|
The Balkans fit our aircraft better, but the votes seem to be going for the Med. Also, this entire venture is amazing and finally pushed me to drop  on an account. (I'm in the Discord channel already, trying to make heads or tails of our aircraft and their capabilities and the likely theatres.) I'm a bit tired to come up with the roleplay-esque characters that others have but sign up Cutlass for the pilots' waitlist, preferentially for one of our ground-attack craft, please and thanks.
|
#
¿
Oct 21, 2017 07:38
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 5, 2024 22:49 |
|
|
shas posted:alright, that's a pretty convincing argument for Balkans If he does, let's try to make sure the Dani Bakery and Air Defence Center ends up on our side.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 21, 2017 18:41
|
|
|
Remember the Serbian urchins who tagged along with the Phoenix Command group? I'm thinking we can give them a few things to do.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 22, 2017 02:53
|
|
|
Thunderdomes just...happen around us.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 22, 2017 06:12
|
|
|
I've mentioned this in Discord and I'll say it again here, something about this feels terrifying and sleazy and downright unholy that all the other PMCs do not. Like, it fits perfectly in the 'verse, it's just... So, well done, Orcbuster. Now if you'll excuse me I'll need to scrub off my skin until I feel clean again.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 22, 2017 06:58
|
|
|
Do we know where HACK AND CAS is going to happen? Just somewhere in Hungary, not more specific? Our positioning pretty much means that we'll need to stay on YugoImport's good side. Maybe it'll be worth getting them happy enough to provide refueling rights once we've gotten settled in. Now, if you'll excuse me, I'm off to sample the local rotgut and/or write up a character for the callsign. Oh, and YES on bribery and keeping the locals happy. There will inevitably come a day when someone comes for us by land, air, or tactical ballistic missile, and it won't do to have the locals alienated from us when we need their help. bibliosabreur fucked around with this message at 20:40 on Oct 22, 2017 |
|
#
¿
Oct 22, 2017 20:33
|
|
|
Hack and CAS, and CAS. The Zeppelin job is a nice easy introduction, but the only aircraft we have that can reach that far are our Gripens, and that means Meteor expenditure. BDA seems horribly dangerous. That leaves the other two options. I'm also going to put down the bio for a pilot to go on the waitlist. It's probably very unorthodox for a groundcrew to go on to become a pilot, but this is HG. ---- quote:Nisha "Cutlass" Anand, 27
|
|
#
¿
Oct 22, 2017 23:35
|
|
|
Tokyo Bay Fortress can be parked safely offshore under the auspices of its own shell company. Whatever happens, don't let News Corp learn about her, though.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 23, 2017 01:26
|
|
|
Yeah, I don't know how CMANO handles simple decoys, but it'd be a time-honored tradition here in the Balkans. Going full FUSAG and Operation Bodyguard may not be possible, but I do like the idea of enlisting some Serbian consultants to confuse the enemy...
|
|
#
¿
Oct 23, 2017 06:51
|
|
|
In the Discord, Yooper mentioned that there's a zoo next to the warehouse that must on no account be damaged. Now I can't see this as a mission success unless we spring the animals loose and the lions, tigers, and bears help to overrun the warehouse.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 23, 2017 20:25
|
|
|
Okay, poo poo's gonna get real. I like this. If our only air threat is F-104s and perhaps--at the top end--some upgraded MiG-21s like what we have, I'm not particularly worried. Upgraded Bisons would be dangerous but the F-104s I've been able to find are universally terrible. The least bad of them carries Lima Sidewinders and Aspides (lovely Sparrow clones). A bigger concern are all the radars and SPAAG/SAM coverage. Once in the threat area, I would propose a hard floor of 15000ft, with aircraft preferably to stay above 18000 ft. It is utterly embarrassing and unprofessional to lose anyone to a MANPADS when we have stand-off weapons. That should also put us out of range of any SPAAGs. That leaves more dangerous vehicle-mounted SAMs. This would be a great chance to break out our shiny new Nighthawks--but keep in mind that Nighthawk is horribly vulnerable in daytime. I propose using ARMs on our Floggers; save the Nighthawks for a nighttime mission. So, provisionally, I'm thinking an air and SAM sweep first to take out the more obvious targets. Then AMXs and Reapers can circle overhead and bomb targets of opportunity. If we can stage our Bisons fairly close to the mission area, all the better; I think all of them are going to go air-to-air, and while I'd love to land them and switch them to TV-guided bombs, that may be impossible.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 24, 2017 05:58
|
|
|
Yikes, you're right. I'd gotten a little too used to the super-ARMs.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 24, 2017 06:55
|
|
|
re: power crystals: I love the MEAT diaries. There's just enough poignancy and the writing is genuinely great. Keep 'em coming!
