Strike Command: Wait, is that a fucking laser? - The Something Awful Forums

Register a SA Forums Account here!
JOINING THE SA FORUMS WILL REMOVE THIS BIG AD, THE ANNOYING UNDERLINED ADS, AND STUPID INTERSTITIAL ADS!!!

You can: log in, read the tech support FAQ, or request your lost password. This dumb message (and those ads) will appear on every screen until you register! Get rid of this crap by registering your own SA Forums Account and joining roughly 150,000 Goons, for the one-time price of $9.95! We charge money because it costs us money per month for bills, and since we don't believe in showing ads to our users, we try to make the money back through forum registrations.

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Video Games > Let's Play! > Strike Command: Wait, is that a fucking laser?

karoshi: Nov 4, 2008; "Can somebody mspaint eyes on the steaming packages? TIA" yeah well fuck you too buddy, this is the best you're gonna get. Is this even "work-safe"? Let's find out!

The swedes sent a MMS:
"Wrong movie motherfuckers:

"

e: new page "Can you think in chinese?"

# ? Apr 11, 2017 12:52

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? May 16, 2024 06:55

Jimmy4400nav: Apr 1, 2011; Ambassador to Moonlandia

Stealing the planes sounded fun, but yeah, we really dont have the infrastructures in place for executing the mission. Kill is safer and hey who knows, if the Indians overrun the base they might still find J20s to salvage.

For the kill, should we focus on the runway or the supplies? We had some discussion on that but it got a tad derailed. Bombing the runway sounds easy, but we need to really commit to it. Taking out softer targets sounds easier, but we really need to knock out most of the support to achive a mission success. Of the 2 what should we focus on?

# ? Apr 11, 2017 13:03

Jimmy4400nav: Apr 1, 2011; Ambassador to Moonlandia

PHONE DOUBLE POST PLEASE IGNORE

# ? Apr 11, 2017 13:03

Bacarruda: Mar 30, 2011; Mutiny!?! More like "reinterpreted orders"

Yooper posted:

This is like everything that was a bad idea about Operation Market Garden but without Germans.

# ? Apr 11, 2017 13:08

Vando: Oct 26, 2007; stoats about

This is a vote for:

Psawhn posted:

Operation Strict Parenting

Light Attackers Yes

# ? Apr 11, 2017 13:11

Soup Inspector: Jun 5, 2013

Like some of the other guys I'm torn. Ignoring whether it's viable or not: on the one hand Operation Mikadgoon (Goonkado?) would be the stuff of legends if we could pull it off, but it's ridiculously risky. Like "if we gently caress this up then we're probably done as a PMC" risky. If we do go through with it I feel like it'd be better to focus on flattening the main airbase and do any sort of commando raid on the back-up airfield since it's likely to be staffed by lower quality units than the main airbase (even if not by much).

It might also be worth seriously considering bug out plans if we eat poo poo and fail to prevent the strike against our airbase from launching. That way we can salvage things if it all goes tits up.

# ? Apr 11, 2017 13:13

Nuramor: Dec 13, 2012; Most Amewsing Prinny Ever!

Would it be possible to kill the base at Lhasa and then (preemtively?) capture whichever airstrip could be an alternate return point for the Chinese? Since Lahsa would be unavailabe, every chinese plane in the current theatre based from there would need to reassess their bingo status and such, especially the ones sent to respond to the indian raid.

^Same idea.

# ? Apr 11, 2017 13:14

Bacarruda: Mar 30, 2011; Mutiny!?! More like "reinterpreted orders"

Soup Inspector posted:

Like some of the other guys I'm torn. Ignoring whether it's viable or not: on the one hand Operation Mikadgoon (Goonkado?) would be the stuff of legends if we could pull it off, but it's ridiculously risky. Like "if we gently caress this up then we're probably done as a PMC" risky. If we do go through with it I feel like it'd be better to focus on flattening the main airbase and do any sort of commando raid on the back-up airfield since it's likely to be staffed by lower quality units than the main airbase (even if not by much).

The backup airfield is nearly 300km inside Tibet proper. It's an even worse target to try and land troops at. The TLA will take months to get there.

Yooper posted:

It's likely they'll attempt to divert to an emergency airfield Dangxiong Airbase. That place is even shittier than our forward base and will barely get them back to a proper refit base.

