|
Season 16. Northern Sabre - You're Gonna Need a Bigger Boat (A-7E Corsair II (74)) We are stepping into the realms of SF2: North Atlantic, the latest, and quite probably the last Third Wire's release for the PC.  Those crafty Reds!  This is a companion campaign to Red Lightning.  Here's the general map layout. Before you ask, no, there are no volcanic eruption events in the campaign. Could be hilarious, though. Martin "Scuba Tank" Brody enters the scene. S16E01: 1979.09.19 (Niceland?) Morning  The Red tanks are still far away. We'll hit some supplies.  There isn't much in the new weapons department. I believe, the Tomcat campaign will be the last time we see anything new here.  We have Michael Moore on board. Let's hope he doesn't find a camera, because filming crap is my job here. Which nicely leads us into... The mission video  In which we might redefine ugly  Dat blast radius  Afternoon  Suddenly the enemy is up close and aiming for our final strongholds. The mission video  In which the tanks jump the shark  We've got a trigger-happy gunner in the unit. Good!  Oh, it's another one of those.   *Jaws music*
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2014 05:27
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 16, 2024 10:04 |
|
|
Well, you did say the tanks were amphibious...
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2014 06:19
|
|
|
Must be a variant of the PT-76 from Nazareth or maybe vatican city?
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2014 14:22
|
|
|
I had a little nature documentary style narration (by David Attenborough naturally) going through my head during that entire segment. And here we see the adult PT-76s returning to the water to spawn. A male remains on shore to guard against incursions by predators such as the Crusaders wheeling overhead. Alas, it is not to be - a particularly aggressive Crusader cuts its life brutally short. However, enough have survived to ensure the continuation of the species, and so the cycle begins anew. Ahem. I was pleasantly surprised by how one of the smaller ships in the fleet actually seemed to bob along the waves rather than acting like it was on rails. It was a bit blink-and-you'll-miss-it, though.
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2014 15:12
|
|
|
PT-76 died for your sins. (Your sins mostly consist of not upgrading his Malyutka launcher into something usable.)
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2014 15:44
|
|
|
sunburstbasser posted:Well, you did say the tanks were amphibious... At least they don't fly.  ... Fly very well, that is.
|
|
#
?
Jun 19, 2014 16:30
|
|
|
The landscape actually looks pretty nifty! Shame it's just for looks and you can't surprise somebody coming over a mountain, but oh well. Baby steps!
|
|
#
?
Jun 22, 2014 15:49
|
|
|
So let me get this straight... A Marine Expeditionary Unit is on it's way to retake Iceland...AND THERE'S NO USMC HARRIER CAMPAIGN?!?! Also just F-14s and A-7s? Seriously?
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2014 01:21
|
|
|
Africanus posted:So let me get this straight... Kinda disappointed that they won't let you do an A-6 campaign, even though you'd basically be hosed if there's any enemy aircraft around. Subsonic, A2G weapons only, and knowing 3rd Wire they wouldn't let you use any of the fancy terrain-following or night attack features.
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2014 07:48
|
|
|
Africanus posted:So let me get this straight... On the first point: The USMC AV-8A is a slightly different aircraft than the British Harriers, so i'm guessing third wire couldn't be arsed to model the difference. Second, the F-4 is available to fly if you have one of the other (Vietnam?) SF2s.
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2014 15:37
|
|
|
If you think the lack of a flyable is stupid, wait till you see the next update Coming up within 24 hours. You'll see the main reason no one really plays this campaign.
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2014 17:11
|
|
|
SelenicMartian posted:If you think the lack of a flyable is stupid, wait till you see the next update Oh please tell me it's the attack on the Soviet carrier.
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2014 17:18
|
|
|
SelenicMartian posted:If you think the lack of a flyable is stupid, wait till you see the next update We're not suddenly going to run into a bunch of SA-8s tied to a raft or something are we? I'm on the edge of my seat here! 