|
|
#
¿
Oct 25, 2017 05:33
|
|
|
Yooper posted:
This is everything I expected and more.  Regarding the op plans, it sure looks like we'll be breaking out our 117s early, huh? I was hoping to keep them hidden for a little while longer.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 27, 2017 05:17
|
|
|
1. Operation Speakeasy 2. Operation We Didn't Start the Fire
|
|
#
¿
Oct 28, 2017 20:13
|
|
|
Davin Valkri posted:Given their resumes, and my anime predilections, may I suggest...? Hell. Yes.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 31, 2017 19:37
|
|
|
This is absolutely wonderful! For all the things we should have DT5 do, hacking should only be a comedy option. I'm a little terrified of Aiko accidentally flashing all our own equipment's firmware. Although, Yooper, I understand Chains of War can simulate cyberattack effects, right...?
|
|
#
¿
Nov 1, 2017 14:42
|
|
|
I had no idea the Foxhound was even an option, but I'd outed myself as a Flanker Wanker in the Discord ever since I saw the test results. For ground-attack, though? I'm going with my first love of warplanes. 
|
|
#
¿
Nov 1, 2017 19:38
|
|
|
TheDemon posted:In conclusion: I hadn't considered the possibility of trimming off the dumb bombs for cost savings, but you make an excellent point. As fun as it is envisioning the Flankers in air-to-ground mode with dumb bombs, the cost savings are substantial enough to get behind this.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 2, 2017 02:13
|
|
|
quote:
Oh my god, yes. Can't wait for that vintage Intruder action. Although next time you show a lovely, loaded A-6 flashing her goods like that, give it the appropriate  tag, willya? That sheer bombload... 
|
|
#
¿
Nov 2, 2017 06:32
|
|
|
Christ in heaven, the DT5 girls meeting Jack? 
|
|
#
¿
Nov 3, 2017 06:01
|
|
|
Gonna be at work, too. 
|
|
#
¿
Nov 3, 2017 20:26
|
|
|
Yooper posted:Overall our pilots performed swimmingly. The Nighthawks followed a secure path, neutralized the radar, and kept the hostiles from getting those MIG's in the air. Our SDB's did the rest and only a single MIG-21 reached the sky. It didn't last long, but in that short window it managed to knock three of our birds down. Holy hell, really? Someone track down that pilot and buy him a beer or something. That's honestly pretty amazing...although I hear from the Discord that our own MiGs were well out of position, and that our ARMs kept getting shot down?
|
|
#
¿
Nov 4, 2017 04:49
|
|
|
Zeppelin appears to be relatively easy money, just not a whole lot of it. It's a "safe" choice (keeping in mind that someone's almost certainly going to try to surprise us during it), which may be why it doesn't seem very popular.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 6, 2017 02:33
|
|
|
TheDemon posted:Questions: A fight over the Adriatic should have been easily tracked by our Ground Master, and also by our ELINT boat. The boat would pick up any long-range radars like from an AEW aircraft (but not short-range), and the Ground Master would definitely pick up the dogfight itself. Is this confirmation that we didn't see an AEW on ELINT? Did we pick up radio transmissions from the participants, and does that tell us who was involved? And was that the AMRAAM assailant was careful enough to dodge our Ground Master's coverage? Seconding! Our bote ought to have some answers here. Adding in my two cents for the bridge strike: if the Nighthawks get involved, it should be a night operation, I would think. Otherwise, we have some more leeway. Also, is there any thought towards keeping a flight of Bisons or Gripens ready to scramble? I assume MCTB is going to have us assailed one way or another, so at least putting out an early warning net--and, if possible, getting informants out to nearby FOBs so we know who's leasing them--will be a must. (Even better if we can somehow get an aerostat or a couple of AEW helis to circle our airbase, or else put out the word that while we harbor no grudge against any PMC that comes after us, we will make sure they're utterly ruined during or after the operation, one way or the other, so they better consider their risk-reward calculus very carefully if MCTB launches them against an airfield Albania. Sorry, lads, that's just business.)
|
|
#
¿
Nov 27, 2017 09:26
|
|
|
Dr. Kyle Farnsworth posted:Those of you jonesing for some Top Gun action, the first tutorial mission has you running a strike with A-6s and Corsairs with Tomcats as your fighters and if you've watched Yooper play enough, it's actually not that hard to figure out. Some of the weird submenus I still haven't gotten but so far I've been able to launch a fighter sweep, get my AWACS up, and start sending in strikes. First run I lost half my strikers because I forgot to set the Tomcats to emit, thinking that they could launch off Hawkeye data while staying in EMCON. Yeeeeeah not so much.  Second run I swept the MiGs clean and had my strikers taking off, blanketed by Prowler OECM, when I realized the Iron Hand birds were missing somehow. Further investigation revealed that I had somehow ordered them to change to a different SEAD loadout that wouldn’t have been ready for hours. 
