Search found 3496 matches

Go to advanced search

by GARGEAN
Mon 4 Sep 2017 17:25
Forum: Wargame : Red Dragon
Topic: No C-300 ?
Replies: 117
Views: 11833

Re: No C-300 ?

ilias wrote:you *gd;se/es*d*f/af

And what that's supposed to mean.
by GARGEAN
Mon 4 Sep 2017 17:16
Forum: Wargame : Red Dragon
Topic: No C-300 ?
Replies: 117
Views: 11833

Re: No C-300 ?

ilias wrote:Minimally: 5V55R was produced, which have range of 90km

Again: missile for S-300P, which fit game even worse that Patrion or S-300V.
by GARGEAN
Mon 4 Sep 2017 17:01
Forum: Wargame : Red Dragon
Topic: No C-300 ?
Replies: 117
Views: 11833

Re: No C-300 ?

molnibalage wrote:Anti airplane range of S-300V/V1 was only 75 km comparing to 68 km or MIM-104A missile. So gibing 7km in WG would be strange...
75/68 is not the same as 7/5.6 km...

Yeap, cause 9M82 missile never existed...
by GARGEAN
Mon 4 Sep 2017 15:25
Forum: Wargame : Red Dragon
Topic: No C-300 ?
Replies: 117
Views: 11833

Re: No C-300 ?

molnibalage wrote: blah

Yaaaay, missed this muh-muh stuff! Ah, sweet times.
by GARGEAN
Mon 4 Sep 2017 12:52
Forum: Wargame : Red Dragon
Topic: No C-300 ?
Replies: 117
Views: 11833

Re: No C-300 ?

Fodder wrote:The real reason why its not ingame.
Becuz it was design to target strategic bombers and missiles, which are not ingame

Patriots only ingame becuz US infantry sucks and USA needed motorized AA

Wrong.
by GARGEAN
Mon 4 Sep 2017 11:42
Forum: Wargame : Red Dragon
Topic: No C-300 ?
Replies: 117
Views: 11833

Re: No C-300 ?

ilias wrote:0. In game we have not things which been made in 90s, we have what was used in 90s

That's lol. NASAMS anyone? Macbeth? Crotale-NG?
by GARGEAN
Mon 4 Sep 2017 11:30
Forum: Wargame : Red Dragon
Topic: No C-300 ?
Replies: 117
Views: 11833

Re: No C-300 ?

0. Russian SAMS not actively developing because no need in it, S-300 is one of superior AA systems in a world unlike Buk which banaly worse, 1. USA have patriots, thats point of S-300 presence in game (i wrote HAWK's range as example for explanation of S-300 in game presence accordance) 2. Why you ...
by GARGEAN
Mon 4 Sep 2017 11:21
Forum: Wargame : Red Dragon
Topic: No C-300 ?
Replies: 117
Views: 11833

Re: No C-300 ?

0. Russian SAMS not actively developing because no need in it, S-300 is one of superior AA systems in a world unlike Buk which banaly worse, 1. USA have patriots, thats point of S-300 presence in game (i wrote HAWK's range as example for explanation of S-300 in game presence accordance) 2. Why you ...
by GARGEAN
Mon 4 Sep 2017 09:11
Forum: Wargame : Red Dragon
Topic: No C-300 ?
Replies: 117
Views: 11833

Re: No C-300 ?

Cause first: this is S-300, not C-300. Second: it is in every iteration blatantly superior to HAWK, and third - we don't need S-300V, we need Buk-M2. But everyone knows that Soviet works on AA stopped in 80s, cause who need those modern SAMs?
by GARGEAN
Sun 3 Sep 2017 18:00
Forum: Wargame : Red Dragon
Topic: Broken Stuff that Needs Fixing ASAP
Replies: 304
Views: 31248

Re: Broken Stuff that Needs Fixing ASAP

Extra, extra! The whole forum is Razzmann fanboys! Veteransy on bombers matters! New revelations every monday!

Go to advanced search