Bacarruda fucked around with this message at 13:23 on Apr 11, 2017

# ? Apr 11, 2017 13:15

gradenko_2000: Oct 5, 2010; HELL SERPENT; Lipstick Apathy

I love that the follow-up to "trying to take over an airbase in the middle of Lhasa would be way too risky" is "perhaps should completely flatten THAT base, and THEN take over the ALTERNATE airbase!"

# ? Apr 11, 2017 13:19

Quinntan: Sep 11, 2013

Surely the alternates would be Yonphula (god help us) and Bagdogra, where the Indians are making their attack from.

# ? Apr 11, 2017 13:36

Nuramor: Dec 13, 2012; Most Amewsing Prinny Ever!

gradenko_2000 posted:

I love that the follow-up to "trying to take over an airbase in the middle of Lhasa would be way too risky" is "perhaps should completely flatten THAT base, and THEN take over the ALTERNATE airbase!"

You must admit, nobody would ever expect that.

Quinntan posted:

Surely the alternates would be Yonphula (god help us) and Bagdogra, where the Indians are making their attack from.

I'm pretty sure the Chinese would rather have their pilots fly the planes straight into the ground than land on an indian airport.

# ? Apr 11, 2017 13:36

Darnoc: Feb 28, 2016

Entebbe

no guts no glory!!!!

# ? Apr 11, 2017 13:38

Quinntan: Sep 11, 2013

Nuramor posted:

You must admit, nobody would ever expect that.

I'm pretty sure the Chinese would rather have their pilots fly the planes straight into the ground than land on an indian airport.

Sorry, I misread it as "we should go to the Chinese airport should they take out our own." Which is only marginally more silly as an idea.

# ? Apr 11, 2017 13:40

Yooper: Apr 30, 2012

An Entebbe style operation is beyond the capabilities of this organization. For now.

Landing a few transports worth of troops, no matter how elite, can't hold this airbase for the 2 weeks it's likely to take for ground troops to move in. India would find that risk unnaceptable.
A Clint Eastwood operation, either stealing a J-20, or cutting it into bite sized pieces is more manageable but we lack the resources to provide the sort of cover needed to make it feasible. We just don't have the planes.
It's going to be hard just to come in, kill a runway or facilities, and get out. This is place is very well defended. Smashing it up to the point that a fat cargo plane could land ain't gonna happen. Right now we're a surgical strike operation, not a sustained 48 hour ops kind of place.
But in the future, if we have planes to do it, I will absolutely roll with something like this. Lhasa just isn't our time.

# ? Apr 11, 2017 14:09

simplefish: Mar 28, 2011; So long, and thanks for all the ~~fish~~ gallbladdΣrs!

Yooper posted:

An Entebbe style operation is beyond the capabilities of this organization. For now.

Landing a few transports worth of troops, no matter how elite, can't hold this airbase for the 2 weeks it's likely to take for ground troops to move in. India would find that risk unnaceptable.

A Clint Eastwood operation, either stealing a J-20, or cutting it into bite sized pieces is more manageable but we lack the resources to provide the sort of cover needed to make it feasible. We just don't have the planes.

It's going to be hard just to come in, kill a runway or facilities, and get out. This is place is very well defended. Smashing it up to the point that a fat cargo plane could land ain't gonna happen. Right now we're a surgical strike operation, not a sustained 48 hour ops kind of place.

But in the future, if we have planes to do it, I will absolutely roll with something like this. Lhasa just isn't our time.

Really appreciate you looking into it and thanks for being willing to go with our craziness

# ? Apr 11, 2017 14:23

Quinntan: Sep 11, 2013

Thank you yooper for looking into the more madcap of our madcap schemes and giving it a fair shake.

# ? Apr 11, 2017 14:25

Yooper: Apr 30, 2012

simplefish posted:

Really appreciate you looking into it and thanks for being willing to go with our craziness

I'm all about the craziness. But this one just isn't our time. Have no fear, there'll be plenty of opportunities for crazy poo poo.

# ? Apr 11, 2017 14:25

Yooper: Apr 30, 2012

Here's our current intel.

Operation Thors Hammer

Operation Hollywood

Operation Strict Parenting

Operation Surprise Motherfuckers!

Psawhn is a mission manufacturing animal.

You can be too! We've got some great plans, but we can always use more. So either vote on one of these, or propose your own.

# ? Apr 11, 2017 14:51

Soup Inspector: Jun 5, 2013

Bacarruda posted:

The backup airfield is nearly 300km inside Tibet proper. It's an even worse target to try and land troops at. The TLA will take months to get there.