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2014 21:48
|
|
|
Soup Inspector posted:We're not suddenly going to run into a bunch of SA-8s tied to a raft or something are we? I'm on the edge of my seat here!  BITCH I'M A COMIN FOR YA Alternatively,  State of the art Soviet Medical Science. Suspect Bucket fucked around with this message at 00:00 on Jun 28, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2014 23:52
|
|
|
S16E02: 1979.09.19-20 (Aircraft Carrier Theme Park) 1979.09.19 15:00-ish  You might have heard of Akureyri, it's one of the two slightly crazy airports in Iceland. I'll be visiting the other one later. The mission video  In which we catch a glimpse of the ultimate terror  That sure was a landing. Not the deepest penetration, but it's in the top three.  Ejecting directly into the ship's infirmary hurts! 1979.09.20 6:30-ish  I take one evening off, and both fleets are about to ram each other.  We got so excited loading the Walleye II, we achieved this  Then we put the extra pair back for fear of the carrier imploding. The mission video  In which we drop in with a neighbourly visit That won't do. Let's try again... The real mission video  In which we technically win  Hey, Michael Moore killed something.  I should probably make those Washingtons into earrings or something.  Another glimpse of poo poo flying over there. And now...   (over the background of an Israeli tank burning under a Fishbed)  Here's the situation: - The player's character is alive and not captured. - The player's squadron did not suffer major losses. - The player's carrier is well. - There was no tank activity on this day at all, so the front line didn't move. And this mess of scripting errors still fails you. And I have no idea why. The only guess is that the Kiev's carrier group hit a specific point on the map. It's random. In some of my attempts I got the line about strategic objectives in the debrief, and in some I didn't. No one plays this campaign, and if they do, they post threads asking if this crap is even winnable. Anyway, the final roster  I'll throw together another attack-related update and move on to the F-14A.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2014 06:16
|
|
|
The Navy Maverick (AGM-65F) is larger and heavier than a standard Maverick, with the same large blast-fragmentation warhead other models designed for taking out fortified structures like bunkers and bridges had. It uses an imaging infrared sensor, which in the case of 80s military equipment probably means it uses a CCD optimised for IR wavelengths (or coated with lead(II) sulfide, mercury-cadmium telluride or some other IR-sensitive material). The main difference between an AIM-9 seeker and an imaging infrared sensor is that there's some kind of device as part of the sensor that can convert the electrical signal produced into an image that can be viewed by the user.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2014 12:26
|
|
|
Suspect Bucket posted:
Makrond posted:The Navy Maverick (AGM-65F) is larger and heavier than a standard Maverick, with the same large blast-fragmentation warhead other models designed for taking out fortified structures like bunkers and bridges had. It uses an imaging infrared sensor, which in the case of 80s military equipment probably means it uses a CCD optimised for IR wavelengths (or coated with lead(II) sulfide, mercury-cadmium telluride or some other IR-sensitive material). The main difference between an AIM-9 seeker and an imaging infrared sensor is that there's some kind of device as part of the sensor that can convert the electrical signal produced into an image that can be viewed by the user. I wasn't even aware a Navy Maverick was a thing! Regardless, I found the attacks on the Kiev class carrier rather intense, with how much flak it was putting out. It reminded me of the absurd amounts of gunfire aircraft carriers in IL-2 put out (though at least those don't have Geckos constantly being launched at you).
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2014 15:35
|
|
|
SelenicMartian posted:
Somewhat related story, my Mom was working in a college infirmary, mostly nursing dumb kids through hangovers, or calling the real hospital to come pick them up. Anyway, she's having a quiet day, holding down the fort, when there's this huge CRASH into the front door of the infirmary. She opens it to find an adjunct professor of physics (who had a department the next floor up), on the floor, next to a wheeled chair, holding two lit sparklers, and half his class running down to get him. The infirmary was in the 'basement' of a pretty rad old brutalist architecture kinda design, so there were ramps and stuff everywhere, and the professor decided to demonstrate... something by rolling down one of them in an office chair holding sparklers. We're still not quite sure what it was. Mom thought it was hilarious, and being a former teacher herself, decided to take the opportunity to show the class how to diagnose a concussion.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2014 23:58
|
|
|
Soup Inspector posted:I wasn't even aware a Navy Maverick was a thing! Seriously? I thought it was common knowledge. 
|
|
#
?
Jun 29, 2014 04:52
|
|
|
McNally posted:Seriously? I thought it was common knowledge. Hey, we haven't even hit the F-14 campaign yet! You're shootin' off early there, sailor.
|
|
#
?
