an excellent anti-tank gun in France in 1940, especially against heavily armored French Char B1-bis heavy tanks and British Mk.II Matilda infantry tanks. By the time when it arrived in North Africa it was a feared tank killer, which could knock any Allied tank at distances well over 1000 meters

It again proved its reputation in Russia, where it was the only gun capable of dealing with Soviet T-34 medium tanks and KW-1 heavy tanks, before the arrival of heavier German tanks.

88mm Flak guns were also used as field artillery - e.g. during the Battle of the Bulge. The only problem with 88mm Flak series was its height and weight, which forced it in action to rely on its power and range rather than concealment

During the war 88mm Flak series guns were used aside of the German Army by Italy and captured examples were often used by the Allies including US Army in late 1944 in Western Europe. After the war many 88mm Flak series guns were used by many countries including former Yugoslavia and Denmark.

Prototype of Flak 18 was developed as early as 1928 by Krupp of Essen in cooperation with Swedish Bofors, but entered production after Hitler's rise to power in 1933/34. It was mounted on pivoted cruciform carriage, which was carried by two single axle trailers, which allowed it to be quickly dismounted. Flak 18 had single piece barrel.

Next model Flak 36 was basically Flak 18 with multi-section barrel and new type of transport trailers. Flak 36 was followed by Flak 37, which was an improved Flak 36 with revised fire control data transmission system, which made the gun more suited for static rather than mobile use. Flak 36 and Flak 37 differ from each other by the carriages. Flak 18 was transported using lighter trailer (Sonderanhaenger 201) and was lighter in transport than later models, which used Sonderanhaenger 202 by 1200kg. All three models were interchangeable and often Flak 18 barrels were mounted on Flak 37 carriages. Also during production various changes were introduced including new trailers, various mounting (e.g. railway flatcars and coastal defenses). In August of 1944, there were some 10704 Flak 18, 36 and 37 guns in service

[Virigoth]

Everybody who played the game knows that 88s are stupifyingly (is that a word?) vulnerable unless they have more then their cost of additional units around to defend them. They are arty bait, calliope bait, satchel bait, mortar bait and required spotters and extremely specific locations on each map to be effective.

As a contender to a tiger of the other doctrines in the "armor counter" category they fail miserably especialy considering current pitful state of tank traps.

Anyone who says they are effective (when given 500+MP and XFuel of support) is referring to team games where this strategy is somewhat possible. Even then, it is far easier to take out a well defended 88 (recon followed by arty strike or offmap for example) in team games then in 1vs1 so they are not any more useful in those situations other then as waste bins for resources.

400MP and 75Fuel and 12 popcap for a static unit that often can be circumvented is not a trivial investement.

In team games Howies (their closest counterpart) can be put behind hedges at the back of the map and often spend majority of the game unharmed. 88s in team games get snuffed out after they fire a single shot.
As to people who say 88 has to kill only 1 tank to break even for it's cost.. Thats only true if you are playing noobs. Experienced players will waste your 400/75 + support worth of resources without blinking or loosing a single unit. And if it's really well defended, they go somewhere else where you don't have units beacuse you put them all in one place.

It's the same situation as HMGs. They are great at what they do, but you need to constantly redeploy them to new locations or they are wasted. 88s cannot be redeployed.

[KDR_11k]

I don't think the vulnerability of the crew needs a reduction or increase, it's fine. The gun itself should take less damage from anti-tank weapons, though.

[Pak88mm]

a sherman can 1v1 with 88mm and win stading face to face no flanking. On other hand an markiv, stug and panther cannot do the same against a 57mm.......nice joke.

[TheDeadlyShoe]

- Fixed bug where Allied AT Guns could destroy Axis Flak 88s in a single registered hit, regardless of the Flak 88's health.

^Pak - flaks are not AT guns. They have to be protected. That sherman wont win if it has to approach under fire and you have units there.

[tuffy!]

Geez the OP is out of his mind. Never heard something as ridiculous as this. Must be a beginner, or just crazy.