This is what happens when you don't click links to airports. :downs:

:downs:

Never mind!

In all seriousness though, I think it's worth at least considering where our aircraft could disperse to if we fail to knock out the airfield. Except not ones in enemy territory, obviously.

Soup Inspector fucked around with this message at 14:58 on Apr 11, 2017

# ? Apr 11, 2017 14:52

Yooper: Apr 30, 2012

Soup Inspector posted:

This is what happens when you don't click links to airports. Never mind!

In all seriousness though, I think it's worth at least considering where our aircraft could disperse to if we fail to knock out the airfield. Except not ones in enemy territory, obviously.

I'll make sure there is alternatives around so if our planes need to bail they've got somewhere to go. Dibrugarh airfield isn't far away from North Lakhimpur.

# ? Apr 11, 2017 15:16

JcDent: May 13, 2013; Give me a rifle, one round, and point me at Berlin!

I vote for Surprise Motherfuckers! with Light Attackers Yes. More planes, more fun.

_{if we had 8 Phantoms, we could blanket the place with Napalm}

# ? Apr 11, 2017 15:20

Yooper: Apr 30, 2012

In order to assist with operations planning we've brought in a professional. Lt. Johnson will offer little tidbits of advice. Do we want to know if a missile will kill something? We can ask Warlock. Is 4 planes enough? Ask Warlock. Is this enough CAP? Ask Warlock.

He's a cautious man and will give cautious advice. His advice may not always be right. But he won't willingly be wrong.

This is my in-character attempt to make sure game mechanics don't gently caress us up.

# ? Apr 11, 2017 15:39

Bacarruda: Mar 30, 2011; Mutiny!?! More like "reinterpreted orders"

To make sure Yooper and Psawhn see this.

e: I'd also like to backseat one of the Phantoms, if possible.

Bacarruda posted:

I like the Strict Parents plan, and am voting for it with the light strike option.

A couple of notes.
1. I don't think this plan gives us enough CAP birds. We've been briefed that there's a wing of J-16s guarding Lhasa airbase. We need at least three or four Gripens with Meteors doing dedicated CAP work to keep our strikers safe. Would you add 1-2 more CAP birds?
2. I'd consider giving the Hawks 4x Rockeye cluster bombs instead of the Mavericks. If they are overflying the field at the same time as the Su-25s and the SK 60s, it'll help split up the fire of the AAA batteries -- which gives our vulnerable Su-25s better odds of survival.
3. Given the SK 60s rocket debacle last turn, let's set the rocket release range to 1 to 1.5 km. This will give them better odds of landing hits. Can we work this into the plan?
4. All the aircraft here have different cruising speeds -- do you think we'll run into an issue where they get too strung out and don't arrive together? Should we give them some kind of keep formation or throttle setting order?

Bacarruda fucked around with this message at 17:58 on Apr 11, 2017

# ? Apr 11, 2017 15:41

Nothingtoseehere: Nov 11, 2010

Between strict parenting and suprise motherfuckers, it's a tough pick, but I'll go Strict Parenting with light attackers.

# ? Apr 11, 2017 15:52

Quinntan: Sep 11, 2013

I'm going for Operation Surprise Motherfuckers and Light Attackers: Yes

# ? Apr 11, 2017 16:09

Crazycryodude: Aug 15, 2015; Lets get our X tons of Duranium back!

....Is that still a valid thing to jingoistically blow out of proportion?

Strict Parenting with Light Attackers

# ? Apr 11, 2017 16:31

Stago Lego: Sep 3, 2011

Strict Parenting and yes to Light Attackers, the more the merrier (and richer)!

# ? Apr 11, 2017 16:35

xthetenth: Dec 30, 2012; Mario wasn't sure if this Jeb guy was a good influence on Yoshi.

Strict Parenting with Light attackers. This is a major effort, and if we can't risk the light attackers, why the hell do we have them anyway?

If it doesn't work, I'm calling it a combat rightsizing. :colbert:

:colbert:

xthetenth fucked around with this message at 17:04 on Apr 11, 2017

# ? Apr 11, 2017 16:59

gradenko_2000: Oct 5, 2010; HELL SERPENT; Lipstick Apathy

Strict Parenting, Yes to Light Attackers

Fighter pilots make headlines. Attack pilots make history.