|
|
#
¿
Nov 28, 2017 03:44
|
|
|
Sounds like we'd need Yooper to make a ruling; I interpreted "close range pass" as low-altitude as well, but it'd be easier if we could keep relatively high instead of running the gauntlet of AAA. Also, the two-missions format forces us to diversify our aircraft a little more. OECM has been quietly vital to many of our missions, but we only have the one Prowler, and because they tend to be high-value/low-numbered airframes, they're badly suited for 3D printing. That said, if there are chances to K&P to supply us with a few of, say, Lansen EWs or maybe even a Viggen EW trainer, it would greatly multiply what we could do. Just something to keep our eyes open for...
|
|
#
¿
Nov 28, 2017 06:30
|
|
|
Holy poo poo, I didn't catch that at first and thought he was deliberately making a pun about the Tomcats in the tutorial scenarios. Anyway, I understand our Deagles/Akefs have arrived on the ground here? I know we haven't decided missions yet, but I'd like to point out that if we fly them in the bomb-truck role with 2000-pounders, that frees up our Tornadoes, which we can fit with 5x ALARM apiece. 
|
|
#
¿
Nov 29, 2017 03:15
|
|
|
Here's something that came up in the Discord chat regarding our shiny new F-15 Akefs: While they can fly air-to-air in all weathers and conditions, their air-to-ground loadouts are limited to daytime and fair weather. The GBU-15 is a very powerful weapon with an excellent glide range, but it needs to be dropped from high altitude, it can't see in the dark, and the 1985 Akef has no FLIR and no provision for one. Also, given that the Sparrow is quite a step down from what we're used to, may I recommend double-checking the WRA on them so that the Eagles default to firing two missiles per target? One more thing. It sure seems like the MiG-21 Bison is rapidly proliferating to become the AK-47 of aerial PMCs. Unfortunately for us, it can joust with the Eagle and win much of the time in a fair fight, given the fire-and-forget Amraamskis. We shall have to adjust our tactics accordingly. The Bison's main weakness is an old and rather weak radar set, so blanketing their radars with OECM seems like one possible countermeasure; this means we'll need more than just our Prowler (keeping in mind that the R-77s do have a home-on-jam mode). Another is to play chicken at the very edge of their range. If we can somehow bait the Bisons into firing first at long range, then turning and running until the missiles run out of fuel, we should be in a good position; Sparrows have 55nm against the Amraamski's 40nm, and the Bison only carries two of them. Ideally, if the Bison looses both Amraamskis at extreme range--which our Akef outruns--the fight becomes Sparrows against Archers, and that's a fight we can win. (Or the Bison turns around and goes home, in which case it's a mission kill.) E: Of course, all of this is less preferable to making sure our Eagles don't get into fights with enemy Bisons in the first place, but that seems very optimistic given our history of missions in this theatre. bibliosabreur fucked around with this message at 21:04 on Nov 29, 2017 |
|
#
¿
Nov 29, 2017 21:00
|
|
|
We keep Gjader as our home base, correct? I'm really liking our Albanian supervillain lair, guarded by savvy locals and mountains.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 1, 2017 20:49
|
|
|
sparkmaster posted:
This. I just watched the mission last night. Overall it went very well, but I was nervous at the sprinkling of bombs that Pliven received, and very nervous indeed when enemy aircraft began taking off. Fortunately our Bisons got in position pretty quickly, but there were some very nervous moments when our Tornadoes were transiting out and our Bisons were arrowing in, with enemy aircraft scrambling into the sky. If they had better C3, or if those aircraft had better nighttime sensors, we could've easily lost the Tornadoes. Thus far, HG's calling card has been "gently caress yo airfield". Thus far, we honestly haven't been all that good at it. Failure to do more damage to the Supersonics' airfield near Timisoara cost us three birds to a lone Bison; failure to knock out Pliven meant that half their aircraft got off the ground successfully, and while good GCI meant our Bisons were able to vector onto them, that's still not good enough to count the airfield strike as a full success. tl/dr: this time we were extremely goddamned lucky we didn't lose anyone to enemy aircraft coming out of that airfield that we failed to disable fully; last time we weren't so lucky and lost three birds to enemy aircraft coming out of that airfield that we failed to disable fully, and I'm thinking we need to give airfield denial missions a good hard look. The two most immediate fixes are: assigning a lot more munitions to aircraft parking spots, and maintaining a Leaker-CAP nearby: when enemy aircraft take off, they immediately eat an AAM, no questions asked. (Because there will be leakers.) 500lb Paveways are adequate for smashing parking spots but wholly inadequate for wrecking access points and runways. Advice on the Matrix Forums I remember reading point out that runways and access points generally require so many munitions it's not worth focusing on them if your bombload is limited; instead, focus on blowing up parked aircraft. With 2000-lb GBU-15s, we should be able to do that a lot better now in daytime. At night, the Akefs may need to be assigned to LeakerCAP; further testing by Anta has shown that they're horribly vulnerable to Bisons. bibliosabreur fucked around with this message at 19:22 on Dec 2, 2017 |