Jun 29, 2014 05:18
|
|
|
Remember the mattressed Harrier? Apparently, they improved the technology http://metro.co.uk/2014/06/27/winged-it-plane-nose-gear-jams-so-pilot-lands-on-a-stool-4778142/
|
|
#
?
Jun 29, 2014 05:24
|
|
|
Suspect Bucket posted:You're shootin' off early there, sailor. I thought that's what sailors did. 
|
|
#
?
Jun 29, 2014 05:40
|
|
|
There's an F-14 campaign?
|
|
#
?
Jun 29, 2014 10:47
|
|
|
SelenicMartian posted:Remember the mattressed Harrier? I was half-expecting a wooden stool in light of the mattress incident, but hey, at least they thought about what to do if a Harrier experienced a nose gear failure! Arglebargle III posted:There's an F-14 campaign? Yep, Selenic mentioned it in the last video (and I think it's also shown in the OP). I can't wait, since I think the F-14 is one of the coolest looking jets around. Soup Inspector fucked around with this message at 14:04 on Jun 29, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jun 29, 2014 14:01
|
|
|
S16E03: Furiously Undershooting Last time we failed to prevent a global nuclear war. On the plus side, we're free to travel across Iceland and enjoy the views. The trip report  In which the game has a funny idea of reconnaissance In addition to that, I promised to show you, what happens when two ships of the opposing sides meet. The battle report  In which there is much 
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2014 05:56
|
|
|
Holy poo poo, that airstrip is a real place.
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2014 06:56
|
|
|
Aint nothin to fix.
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2014 16:59
|
|
|
Is everything about this game a let down? I feel as though the thread title should be "Striker Fighters 2: where your dreams went to die". The ship combat part was just awful. Do those giant fuckoff launch tubes on ships actually work (I'm guessing no)? Do ships ever launch ASMs at other ships?
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2014 01:28
|
|
|
Even if it is dumb and broken, for the player to be launched to attack the enemy fleet like that, by gosh is it loving radical 
|
|
#
?
Jul 3, 2014 00:07
|
|
|
That take-off is terrifying. I still have no idea how you managed to avoid going into the drink. I've flown to an airport with a hill on one side before, but nothing as bad as that.  As for the ship combat, well... that brings up an interesting question. If the ships are so bad at hitting each other, how can the Soviet fleet ever sink your carrier? Suspect Bucket posted:Aint nothin to fix. "Pukin' Dogs"? Who thought that was a great squadron name?
|
|
#
?
Jul 3, 2014 21:43
|
|
|
Triggerhappypilot posted:On the first point: On the contrary, other than looking slightly different they are functionally identical. I checked out the link someone posted earlier for the game on steam and, right up front is a Harrier in USMC colors. Considering how hopelessly broken the Iceland campaign is, I doubt I'd play a harrier themed game about it anyway. (Sour grapes)
|
|
#
?
Jul 4, 2014 00:23
|
|
|
Suspect Bucket posted:What exactly is going on? I'm figuring it's dogfight practice, prolly t-38's?. What's that funky line in the top middle of the HUD? It is indeed BFM(Basic Fighter Maneuvering AKA Dogfight) practice. The voices you hear are an instructor(screaming) and a student. Typically in order to train new guys to dogfight you'll start out doing 1v1 with an IP(instructor pilot) and a student in one jet and another instructor in other. Usually you'll start out offensive(the student has an advantage over the bandit) and move onto defensive(the bandit has the advantage), before starting neutral(just like it sounds, you start even and fight for an advantage). Generally you'll do canned(ie pre-choreographed) sets where the bandit will demonstrate a BFM error. This illustrates how easy it is to gain advantage and maybe take a shot when your opponent makes a mistake. Then you'll progress to in-canned or random sets where the bandit is free to maneuver as he wishes. Bandits are typically IPs with at least one tour and sometimes up to a dozen years of experience. As a 1st Lieutenant at the time, dogfighting against Commanders and Lt. Colonels with 10+ years experience was, in a word, humbling. Starting and ending the fight neutral is a serious accomplishment, not getting shot down is a win. What probably going on in the video is the student and his IP begin defensive while the bandit(after the "fight's on!" Call) demonstrates a BFM error by letting the student force an overshoot in close("there's the overshoot!"), at which point it's time to reverse on the bandit and, ahem "GET THAT MOTHERFUCKER!!!" A key point in any BFM experience is the IPs responsibility to induce stress on the student and also to encourage aggression. BFM is a fight to the death, US Navy and US Marine Corps aircraft don't have the speed to escape a dogfight with their most likely adversaries. The goal of effective BFM is, to quote the manual "To kill or be killed." Period.
|
|
#
?
