Reconnaissance aircraft Suggestion.

User avatar
trotskygrad
General
Posts: 6444
Joined: Mon 17 Sep 2012 16:09
Location: две тысячи лет война
Contact:

Re: Reconnaissance aircraft Suggestion.

Postby trotskygrad » Wed 15 May 2013 01:16

grimreffer2 wrote:Some people think *Cough*orc(something)*Cough* that a Recce plane needs to take pictures and then fly back to base, then the pictures need to be analyzed, etc. It's not like it was 1865 where they had no radios. People don't relise that the SR-71 did use Radios to speak to Spec-ops and Black-ops forces on the ground during their Raids(or what ever they were doing.) The U2 for example could've been modified to have a radio in it, and tell the commander on the ground where enemy positions are.


BECAUSE THE SR-71 HAD AN ONBOARD PHOTO LAB AMIRITE

AND A CREW OF ONBOARD ANALYSTS TOO
NEXT TIME I SEE A DAMN FLAMEWAR INVOLVING DARTH-LAMPSHADE, FROSTPOOKY, LONERIFLE, FADE2GRAY, TROTSKYGRAD AND/OR ANYONE INVOLVED IN A DISCUSSION BETWEEN THEM I'M GOING TO HAND OUT BANS TO ANYONE USING ANYTHING LOOKING REMOTELY LIKE AN AD-HOMINEM

rags17
Sergeant
Posts: 66
Joined: Mon 29 Apr 2013 14:16
Location: Melbourne Vic, Australia
Contact:

Re: Reconnaissance aircraft Suggestion.

Postby rags17 » Wed 15 May 2013 01:23

trotskygrad wrote:BECAUSE THE SR-71 HAD AN ONBOARD PHOTO LAB AMIRITE

AND A CREW OF ONBOARD ANALYSTS TOO


Plese tell me tat was sarcasm, right ?

bigcracker
Corporal
Posts: 38
Joined: Sat 11 Feb 2012 03:38
Contact:

Re: Reconnaissance aircraft Suggestion.

Postby bigcracker » Wed 15 May 2013 01:23

Hidden Gunman wrote:
bigcracker wrote:
Hidden Gunman wrote:Well, if we are considering applying AD2000+ command and control structures to the game, why not just give us direct feed satellite intel as well?

You kids from the modern age have very little, if any, appreciation of just how slow communications, particularly military battlefield communications, were in the 70's and 80's.


If that is the case then the buks and hawks need to be removed from game as well as they are not frontline combat AA units. This game is far from being realistic and the suggestion is just for fun not if it could happen but fur "fun".

As if this was realistic game we would need all this for one BUK and about 24 hours of man power to set it up, https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/ ... n_2010.jpg


No argument from me on that...but the point is that the 'fun' recce units referred to here would utterly remove the necessity for any other recon units, and would revert the game to basically a computerised table top game with full visibility of everyone's units.

However, p*ss ante unit realism arguments aside, the use of intel in any battle is a fairly complex undertaking, especially in the time period covered by the game, as I pointed out. The processes and structure simply weren't in place to get real time intel as we do from the existing recce units in the game, let alone from otherwise employed strategic assets.


I would agree that having aircraft could limit the use of man recon and such but in this new WG we have decks that have special units(Aka Marine). I wouldnt suggest to give every deck aircraft recon but a few and they wouldnt be on the battlefield at all times. I would suggest that something like the SR-72 has one pass on the battlefield from on the table to off the table in a straight line and then be on something like a 6-7 minutes cool down. Then having man or tracked recon you would have it stay on the field as long as your keep it alive.

And to reply with you calling me names, I feel like i have rattled you and apologize for replying to your comment with a educated response. For your argument to be about time period is irrelevant one could state that you are confusing a arcade style rts to real life to much. A man recon unit sitting in the back of a enemy base gives you up to the minute intel cause there is no real intel it just removes fog of war....

bigcracker
Corporal
Posts: 38
Joined: Sat 11 Feb 2012 03:38
Contact:

Re: Reconnaissance aircraft Suggestion.

Postby bigcracker » Wed 15 May 2013 01:24

Knautscher wrote:
bigcracker wrote:
Hidden Gunman wrote:[...]

As if this was realistic game we would need all this for one BUK and about 24 hours of man power to set it up, https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/ ... n_2010.jpg


Wikipedia has text as well:
"A Buk missile battery consists of two TELAR and one TEL vehicle. The battery requires 5 minutes to set up before it is ready for engagement and can be ready for transit again in 5 minutes."
- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buk_missil ... escription

But with reloading etc. it would probably take longer, I agree.

I am against the spy planes. For the reasons that have already been mentioned it's something for Command and Conquer Red Alert, not for ALB. Just my opinion.



I agree the 24 hour comment was for man power to actually get it into a position in the forest some where if it wasnt already set up.

Chesnok
Command Sergeant Major
Posts: 334
Joined: Thu 2 May 2013 22:01
Contact:

Re: Reconnaissance aircraft Suggestion.

Postby Chesnok » Wed 15 May 2013 01:28

The recon units (infantry, wheeled, tracked AND helicopters) already included in-game AND historically supported as being used for said tasks in this era should be plenty efficient at spotting/infiltrating. There's a great variety of recon units in game, armed with a great variety of weapons, supporting a great variety of recon TACTICS. If you'd like an outline of said tactics, I'd be willing to humor you and would describe some.

