Nighthawk

User avatar
another505
More than 10 000 messages. Soldier you are the leader of all armies!
Posts: 13128
Joined: Sun 21 Jul 2013 05:18
Location: Hiatus
Contact:

Re: Nighthawk

Postby another505 » Thu 15 Dec 2016 18:35

I rather nerf the kurnass to 1 LGB only per plane instead of seeing more gimmick instant removal units getting buffs
Image
Of Salt

User avatar
Xeno426
Carbon 13
Posts: 11965
Joined: Tue 13 Mar 2012 21:27
Location: Acheron, Hadley's Hope
Contact:

Re: Nighthawk

Postby Xeno426 » Thu 15 Dec 2016 18:38

another505 wrote:I rather nerf the kurnass to 1 LGB only per plane instead of seeing more gimmick instant removal units getting buffs

Would be an asymmetric loadout.
Image
CloakandDagger wrote:And you're one of the people with the shiny colored name. No wonder the game is in the state it's in.

User avatar
another505
More than 10 000 messages. Soldier you are the leader of all armies!
Posts: 13128
Joined: Sun 21 Jul 2013 05:18
Location: Hiatus
Contact:

Re: Nighthawk

Postby another505 » Thu 15 Dec 2016 18:48

Xeno426 wrote:
another505 wrote:I rather nerf the kurnass to 1 LGB only per plane instead of seeing more gimmick instant removal units getting buffs

Would be an asymmetric loadout.

Then i rather nerf the kurnass 1 per card, make it veteran/elite. Or actually just give them different smaller LGB.
Image
Of Salt

User avatar
Sir Typhoon
Chief Warrant Officer
Posts: 517
Joined: Sat 30 Jan 2016 13:17
Contact:

Re: Nighthawk

Postby Sir Typhoon » Thu 15 Dec 2016 19:47

Xeno426 wrote:Would be an asymmetric loadout.


What about J-7H or Super Retard?

User avatar
Xeno426
Carbon 13
Posts: 11965
Joined: Tue 13 Mar 2012 21:27
Location: Acheron, Hadley's Hope
Contact:

Re: Nighthawk

Postby Xeno426 » Thu 15 Dec 2016 20:22

Sir Typhoon wrote:What about J-7H or Super Retard?

J-7H is a problem with the mode; the load would be on the centerline.

The Super Retard has the opposite side equalized by a fuel tank.
Image
Image
CloakandDagger wrote:And you're one of the people with the shiny colored name. No wonder the game is in the state it's in.

User avatar
FrangibleCover
Lieutenant
Posts: 1465
Joined: Mon 14 Nov 2016 21:34
Contact:

Re: Nighthawk

Postby FrangibleCover » Thu 15 Dec 2016 20:45

Xeno426 wrote:
Sir Typhoon wrote:What about J-7H or Super Retard?

J-7H is a problem with the mode; the load would be on the centerline.

The Super Retard has the opposite side equalized by a fuel tank.
Image

I've always sort of wondered why that's the only load you ever see on them. Why did they not use two Exocets on short-range strikes? Short legs? Lack of missiles even in the Aeronavale? The port wing wasn't wired for it?
What if Wargame stuck to timeframe?
Image

User avatar
HrcAk47
Colonel
Posts: 2788
Joined: Sat 3 May 2014 18:00
Contact:

Re: Nighthawk

Postby HrcAk47 » Thu 15 Dec 2016 21:07

I think that the Super Retard should get 2 missiles - TOT is not that big of an issue in Wargame.

I believe they carry 1 missile mostly because all the pics we see of it are training pics - maximize flight time, expend one missile (they are expensive), and in case of having to jettison a missile, your costs are lesser.

In Yugoslavia, only one missile was used for training (Maverick B), with the opposite wing being loaded with a static model. I've seen pics of such static models for Grom A and Grom B as well. On combat missions, two were loaded.
The SEAD never bothered me anyway.

SMB Yugoslavia Retexture Mod, now released, v.1.0

AmberT
First Sergeant
Posts: 228
Joined: Fri 20 Sep 2013 10:46
Contact:

Re: Nighthawk

Postby AmberT » Mon 9 Jan 2017 13:12

Razzmann wrote:Why did you not bring up these arguments in the first, opening post?

