|
Mr Luxury Yacht posted:Increasing the aim time and decreasing the fire angle removes the ability to do the ol' orbits of doom where you just have them loiter in a circle lobbing missiles at things from out of range. Isn't this more or less what they do IRL?
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2014 01:11
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 10, 2024 02:46 |
|
|
JeffersonClay posted:Isn't this more or less what they do IRL? Yep.
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2014 01:26
|
|
|
OctaMurk posted:The medium tanks: Is this picture maybe out of date now? Someone posted a shot of a soviet deck on the wargame forums a day or two ago and the T72 was 40 points. I hope so cause autoloader or no 45 points does seem a little steep
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2014 02:18
|
|
|
sgnl05 posted:Is this picture maybe out of date now? Someone posted a shot of a soviet deck on the wargame forums a day or two ago and the T72 was 40 points. I hope so cause autoloader or no 45 points does seem a little steep The T-72 lost some accuracy and dropped down to 40points again.
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2014 02:23
|
|
|
Are they now going to note in the armory which tanks use autoloaders or will the change to the morale mechanic be another thing they just let new players figure out on their own?
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2014 04:47
|
|
|
Mazz posted:You misread the Igla change. The Igla-N has the 6 HE warhead but only shoots out to 2450. This new Igla shoots out to 2625, but no indication that its going to shoot more then 4 HE. The Igla-N is also getting nerfed down to 5HE last I checked
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2014 05:06
|
|
|
It'd be seriously stupid of them to not indicate on the unit cards which tanks have autoloaders and which don't. Since a bunch of posters here seem to be marshalls, can anyone comment on how the tank changes play out? I'm particularly curious on what effect it's going to have on mid range stuff like the T-72, T-72A, chieftain mk5 etc
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2014 05:08
|
|
|
JeffersonClay posted:Isn't this more or less what they do IRL? Absolutely not no. The Tomcat is basically a gigantic flying radar, and that radar needs to remain pointed at the target to guide its missiles. The way planes turn away after firing semi-active radar missiles in Wargame is totally unrealistic. The way semi-active missiles launch is also really unrealistic. There's no particular reason that you should launch only one semi-active missile at a time. You can have three sparrows follow the same radar contact. Finally, the way the Tomcat behaves (and the American teen series and later fighters) is really unrealistic, because the Tomcat's big advance was multi-target capability. The Tomcat can guide up to 6 missiles at once at 6 different targets, and basically every subsequent fighter with a phased-array radar incorporated this obvious advantage. I'm pretty sure the MiG-29 and Su-27 also have multi-target capability in real life.
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2014 05:10
|
|
|
Arglebargle III posted:Absolutely not no. The Tomcat is basically a gigantic flying radar, and that radar needs to remain pointed at the target to guide its missiles. The way planes turn away after firing semi-active radar missiles in Wargame is totally unrealistic. This is also looking past the fact the Pheonix would probably suck against targets that can actually turn out of the way (assuming they could pick up its terminal radar track). It was meant to shoot at Tu-95s and stuff, not fighters. F-14s routinely carried Sparrows and Sidewinders too, like the fleet one we have now. The AMRAAM does have active radar homing, which means you don't need the illuminating track from the host fighter, hence the F+F tag. Mazz fucked around with this message at 05:44 on Jul 18, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2014 05:33
|
|
|
Ehhh I could see the AIM-54 making GBS threads on fighters just due to the huge amount of energy its gonna have when fired from like... half its max range. Not sure how its max G's etc are though, plus the radar issue
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2014 05:43
|
|
|
Dandywalken posted:Ehhh I could see the AIM-54 making GBS threads on fighters just due to the huge amount of energy its gonna have when fired from like... half its max range. Not sure how its max G's etc are though, plus the radar issue Well as long as the track was good and the terminal radar had a view, it should be able to hit whatever was in front of it. The problem though is that if the target made a decent turn, the sheer momentum of that thing likely throws it right by. I mean the thing was said to go Mach 5 before it started its terminal dive from 80,000+. It'll definitely gently caress up whatever it did hit though, it was a giant missile. But yeah, I can't find a G figure either. Mazz fucked around with this message at 05:53 on Jul 18, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2014 05:46
|
|
|
The Phoenix has never, ever successfully hit a target in actual deployment. So if they simulated its IRL performance...
