CorranSec Posted November 15, 2002 Share Posted November 15, 2002 OK. My home internet is down, so I can't post very often. But here goes: Sith- In my idea, there shouldn't be anything that a diverse air force used by a civ strong in air is 'incapable of doing.' And while I do agree with your points about Commander's idea (especially seeing as it's useless with all my air units), HE wants more air. Ah... internet is screwing up. Be back later. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darth Windu Posted November 15, 2002 Author Share Posted November 15, 2002 sith - of course if they wanted to BOMB a city they woul duse bomb's, was that even a serious statement? A city is also not a military target, generally they dont shoot back so in this case, there would be little to no danger of the bomber's being fired at. On the other hand military targets shoot back, and so they would likely be engaged at the biggest range you can get, hence the use of rockets. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lukeiamyourdad Posted November 16, 2002 Share Posted November 16, 2002 Originally posted by Darth Windu sith - of course if they wanted to BOMB a city they woul duse bomb's, was that even a serious statement? A city is also not a military target, generally they dont shoot back so in this case, there would be little to no danger of the bomber's being fired at. On the other hand military targets shoot back, and so they would likely be engaged at the biggest range you can get, hence the use of rockets. Don't you think they can put AA artillery in a city? If it was all like your stupid idea or relations with real life you wouldn't even need to ''send'' bombers or strike aircrafts. Modern aircrafts can shoot rockets, missiles at hundreds of miles so if it was like you wanted, we could just sit back click a unit, click on an enemy building from 50000000000000000000000 miles and shoot at it and destroy it without endangering you bomber. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darth Windu Posted November 16, 2002 Author Share Posted November 16, 2002 luke - generally, there isnt enough room in a city for a great deal of AAA, and also if you put military weapons inside a city, you make that city a legitimate target. As for your statement that you can fire from a ridiculous range without ever putting your forces in danger. That is true, to some extent. The reason things like cruise missiles arent used all of the time is becuase they can be shot down, can miss their target, and also have a rather large warhead which could cause collatoral damage. That is why, for the most part, shorter-range missiles such as the AGM-65 are used. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lukeiamyourdad Posted November 16, 2002 Share Posted November 16, 2002 During WWII, the germans bombed london which is a city. And besides, even if cruise missiles can miss their targets, they still can shoot from very far. And even with that, those shorter range missiles still have a good range. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
simwiz2 Posted November 16, 2002 Share Posted November 16, 2002 Windu, you really ought to realize by now that none of your goairforce.com factoids have any relevance whatsoever to a Star Wars game. If Lucas says that the primary weapon of the Star Wars bombers is a rocket, then you would win the realism argument. The US AirForce DOES NOT EQUAL The Star Wars Universe Air Forces. Once you get that though your thick skull, you will have a better chance at becoming slightly less ignorant. You may, with a lot of practice, even gain the ability to post intelligently. Well, at least you may become slightly less ignorant... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darth Windu Posted November 17, 2002 Author Share Posted November 17, 2002 The idea of Bomber's having short-range rockets would improve gameplay greatly, especially if that unit was your primary strike aircraft, for reasons which i have already defined. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CRaZy doG Posted November 17, 2002 Share Posted November 17, 2002 I don't want to become one of the people flaming u, Windu, but BOMBERS DROP BOMBS! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Admiral Vostok Posted November 17, 2002 Share Posted November 17, 2002 Windu, the databank is not the movies. It is EU, which does not stand up against evidence from the movies. I'm not denying that Bombers theoretically could be fitted with rockets, but from a gameplay point of view having a destructive unit that is disadvantaged due to range is better than having a destructive unit that is not limited by range. It makes for more strategy rather than in your experiment when you tried to overrun the base with only bombers. Only an incompetant commander would say "that guy has lots of anti-air. The best thing to use on anti-air is air." Just because a unit could doesn't mean it should. Thing about gameplay here. If bombers didn't have a range limitation they would not require any intelligence to use, which would make a very dull game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