|
#
¿
Dec 2, 2017 19:14
|
|
|
TheDemon posted:The mission plan called for bombs on the tarmac and hangar only. In the mission run, after the two F-117s had started their run, Yooper manually ordered a strike on the airfield as a whole, seemingly in concern that one of the Nighthawks had gotten distracted (it hadn't). That caused the runway and runway access to be hit instead of the pre-planned targets which were only hangars and tarmacs. So the idea that we aren't trying to concentrate our ordinance isn't so; we were, it just didn't work out. Hmmmm. Good to know. Are we sure that aircraft that leave the tarmac are invincible though? Because I understand they spend a span of seconds on each spot, and it might be worth bombing the runway access point...but it sounds like the limitation is not quite enough ordnance for a multiplicity of targets. If we're not guaranteed to nail them on the ground, the alternative is to beef up the CAP over the airfield and splashing the bandits as they leave the ground. Bisons and Akefs orbiting practically within missile range with a prosecution area blanketing the airfield specifically and orders to engage any aircraft that leaves the ground?
|
|
#
¿
Dec 3, 2017 05:01
|
|
|
Can we hold off on unleashing DT5 until we learn more about the missions? Would rather have them on hand when there's, for instance, a radar we really need to blow up, or an airfield we need sabotaged.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 3, 2017 21:51
|
|
|
This sure appears to be a two-fer, so Gunnes should pay attention to that fact.  Assets used in one mission will probably be unable to support the other mission.Naval recovery is certainly the one to go. Payoff is high enough to justify use of Meteors, we'll be able to enlist the Watergeuzen, and also?  I'm kind of agnostic on what to do for Schmohz--I'd have preferred the Rube Goldberg ball bearing mission myself--but my girlfriend's been quite insistent that we need to do a comms strike. As she's been having internet troubles, maybe she's just feeling vengeful. I just hope we have the assets for both.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 4, 2017 22:12
|
|
|
So, glad to report that some swag I ordered arrived today.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 5, 2017 05:43
|
|
|
Doesn't look bad at all for a first mission plan, Farnsworth.  There are a few issues that were identified in the Discord channel:
Since we can't blind our enemy's radars (a whole loving battalion of SA-17s and their Chair Back radars), nor can we effectively bomb their airbases, we're in for what we've been trying to avoid--a straight slugging match. Mass and long-range missilery will be paramount here.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 7, 2017 07:31
|
|
|
If the idea of a Skjold hunt is out, I support these ideas, with airfield recon taking higher priority (unless it turns out there's a battery of dug-in mortars or something). We're all more or less agreed that the enemy air threat is the main factor, so we need information as soon as we can.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 8, 2017 04:32
|
|
|
PenguinSalsa posted:Would a layered CAP (or rather intercept mission I guess) work? Bisons in front, F-15s ten or so nms behind them and Gripens as CAP to pick off anything that gets through. Testing by Anta showed that our Akefs, even with Prowler support, will generally lose to Bisons head-to-head. ARH missiles are just far too much of an advantage compared to SARH. There's been talk in the Discord of the Bisons being treated--by us and by Yooper--as mid/high-end threats; even though they're MiG-21s, their two Amraamski missiles make them extraordinarily dangerous. In practical terms, if this change goes ahead, it would mean that everyone and their mother would no longer be running around with them.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 9, 2017 04:28
|
|
|
Davin Valkri posted:loving magic  Okay, holy poo poo. I'm...going to need to come back to this and critically evaluate it because as of right now I would vote for this just on the basis of writing a goddamned OPlan to the tune of the Major General's Song.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 9, 2017 08:48
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 5, 2024 22:49 |
|
|
Loel posted:Catlike Tread for all the obvious reasons That occurred to me too, but in Discord it was pointed out that, well, did we look like policemen? 
|
|
#
¿
Dec 13, 2017 07:17
|
|