# ? Apr 11, 2017 17:05

BurningStone: Jun 3, 2011

As funny as it would have been to watch the raid from the bleachers, I think you're very well out of it. China's fighting an insurgency; any unguarded airport would've been taken out long ago. The defenders probably aren't the best, and they probably aren't expecting an air assault, but they aren't going to be surprised by the idea of an attack.

But the real horror is this: what if the plan works? What is China willing to do to deny India a working 5th generation fighter? Their own special forces op? Fire off a wave of dozens of cruise missiles? Maybe even a tac nuke? It'd be conceivable. Almost anything is better than knowing they're going to face a flood of Indian copies.

So I'm disappointed, but I'm also glad this LP isn't looking at a quick end. Yooper is doing too good a job to see this suddenly die.

# ? Apr 11, 2017 17:34

Quinntan: Sep 11, 2013

India is already working on its own fifth-generation jet, the HAL MRCA, as well as its on-again off-again attempts to buy and build PAK-FA. Last I heard, the plan was to buy PAK-FA in 2019?

Quinntan fucked around with this message at 17:40 on Apr 11, 2017

# ? Apr 11, 2017 17:38

Cathode Raymond: Dec 30, 2015; My antenna is telling me that you're probably wrong about this.; Soiled Meat

Strict Parenting, No to Light Attackers

I was about to say "yes" to light attackers but then I realized the main reason I'd be doing it is to get pilot attrition up so I could get my pilot in a plane a tad bit faster.

Those SK 60's are just so slow and they have to be so close to use their rockets that I don't see any of them coming back.

# ? Apr 11, 2017 17:52

Jimmy4400nav: Apr 1, 2011; Ambassador to Moonlandia

Strict Parenting with Light Attackers

# ? Apr 11, 2017 18:00

Yooper: Apr 30, 2012

I've got a Time to Target calculator I'll be using now. Hopefully this will allow us to bring multiple strike packages into the target at roughly the same time. This should do a lot to add to the confusion for the defender. And also a lot to keep our smaller planes alive.

# ? Apr 11, 2017 18:00

BurningStone: Jun 3, 2011

Quinntan posted:

India is already working on its own fifth-generation jet, the HAL MRCA, as well as its on-again off-again attempts to buy and build PAK-FA. Last I heard, the plan was to buy PAK-FA in 2019?

I suppose it depends on what they have in this future. Certainly their plan is desperate enough it sounds like they can't compete at all.

# ? Apr 11, 2017 18:10

power crystals: Jun 6, 2007; Who wants a belly rub??

Adding my vote to Strict Parenting with Light Attackers

# ? Apr 11, 2017 18:24

Gervasius: Nov 2, 2010; Grimey Drawer

Quinntan posted:

India is already working on its own fifth-generation jet, the HAL MRCA, as well as its on-again off-again attempts to buy and build PAK-FA. Last I heard, the plan was to buy PAK-FA in 2019?

FGFA is PAK-FA with some indian avionics and a WSO seat. Probably just as clusterfuck as actual PAK-FA project is. e: just saw your edit - disregard.

Also, voting for Strict Parenting with Light Attackers

# ? Apr 11, 2017 18:26

pthighs: Jun 21, 2013; Pillbug

Strict Parenting, Yes to Light Attackers

The Light Attackers contingent on being confident that the AA threat is very dimished.

# ? Apr 11, 2017 18:28

xthetenth: Dec 30, 2012; Mario wasn't sure if this Jeb guy was a good influence on Yoshi.

Cathode Raymond posted:

Strict Parenting, No to Light Attackers

I was about to say "yes" to light attackers but then I realized the main reason I'd be doing it is to get pilot attrition up so I could get my pilot in a plane a tad bit faster.

Those SK 60's are just so slow and they have to be so close to use their rockets that I don't see any of them coming back.

Think of them as very large chaff.

I wonder what the airpower editor's referrals think of our descent into madness. :v:

:v:

# ? Apr 11, 2017 18:36

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? May 16, 2024 06:55

Dong Quixote: Oct 3, 2015; Fun Shoe

Strict Parenting w/Light Attack

# ? Apr 11, 2017 18:50

1
2
3
4
5

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Video Games > Let's Play! > Strike Command: Wait, is that a fucking laser?

Powered by: vBulletin Version 2.2.9 (SABB-v2.24.05)
Copyright ©2000, 2001, Jelsoft Enterprises Limited.
Copyright ©2024, Jeffrey of YOSPOS