simwiz2 Posted November 17, 2002 Share Posted November 17, 2002 Originally posted by Darth Windu The idea of Bomber's having short-range rockets would improve gameplay greatly, especially if that unit was your primary strike aircraft, for reasons which i have already defined. This would improve gameplay how? Right now, bombers and fighters are very diverse, one being ranged and the other being almost "melee". You are trying to take away that diversity by giving bombers range as well. And so far, all I have seen as an argument for this ranged attack is that it will make them less vulnerable. You seem to forget that the same could be said about every other unit. Making a unit that is already strong if used correctly stronger DOES NOT IMPROVE GAMEPLAY. I think you need to learn how to use bombers correctly. 1) Bombers should not ountrange AA. (Overpowered) 2) Bombers should not have ranged attack < AA. (No point) 3) Bombers should have a range similar to their current range (0-1 IIRC) Supply a reason for gameplay, Windu, NOT for strengthening the unit. Bombers aren't too expensive and can knock out a base of an opponent in T2/early T3, and if you use other units to kill AA, they can take down a town anytime. Using bombers against massed AA is NOT recommended. That would be like using mounties against a huge T4 defense and saying that mounties need more range. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lukeiamyourdad Posted November 17, 2002 Share Posted November 17, 2002 Yeah all what simwiz said. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sithmaster_821 Posted November 17, 2002 Share Posted November 17, 2002 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lukeiamyourdad Posted November 17, 2002 Share Posted November 17, 2002 Originally posted by Sithmaster_821 Who? Me or simwiz? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
simwiz2 Posted November 18, 2002 Share Posted November 18, 2002 Windu, I hope. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sithmaster_821 Posted November 18, 2002 Share Posted November 18, 2002 Simwiz Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
simwiz2 Posted November 18, 2002 Share Posted November 18, 2002 Why? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lukeiamyourdad Posted November 18, 2002 Share Posted November 18, 2002 Originally posted by simwiz2 Why? Yeah it's probably the first time you two agree! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sithmaster_821 Posted November 19, 2002 Share Posted November 19, 2002 Why do i agree with you? I dont know, you were right maybe? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CorranSec Posted November 20, 2002 Share Posted November 20, 2002 Wow. Amazing things happen when I'm not here. Windu... possibly shocked into not posting (at least for a while). Sith and simwiz... agreeing (at least for a second). Luke's dad.... er, being as normal as ever. Personally, I'm with anyone who has the courage and/or intelligence to call themselves stupid. *hopes for chance to win Stupidest/Craziest Thing Said contest* Of course, even though I do support changes to all air units in GB 2 (which I won't go into here), I'm still staunch in my opposition of Windu. Just thought you'd like to know. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darth Windu Posted November 20, 2002 Author Share Posted November 20, 2002 crazy dog - because something is called a BOMBER doesnt mean it drops BOMB. I suggest you read up on the subject. simwiz - i have never, at any time, suggested that bomber's should have a range greater than AA. vostok - EU is canon, just as the movies are. corran - the felling's mutual. Everyone - you have to remember that the idea of giving bomber's rockets is only on the assumption that unit's such as the air cruiser (ranger strike aircraft) will not be in SW:GB2. Hence the idea combines some features of bombers and air cruisers, although not quite as good in many area's (ie range). In this senario, the bomber having rockets would make it more difficult to hit and hence kill. This in turn would make it a greater threat in the game which would have to be defeated by the opposition. The main idea for this is, again, to give air more importance and striking power IF units such as the air cruiser are not in SW:GB2. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crazy_dog no.3 Posted November 20, 2002 Share Posted November 20, 2002 Windu, that's real life. Also bombers are meant to come in at close-range, becuase they DROP bombs. Maybe thier range can be increased, but not by much. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sithmaster_821 Posted November 20, 2002 Share Posted November 20, 2002 There you go again Windu, trying to fix problems that never were broken (see the other UU for GB2 thread). Since when are air units too weak? And how does making airunits good vs thier counter being called balance? And, for the last time, this is Star Wars, a place where bombers drop *gasp* bombs, not C&C or EE, where bombs drop rockets and rubber chickens and god knows what else. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lukeiamyourdad Posted November 20, 2002 Share Posted November 20, 2002 *Agrees with Sith Corran-I admit it! I AM STUPID!!!!!!!!!GLORY TO THE IDIOTS!!!!! Except Windu Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darth Windu Posted November 21, 2002 Author Share Posted November 21, 2002 sith - did you actually even read my post? I did NOT say bomber's were too weak, and i did NOT say that they should outrange their counter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CorranSec Posted November 21, 2002 Share Posted November 21, 2002 Windu- what feeling? The feeling that you're wrong, or that insanity is a good thing? Oh, and I sense a little contradiction. First it was "if they're going to BOMB a city they drop BOMBS," and now it's "Just cos it's a BOMBER doesn't mean it drops BOMBS." ????? Luke's dad- Whoooho! Go the stupid people. Go the insane people even more. Sith- Argh, you stole my rubber chickens line. But, yeah, you're right. Oh, and here's another reason for using my 'more air units' idea- it will totally discount Windu's idea. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.