I did not quite follow you on the defense of the NDIsles, I must have missed the battle somehow. I do agree that killing the Barracks stops or delays the enemy from taking a base however it does nothing to hinder there agression. They just keep comming and can easily control a region until the Barracks come back or sustain long enouph for a longer goon flight.
Crow, aggression without any potency of capture is void and empty. Control of airspace is meaningless when you have nothing to do with what's under control, and barracks respawn in about two hours or so - which is in most cases more than enough for the tide of battle to change.
In those two hours time a good, trained pilot can go pork troops in at least three bases. If there are three~four of these guys in the area, and they can kill all enemy barracks upto 50 miles behind the "front" - forcing them to fly goons from at least 75 miles away. (except... for some reason, stupidity probably, there are surprisingly small number of people who go hit barracks)
Porking fuels may halt the enemy from upping some types of planes, but it works both ways in that the defenses cannot up fighters to sustain sufficient CAPs for extended length of time. During that time the enemy can always up an organized jabo from 2nd line bases behind the frontline, and insert into our vicinity at altitudes which we cannot reach due to lack of fuel.
Barracks are different, in that destruction of barracks does nothing to hinder defensive capability, while it serious deterrs offensive capability. The barracks buildings have now become a strat object more important than anything else.
If we define "defense" as being able to meet force with equal numbers of force to halt advance then we might be able to agree with your reasoning - but if we define defense simply doing anything necessary to stop enemy advance, then the ability to put more planes in the air does not matter anymore.
Strat Targets are a fundamental part of warfare. What would it be like if there were no start targets at all. Much like just another video game with perhaps a better engine.
I think that is one of the things that really sets this system apart from the others. Its nearly a full scope battle field.
There still are strat targets. The importance of those targets, are even higher than fuels were in AH1 - it's just that nobody wants to understand the new dynamics of tactics and strategy in AH2.
The most important target is the barracks. The second is ammo bunkers, and the third and fourth are VH and radar(but these two are of value when your team is on offense). Of the many strat targets which were available in AH1 only the fuels are missing, the rest work in the same manner but different in priority.
I am open minded though and would very much like to here you defensive strategy.
The defensive strategy is simple: up fighters, avoid radar contact, sneak into enemy field and kill barracks. It's the exact same thing(in the way how it's done) as porking fuels in AH1, except it's easier to do and more effective.
Repeat this, so that every enemy barracks within 50 mile range of the frontline is dead. Then you've got two hours to organize defenses and start pushing back the enemy. Unless the defending side is absolutlely overwhelmed in every field, the defenses can form up, and start fighting back.
The enemy may be able to swarm a certain base and control the area, but they are gonna have to fly a goon from 75 miles away.
Up a very fast fighter as goon hunters, occasionally drop a goon or two and basically there's no way for the enemy to utilize their control of airspace into something useful.
The only was to stop goon hunters is to set up screen/CAPs at every altitude at every base a defender might take off from, for an unknown period of time until the field is captured by a goon which takes more than half hours to arrive.. and at the same time keep the target field vulched and covered.
By the time goons fly 75 miles to reach the base the VHs and acks start popping back up. If the defense puts in at least 75% of numbers of the attackers in the sector, then they can be driven back.
Basically killing the barracks is the equivalent to disrupting enemy logistics. The longer they have to fly troops in, the easier to defend.
I define it as aggressive form of defense, pushing past the front line, and hitting important targets behind the line.
Compared to that, the traditional method of 'defense' by upping same or more number of fighters to meet enemies in the sky and duke it out for supremacy, or, do something to immediately reduce enemy numbers put up in the sky, is inefficient, risky. It's a passive way of defense, waiting for the enemy to show a certain level of strength, and then matching it with our own or trying to cut it down to our size.