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2014 05:54
|
|
|
I don't really think the Mig-31 and F-14 really fit the game. The F-14 was mostly designed to shoot up Tu-22s outside cruise missile range of CVBGs and the Mig-31 was mostly designed to shoot up AWACS planes. They're not really used in real games anyway as most of the high end fighters have way too much ECM for them.
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2014 06:01
|
|
|
And then you have a match where your Su-27 is hit by the first F-14 missile at max range, forcing you to evac. 
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2014 06:03
|
|
|
Chantilly Say posted:The Phoenix has never, ever successfully hit a target in actual deployment. So if they simulated its IRL performance... There is some speculation that a pilot in Iran got a kill with one, but ya its record is pretty bad.
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2014 06:08
|
|
|
Arglebargle III posted:Su-27 also have multi-target capability in real life. The Su-27's original radar didn't have the processing power to track more than one target at a time afaik.
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2014 06:11
|
|
|
gently caress trophy 2k14 posted:The Su-27's original radar didn't have the processing power to track more than one target at a time afaik. Yep, the original one was really bad. It was a sort of (but not quite) placeholder, if I remember right.
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2014 06:11
|
|
|
Chantilly Say posted:The Phoenix has never, ever successfully hit a target in actual deployment. So if they simulated its IRL performance... And how many times was it launched in actual deployment?
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2014 06:18
|
|
|
Arglebargle III posted:And how many times was it launched in actual deployment? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AIM-54_Phoenix#American_combat_experience 0/3 in real conditions is not a great record. And that's against Iraqi pilots. Come at me, bro.
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2014 06:48
|
|
|
All three were shots at fighter aircraft.
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2014 07:06
|
|
|
Arglebargle III posted:All three were shots at fighter aircraft. As are most of the aircraft it shoots at in game? If Wargame included a strategic bombing component I might me sympathetic to that argument. I haven't seen much use of interceptors in RD already so I can't say I see the point of this move.
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2014 08:11
|
|
|
Chantilly Say posted:As are most of the aircraft it shoots at in game? If Wargame included a strategic bombing component I might me sympathetic to that argument. There's a really weird phobia/hatred of them that has persisted since ALB.
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2014 08:31
|
|
|
I tried to give the Mig 31 a whirl since it really does seem great on paper, but they are just so inferior to other choices. The missile takes so long to actually hit/miss since it fires from far as gently caress away and if you do miss it takes a while to reengage, and you can't order the plane to target another plane without risking it flying closer than its minimum range. Plus, the 31M is useless without a gun if something closes the distance. You're better off with those Mig 23s with the 6 IR missiles or just a loving Flanker like every other smart person.
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2014 08:37
|
|
|
Dandywalken posted:There's a really weird phobia/hatred of them that has persisted since ALB. I think that's cause they were actually pretty good in ALB and kind of hard to counter since they could hang so far back behind friendly AA. I'm fine with them now, but only because they're not very good at present
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2014 09:36
|
|
|
Dandywalken posted:There's a really weird phobia/hatred of them that has persisted since ALB. I think it started back in the early days if ALB when a pair of them could lock down the map for air, plane and helicopter.
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2014 09:42
|
|
|
Well, I just found something that can only be summed up as  :
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2014 13:01
|
|
|
brb going to hell
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2014 14:18
|
|
|
Buk OP, nerf pact. http://foxtrotalpha.jalopnik.com/ukraine-rebels-stole-same-missiles-that-may-have-taken-1606774715
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2014 16:42
|
|
|
I just had the weirdest idea. What if the east germen FSJ got an upgrade in the expansion that got rid of their rpg but gave them a machine gun instead. Then you would have a massive hard counter to helo infantry rushes thats vulnerable to vehicles.