GuerreroDelAlba wrote:Terrible Inf

Canda can help out pretty well here. You also have very good fire support.

GuerreroDelAlba wrote:Mediocre AA besides Patriot

Chapparral A1 and A3 are not really mediocre, especially with the much needed HP buff. Pivads being the only system with .2s aim time is also above average. Centurion Marksmen can also be nice.

GuerreroDelAlba wrote:awful Recon

Awful? Not really. Longbow, Rangers, Bradley, Acav are all very playable. Even the Lav-25 has its place even though people like to deny that.

GuerreroDelAlba wrote:Support

Well, aa was mentioned already. Arty is not that great, that is true.


GuerreroDelAlba wrote:Average Airfoce

I don't know why people keep on saying the Plane tab is "terrible" or "average". You have an excellent AT plane with the Hornet, very good ASFs with the Block 52 and F-15C. Wide variety of good SEAD planes. F-15D and Nighthawk are not bad, yes they have low availability, but having a good/ strong bomber card is not really important nowadays.

GuerreroDelAlba wrote:Plus the Nighhawk gets shot down by even AA worth 30 I made a post about it with enough evidence.

You can also lose a Raven to a 30pts AA piece. You showed one example if I remember correctly. I don't know if that qualifiers as "enough evidence". And I also think that you even got critted by the OSA? I am not 100% sure anymore.

Though with the LGB change it could be ok with 2 on rookie, the LGBs would not hit as much. But even then, looking at how the Kurnass is still (one of) the best grouns support plane even on rookie, I am not sure whether I would like that.

The first time when I fully agree Razzman

AmberT
First Sergeant
Posts: 228
Joined: Fri 20 Sep 2013 10:46
Contact:

Re: Nighthawk

Postby AmberT » Mon 9 Jan 2017 13:17

GuerreroDelAlba wrote:Yeah, all that, other nations got the same if not even better than all that. besides the longbow, atacms and pats.

About the Canadian Infantry, you have the TH-495, Canadian Rifles and Canadian Airbone, The result is the same, Terrible-Mediocre Inf.
Privads has a very dissapointing range, Chaparral A1 fails everyshot, and u only get 4-3 Chaparral A3, Centurion Marksmen is probably the slowest Vehicle in the Game. u can say all u want, but when u compare them to other nations, they're clearly shit, every aspect of them; Speed, Availavility, Quality, Acc, etc.

About the Recon: Yes longbow is good, i agree, but u have to be very careful to use it. Rangers is meh, Other recon troops have sniper rifles, AA or even Super Laser Projectiles like the israeli ones, acav is ass , lav 25 is mediocre, it's fast and that's it. the soviet btrs beat it. the Bradley is too expensive, has very limited availability and in most of the maps is useless.

People say that because usa does have an average airforce. Yeah the hornet is good, the ASFs are nothing special, the F-15C is the worst ASF of the same generation. u can't compare it to a rafale, or a su27 pu and others. Then u have the Nighthawk, That has 0% ecm, and that is traduced in being shot down by the shittiest Missile AA in the game, and you only have ONE, It clearly sucks, and if u say the contrary, u need to see a doctor, because you're probably getting blind. If u can't have 2 per card, atleast let me have 2 cards, like all the other nations, USA is the only one that gets fucked this way. I don't understand why you're tryng to make it seem like they're good and don't need anything, When they get outclassed by other factions in everything besides 3-5 units.

just compare the US and the USSR, and you will see how much better the US them USSR.

urogard
Brigadier
Posts: 3062
Joined: Sun 4 May 2014 13:31
Contact:

Re: Nighthawk

Postby urogard » Mon 9 Jan 2017 13:47

another505 wrote:I rather nerf the kurnass to 1 LGB only per plane instead of seeing more gimmick instant removal units getting buffs

LGBs are not what they used to be. I'm actually suprised when a nighthawk manages to kill my moderna. more often than not i only lose a couple HP

Nighthawk to 2 rookies per card is perfectly acceptable, esp with the LGB aim bug still not fixed

Return to “Wargame : Red Dragon”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 42 guests