That said, Junky's point is valid - even though I disagree. Without Air Superioirty locally, something greatly enabled by taking down the FH, base capture is more difficult. I concede it is not impossible, especially if you cap the base well with your balltards. You'll still see enemy fighters coming in from an adjacent base - and with better alt. But, you've increased their organizational challenge - and that's the irony of Junky's point, imj, since I believe the case he cites is a fine example of really entropic conduct. Put more simply, there is no concert of action, taking down the FHs helps to keep one from occurring.
The problem isn't a problem.
One, you almost never see FHs dropped at several bases at the same time (it takes too long and the hangars are back up too quickly, the exception being the V bases that are 5 miles apart), so defenders can always up somewhere. In two of Junky's screenshots he conveniently ignores the CVs cruising 20 miles or less from the base.
Two, with very rare exceptions, no one ever drops hangars to stop a furball, as opposed to taking the base. Junky claims they do because they don't take the base
the way he thinks they should, but then, Junky doesn't take bases and has only contempt for those who do, so why should anyone care what he has to say about the way to do it?
Three, nine times out of ten the "furball" that's getting shut down is 20 guys circling a capped field so they can pad their scores by vulching everything that moves. That is pretty much without exception the whine that goes out on Range when hangars are dropped - "Why'd you drop the hangars? How are we supposed to get kills now?" And I have zero sympathy for it, especially since the same guys, who don't care about taking bases or winning the war, will also not care if one fighter slips the net and gets to town to kill the goon - they're all too busy still waiting for the next sucker to up and get blasted before his engine's fully caught. If they really want a
fight, dropping hangars is doing them a favor, because they'll get to go somewhere else and try to kill people who aren't completely helpless. Who knows, they might learn a thing or two, like how to win a fair fight and not just run home as fast as their little pony hooves can take them as soon as they no longer have a massive e and numbers advantage.
Four, as has been said numerous times here, if there's a big battle going near the base, why can't the defenders kill the buffs? Fugitive may only climb to 6-8k so he can get to the fight quicker (wow we actually have one thing in common), but don't try to tell me there won't be a couple of guys wheeling around at 18k waiting to pick. The only problem is, those guys are afraid to engage a target that has any chance of actually shooting back. You could get shot down that way! The same goes for all the 262 jocks - why don't you put that plane to the use for which it was intended?
And five, dropping hangars doesn't mean there'll be no fight. It generally takes the bombers three or four minutes to get from the dar ring to the base, which is plenty of time for dozens of defenders to up if they care to. They sure get more warning and chance to fight back than they do against an NOE mission with 30 guys. And if it's near an existing furball there'll be plenty of people already in the air to respond. The problem is, people like Junky don't care about defending a base, they just want to whine once it's gone. Anyway, the purpose of dropping the hangars is very simple: if you don't, the defenders can get back in the fight ten times quicker than attackers can, so if they can kill one attacker for every ten defenders who go down, they win by attrition. If both sides have to fly 20 miles to the fight, it's much better for the attackers.
Of course, all the people who have contempt for taking bases and winning the war will say this is all wrong, but why should anyone care what they think? Do you care what a guy who loathes baseball and never watches a game thinks about the World Series?
