Page 1 of 54

Things you DO NOT want to see in WG:RD

Posted: Fri 25 Oct 2013 07:50
by Bryan
Post and discuss what you do not want to see in Red Dragon. Features or units or game modes or maps...anything related.

I will start off....
INTERCEPTORS
And associated weaponry.
I do not want to see MiG-31s, MiG-25s and AIM-54 Phoenixes in the game.
The scale is simply not there and would suit the MRAAMs better. Also many nations do not posses such weaponry and would be better suited and even if MRAAMs were the longest ranged killers.


F-117 Nighthawk or any stealth bomber
They are not used in shallow Close Air Support roles as Wargame depicts but rather large strategically oriented strike packages along with many other aircraft. They also cause unnecessary harm towards gameplay and minor nations, some of which do not have the capacity to sustain its damage or counter it effectively.


SEAD aircraft
Like the Nighthawk, they usually do not participate in shallow close air support strikes. Using an AGM88 HARM on a Shilka is a complete waste of resources and also completely unauthentic as SEAD is usually used against radars and stationary radars and point defence AAs. I would prefer if the current SEAD aircraft were removed of anti-radiation missiles and repurposed into Electronic Warfare aircraft that decreases the accuracy of the air defence systems like usually performed using the 'exceptional ECM' except covering a wider area.
I.e.
EF-111
SU-24
EA-6
Jaguar
-all can be repurposed as jamming aircraft.

[Edit:]Prototypes as national lynchpins (Credits to Graphic)
Do not want to see nations rely on never massed produced prototypes to become viable.





I told you mine now tell me yours!

Re: Things you DO NOT want to see in WG:RD

Posted: Fri 25 Oct 2013 07:58
by Iris
Singapore.

Sorry I just had to.

YF-22 or YF-23; mostly because I'd like to avoid them and encourage the F-16,F-15,F/A-18 90's air fleet of the US armed services because those are more than enough to make an amazingly powerful and enjoyable air fleet.

As much as I am against interceptors like the Mig-31 and F-14 being used in that role in ALB; the addition of Naval warfare at least leads to more realistic usage of the planes and I've come to accept it.

Re: Things you DO NOT want to see in WG:RD

Posted: Fri 25 Oct 2013 08:00
by Coffee_Zombie
I want all anit-radiation missiles removed as well as they serve no purpose.

Re: Things you DO NOT want to see in WG:RD

Posted: Fri 25 Oct 2013 08:06
by shomu1
You say a HARM wouldn't be used on a Shilka and then say it would be used on point defense AA. Doesn't a Shilka technically fall in that category?

But honestly, what I DON'T want to see is CBUs being completely useless against infantry. I'm fine with them having a 0.5 HE value, as long as they do SOMETHING to infantry. It pains me every time I see infantry just sitting and laughing in the aftermath of a CBU strike. (Not that I use CBUs on infantry anymore, but idiot teammates often do)

Re: Things you DO NOT want to see in WG:RD

Posted: Fri 25 Oct 2013 08:23
by Bryan
shomu1 wrote:You say a HARM wouldn't be used on a Shilka and then say it would be used on point defense AA. Doesn't a Shilka technically fall in that category?

But honestly, what I DON'T want to see is CBUs being completely useless against infantry. I'm fine with them having a 0.5 HE value, as long as they do SOMETHING to infantry. It pains me every time I see infantry just sitting and laughing in the aftermath of a CBU strike. (Not that I use CBUs on infantry anymore, but idiot teammates often do)

As in things like SA-3 Goa point defence and Sa-2 Guideline.....

Re: Things you DO NOT want to see in WG:RD

Posted: Fri 25 Oct 2013 08:27
by Graphic
Prototypes that didn't enter serial production becoming the linchpin of certain decks. Fun but non-crucial toys like the MBT-70, Zhalo, Norov, M8 AGS, etc. are fine. CATTB, Objekt ###, F-16XL (sorry, fellow Muricans) aren't.

Re: Things you DO NOT want to see in WG:RD

Posted: Fri 25 Oct 2013 08:39
by Iris
Graphic wrote:F-16XL (sorry, fellow Muricans) aren't.


I'd rather see the F/A-16 / A-16 if we needed a crazy F-16 since those were real and existed around the Gulf War; but with as many real variants exist and varying loadouts to choose from I can't really think of anything insane the US really could argue for; everything we need existed.

But I agree with your main point +1 a thousand times over

Re: Things you DO NOT want to see in WG:RD

Posted: Fri 25 Oct 2013 08:46
by Aikmofobi
+1 to everything in the OP.

Re: Things you DO NOT want to see in WG:RD

Posted: Fri 25 Oct 2013 08:47
by T-80U
This thread is ridiculously stupid. The game does not make you playing units you do not like. But every other man who likes, for example, MBT-70 will be happy. You just want to ban and prohibit, these things never done anything good in history. Stop being so selfish, wargame is the game that offers a unit choice for everebody not for you only. And it shouldn't be for you only.

Re: Things you DO NOT want to see in WG:RD

Posted: Fri 25 Oct 2013 08:50
by ericdude88
Yes I agree with the above, having unrealistic prototypes like random obj ### or concepts like Chimera being lynchpin of any nation's deck is ... ludicrous

Now as for what I DON'T want to see in RD, that'll be any balance scenario where it is USA/W Ger/FR vs USSR dominated multiplayer. I want to see focus on Asian theater, more China/Korea.

Also, I don't want to see linear maps anymore. I personally thought W:EE maps were so much more funner, strategic, and had more options because they were so open. I feel ALB's maps are sometimes so linear that battles can feel the same, and maneuver no longer matters as much (which is part of the reasons why mediums suck, in WEE mediums could flank to hit side armor however with ALB map design it's hard, and in frontal clashes obviously heavies win).