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2014 22:54
|
|
|
Agean90 posted:I just had the weirdest idea. This is an interesting idea but I think it's tentatively confirmed that they're getting the RPG-29 and an upgraded MANPADS, so... welcome to everyone's new helo opener.
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2014 23:51
|
|
|
When is the whole DLC/patch/revamp supposed to come out?
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2014 04:42
|
|
|
StashAugustine posted:When is the whole DLC/patch/revamp supposed to come out? When it's ready/before August.
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2014 05:58
|
|
|
Mr Luxury Yacht posted:I think it started back in the early days if ALB when a pair of them could lock down the map for air, plane and helicopter. There was a period in ALB where the entire air meta was PACT bringing a blob of MiG-31s and NATO resignedly sending in bombing runs only when they were refueling.
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2014 06:28
|
|
|
Mortabis posted:There was a period in ALB where the entire air meta was PACT bringing a blob of MiG-31s and NATO resignedly sending in bombing runs only when they were refueling. Well to be fair, you could pair a US Cat C marine loaded with WWs and Tomcats up with a US Cat A that was nighthawks, ravens and A-10s and there wasn't poo poo PACT could do to stop this. 31s came close, but elite Tomcats were loving ridiculous, and Weasels in Cat C were way too good.
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2014 06:31
|
|
|
Mazz posted:Well to be fair, you could pair a US Cat C marine loaded with WWs and Tomcats up with a US Cat A that was nighthawks, ravens and A-10s and there wasn't poo poo PACT could do to stop this. 31s came close, but elite Tomcats were loving ridiculous, and Weasels in Cat C were way too good. I'm referring to the immediate post-nerf period of the Tomcat where it was absolute dogshit and the Mig-31 was unstoppable. Wild Weasels were my US mainstay even in Cat A decks.
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2014 06:53
|
|
|
Mortabis posted:I'm referring to the immediate post-nerf period of the Tomcat where it was absolute dogshit and the Mig-31 was unstoppable. Two of my all time favorite moments in ranked were Weasel related: The first is a game where I was winning pretty handily on Fjords thanks in large part to my SK60s, and this dude rolls in a pair of Roland 2s. My WW flew in, killed one with a Shrike and loving strafed the second in consecutive turns. The other was where I timed an A-10 and Weasel strike together where the Weasel was about 5 seconds ahead of the A-10, the Weasel strafed an Avenger while the A-10 Mavericked the I-HAWK in the treeline behind it. Since I had an SAS squad nearby the A-10 continued to fly lazy circles shooting Mavericks and 30mm at anything that lit up, including his M60 CV. Dude went from competent AA to no AA in about 4 seconds. Those things were stupid good for 100 points before that AIM-9 nerf (they carried an 80s Sidewinder at first, in Cat C). Mazz fucked around with this message at 07:18 on Jul 21, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2014 07:06
|
|
|
Weasels don't get either the cannon or the AIM-9 anymore, right? Somebody noticed they were stupid good, I think.
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2014 07:19
|
|
|
So here are my two preferred decks as they are. I didn't really try to optimize them, I went by just what I liked. I'm willing to listen to suggestions though.  
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2014 07:26
|
|
|
Mazz posted:Well to be fair, you could pair a US Cat C marine loaded with WWs and Tomcats up with a US Cat A that was nighthawks, ravens and A-10s and there wasn't poo poo PACT could do to stop this. 31s came close, but elite Tomcats were loving ridiculous, and Weasels in Cat C were way too good. I remember what he's talking about, they buffed the MiG-31M to be slightly better than the Tomcat and then next week nerfed the Tomcat into the loving ground. 25% accuracy. It was a brief period but yeah, for a few weeks the MiG-31M ruled the skies over Scandinavia.
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2014 07:39
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 10, 2024 02:46 |
|
|
Chantilly Say posted:Weasels don't get either the cannon or the AIM-9 anymore, right? Somebody noticed they were stupid good, I think. They still get sidewinders, but no cannon
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2014 07:43
|
|