|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
slypie11
Planetary Response Organisation Test Friends Please Ignore
11
|
Posted - 2013.03.23 22:32:00 -
[1] - Quote
Jathniel wrote:Can't wait till we get some serious air power in this game.
Air power has always been the top of the food chain in war. The only AV that should be effective are forge guns, and tank mounted SAMs (guided missiles). Make the tanks sacrifice an anti-infanty gun in favor of a guided missile launcher and pray if they want to be good against jets and gunships.
Guys on foot should not be taking jets out with swarms. Gunships and dropships? Maybe. Jets? Hell no.
Just make the combat aircraft much more expensive than tanks, so they can't be spammed.
Considering the price they should cost... I'm not comfortable with a jet being called down via RDV... I don't trust those bastards. Let me fly myself in.
Yes, guys on foot should be taking aircraft out with swarms. It's not like we need the lock on for tanks. Also, have you heard of a stinger missile? It's a handheld surface to air missile that is used today. So it is perfectly feasible for ground units to attack aircraft. If you don't like it, then don't fly. |
slypie11
Planetary Response Organisation Test Friends Please Ignore
11
|
Posted - 2013.03.24 02:12:00 -
[2] - Quote
Lol noob I don't play battlefield. This is my first serious military FPS since CoD world at war. 1, I doubt there will be jets unless they increase map size significantly. 2, fighters won't be going much damage to ground targets unless they introduce air to ground missiles or fighter/bombers. 3 unless we get sam trucks or installations that are cheap enough to deploy whenever someone calls in a jet, were sticking to SLs hitting jets. |
slypie11
Planetary Response Organisation Test Friends Please Ignore
11
|
Posted - 2013.03.24 02:24:00 -
[3] - Quote
Jathniel wrote:slypie11 wrote:Jathniel wrote:Can't wait till we get some serious air power in this game.
Air power has always been the top of the food chain in war. The only AV that should be effective are forge guns, and tank mounted SAMs (guided missiles). Make the tanks sacrifice an anti-infanty gun in favor of a guided missile launcher and pray if they want to be good against jets and gunships.
Guys on foot should not be taking jets out with swarms. Gunships and dropships? Maybe. Jets? Hell no.
Just make the combat aircraft much more expensive than tanks, so they can't be spammed.
Considering the price they should cost... I'm not comfortable with a jet being called down via RDV... I don't trust those bastards. Let me fly myself in. Yes, guys on foot should be taking aircraft out with swarms. It's not like we need the lock on for tanks. Also, have you heard of a stinger missile? It's a handheld surface to air missile that is used today. So it is perfectly feasible for ground units to attack aircraft. If you don't like it, then don't fly. lol stingers don't shoot down jets noob. stingers are meant to take down slow, low altitude aircraft like helicopters. or facilitate air-to-air combat between gunships. A jet would get out of an IR stinger range in a matter of seconds. Someone clearly played too much Battlefield... Don't like jets? Then get a proper means besides a hand weapon to shoot one down.
Just did some research actually. The top speed of a stinger is 1,400 mph. Most jet aircraft can travel Mach 1.5 or 2 on afterburners. Considering the speed of sound is 768mph, this means that stingers can, in fact, keep up with or outrun must jet aircraft |
slypie11
Planetary Response Organisation Test Friends Please Ignore
11
|
Posted - 2013.03.24 02:25:00 -
[4] - Quote
Oxskull Duncarino wrote:Jathniel wrote:slypie11 wrote:Jathniel wrote:Can't wait till we get some serious air power in this game.
Air power has always been the top of the food chain in war. The only AV that should be effective are forge guns, and tank mounted SAMs (guided missiles). Make the tanks sacrifice an anti-infanty gun in favor of a guided missile launcher and pray if they want to be good against jets and gunships.
Guys on foot should not be taking jets out with swarms. Gunships and dropships? Maybe. Jets? Hell no.
Just make the combat aircraft much more expensive than tanks, so they can't be spammed.
Considering the price they should cost... I'm not comfortable with a jet being called down via RDV... I don't trust those bastards. Let me fly myself in. Yes, guys on foot should be taking aircraft out with swarms. It's not like we need the lock on for tanks. Also, have you heard of a stinger missile? It's a handheld surface to air missile that is used today. So it is perfectly feasible for ground units to attack aircraft. If you don't like it, then don't fly. lol stingers don't shoot down jets noob. stingers are meant to take down slow, low altitude aircraft like helicopters. or facilitate air-to-air combat between gunships. A jet would get out of an IR stinger range in a matter of seconds. Someone clearly played too much Battlefield... Don't like jets? Then get a proper means besides a hand weapon to shoot one down. Really!!!! You think Stingers missile systems are meant for slow aircraft. Considering you have actual access to specs since you're posting ONLINE, you might want to look into the system. Maybe even get away from Wikipedia and look further afield It is very much an effective weapon against jets. It has a short range but nearly instantly hits Mach 2.5, more than enough to take out low, fast moving jets. It's ideal for infantry against a jet giving ground support, AND, it was used alot in short range air to air missile systems between fighter jets. Try to learn something about a subject before acting like a douche. Just because there have been improvements in short range SAMs and AAMs doesn't mean the old ones are crap either. They are still very much effective. Lol proving my point before me
|
slypie11
Planetary Response Organisation Test Friends Please Ignore
11
|
Posted - 2013.03.24 02:30:00 -
[5] - Quote
Falco Bombardi wrote:Gunships should possess a few key traits:
Nimble - Terrain hugging, intricate and tight maneuvers and weaving between obstacles are going to be necessary for gunships to be effective and survivable
2 man crew - Pilot should have an unguided forward firing weapon such as unguided rockets. Gunner would have control of the turret weapons. Either autocannons or pulse lasers or blasters, etc (Primary and secondary weapons for gunner, bringing vehicle grand total up to 3 including pilot "dumb" munitions)
Fast - The gunship will need to be able to dictate engagements for everything except dedicated air superiority fighters.
Fragile - To maintain game balance Dropships should be significantly toughened and Gunships should be quite thin skinned. They will need to rely on the EVE concept of "speed tanking" to essentially survive by not taking hits.
COCKPIT VIEW - This will be crucial, visibility needs to be excellent and the HUD needs to be effective. No way you can do close air support with a 3rd person view.
These are my two cents on the matter.
I don't know about you, but the word gunship makes me think of an aerial tank. Slow but strong with big guns |
slypie11
Planetary Response Organisation Test Friends Please Ignore
11
|
Posted - 2013.03.24 03:00:00 -
[6] - Quote
Oxskull Duncarino wrote:slypie11 wrote: Lol proving my point before me
Haha. I have to take back what I said about it having being used on fighter aircraft for AAMs as I can't find the aircraft . Kitten brain. But yeh, it's a very nice short range SAM.
Yeah, and with the size of these maps, all you need is a short range SAM |
slypie11
Planetary Response Organisation Test Friends Please Ignore
11
|
Posted - 2013.03.24 03:13:00 -
[7] - Quote
Yep all true |
|
|
|