Besides the historical facts of no real-time photo recon existing in the 70s and 80s, how many points would you be willing to spend for an SR-71, a U-2 or a similar strategic recon aircraft? They'd break the unit pricing system in the game, because they'd cost about 400,000 points to activate and use if weighed against the cost of other weapons systems included in the game.

Further, aircraft like SR-71s and U-2s were (and are) are tasked with missions that are planned at the HIGHEST levels of military command. You, as a mere lowly frontline commander of rusty tanks, sweaty men with rifles and throwaway combat aircraft would have no say whatsoever in the tasking of such assets. It's just absurd to claim otherwise, and exposes what you want as a "gimme!" sort of addition to the game, to add what you feel is a coolness factor, similarly to the whole debate over super hardcore snake eating two man sniper teams that will win a match for you.

Not trying to harsh your mellow here, but what y'all are asking for is way, way outside the scope, design, intent and mechanics of the game. EVEN if such mechanics were included (which would require a tremendous amount of work on restructuring the game to avoid them turning it into some sort of weird C&C mess), Eugen's already said repeatedly that they will NOT be adding more units into the game. They have a crazy amount of work to do polishing and balancing the game as it exists now, so give them an opportunity to improve everyone's gaming experience before you launch more campaigns for out-of-scope units to be added. Aren't hundreds upon hundreds of historically employed units enough?

Find me another RTS that has this many real-world units represented. Please, I'll wait. Oh, you can't? Well, there you go. ALB is arguably pushing forward the state of the art in modern military-themed RTS design, and it isn't enough for you.

Y'all remind me of someone who sits down at a massive, sumptuous banquet, complete with virtually anything you could ever want to eat, and says "BUT WAIT, why isn't there a peanut butter and jelly sandwich here??? It would complete my meal and I won't rest until I have it!" :roll:
Last edited by Chesnok on Wed 15 May 2013 01:54, edited 2 times in total.

bigcracker
Corporal
Posts: 38
Joined: Sat 11 Feb 2012 03:38
Contact:

Re: Reconnaissance aircraft Suggestion.

Postby bigcracker » Wed 15 May 2013 01:30

The funny thing is most of the people here that do not like this idea you can already do it with the aircraft in the game, and keep throwing the word realistic around.

User avatar
trotskygrad
General
Posts: 6444
Joined: Mon 17 Sep 2012 16:09
Location: две тысячи лет война
Contact:

Re: Reconnaissance aircraft Suggestion.

Postby trotskygrad » Wed 15 May 2013 01:52

rags17 wrote:
trotskygrad wrote:BECAUSE THE SR-71 HAD AN ONBOARD PHOTO LAB AMIRITE

AND A CREW OF ONBOARD ANALYSTS TOO


Plese tell me tat was sarcasm, right ?


of course :roll:

bigcracker wrote:The funny thing is most of the people here that do not like this idea you can already do it with the aircraft in the game, and keep throwing the word realistic around.

uhhhhhhh

no you can't...

aircraft do not spot for themselves.
NEXT TIME I SEE A DAMN FLAMEWAR INVOLVING DARTH-LAMPSHADE, FROSTPOOKY, LONERIFLE, FADE2GRAY, TROTSKYGRAD AND/OR ANYONE INVOLVED IN A DISCUSSION BETWEEN THEM I'M GOING TO HAND OUT BANS TO ANYONE USING ANYTHING LOOKING REMOTELY LIKE AN AD-HOMINEM

User avatar
orcbuster
More than 10 000 messages. Soldier you are the leader of all armies!
Posts: 12362
Joined: Fri 7 Sep 2012 21:04
Contact:

Re: Reconnaissance aircraft Suggestion.

Postby orcbuster » Wed 15 May 2013 02:01

well they can spot other aircraft but not much else. Oh unless you mean units that are firing upon them, thats generally considered a bad thing though.
Image
Viker for ingen!

Chesnok
Command Sergeant Major
Posts: 334
Joined: Thu 2 May 2013 22:01
Contact:

Re: Reconnaissance aircraft Suggestion.

Postby Chesnok » Wed 15 May 2013 02:13

bigcracker wrote:The funny thing is most of the people here that do not like this idea you can already do it with the aircraft in the game, and keep throwing the word realistic around.


This is becoming hilarious.

If you claim that aircraft spotting already exists in game, then why are you going on and on about how cool it'd be if aircraft spotting was built into the game? :lol:

Phoenix
Sergeant First-Class
Posts: 117
Joined: Wed 6 Jul 2011 14:58
Contact:

Re: Reconnaissance aircraft Suggestion.

Postby Phoenix » Wed 15 May 2013 02:14

orcbuster wrote:well they can spot other aircraft but not much else. Oh unless you mean units that are firing upon them, thats generally considered a bad thing though.


"dude let's use our planes to spot enemy AA and shoot it."
"You gotta be me."
Last edited by OpusTheFowl on Wed 15 May 2013 04:06, edited 1 time in total.
Reason: Language

Return to “Wargame : AirLand Battle”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 8 guests