Jul 4, 2014 01:55
|
|
|
Man the goal includes "or be killed?" That's pretty enlightened.
|
|
#
?
Jul 4, 2014 06:00
|
|
|
Soup Inspector posted:"Pukin' Dogs"? Who thought that was a great squadron name? Fighter Pilots. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/VFA-143 It's also a rad piece of graphic design, in my opinion. Also, quote:"He asked me to draw a lifelike Tomcat wearing boxing gloves and trunks sporting a six-shooter on his left side; where the guns are located on the F-14, along with two tails." Granted, the fumes coming from the Grumman plant to this very day are enough to drive anyone loopy. Suspect Bucket fucked around with this message at 06:16 on Jul 4, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jul 4, 2014 06:05
|
|
|
Season 17. Northern Sabre - Always Underpowered, Never Outgunned (F-14A Tomcat (77)) We get the same campaign intro as the Corsair. S17E01: 1979.09.19 (The Fat Cat) Morning  We start off with a minor case of air strike prevention. They are coming for the Phantom base at Keflavík.  There is one new weapon, which I'm not showing off in this update for the sake of my sanity.  I feel understaffed without a full page of Apex fodder.  Into the what? The mission video  In which we feel the weight of the burden  We know how to burn through Sparrows. Naturally, we also get a life bar extension medal  Afternoon  A naval patrol can bring all kinds of targets. Very few of them are satisfying. The mission video  In which the rival flight is still at it  This is turning into Ace Combat: Infinity. Before you ask, why my throttle is so low, the afterburners on the Tomcat here kick in with the throttle at 70% already.
|
|
#
?
Jul 4, 2014 06:08
|
|
|
Didn't Phoenix missiles cost a making GBS threads million dollars a pop? That's a lot of money to kill a Bear, which you can buy now as a lawn ornament. "Careful now, let's not provoke the physics engine" had me giggling. As well as your gang of Hawkeyes. I guess they were just airing them out, like wet laundry on a nice day. Suspect Bucket fucked around with this message at 06:45 on Jul 4, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jul 4, 2014 06:31
|
|
|
It's worth pointing out that the two movies the F-14 is best known for featured the A model, not the D.
|
|
#
?
Jul 4, 2014 07:51
|
|
|
The one in Area 88 was also an A model.
|
|
#
?
Jul 4, 2014 08:04
|
|
|
For such a fat plane with a big nose it really is quite attractive. I think it's the wing gloves. They can look swept and aggressive with the wings swept or broad and chunky with them extended, and they're always kind of round and swoopy. Also, I think the "overweight missile delivery gadget with a bitchin' radar" was a great doctrinal choice and I think it only died because the Navy never actually needed to use it for anything. If there had been a hot war the Tomcat would have been a zillion times better flying CAP over a carrier group than anything before or since. How else are you going to shoot down Russian naval bombers armed with cruise missiles before they reach launch range? Did the F-14 get a better engine later? Arglebargle III fucked around with this message at 14:50 on Jul 4, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jul 4, 2014 14:37
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 16, 2024 10:04 |
|
|
I forgot to mention this when the last update was put up, but a few years ago I took a trip to Iceland and you could see Eyjafjallajökull (the mountain that caused so much misery for holiday makers) from where I was staying. It certainly didn't look like it could pump out that much ash, but appearances can be deceiving. As for this update, I noticed something peculiar about the Tomcat's attitude indicator in the last video at around 3 minutes in or so (and for the rest of the video) - what are the grey blocks on the green half of the attitude indicator meant to represent? I couldn't figure it out. Arglebargle III posted:For such a fat plane with a big nose it really is quite attractive. I think it's the wing gloves. They can look swept and aggressive with the wings swept or broad and chunky with them extended, and they're always kind of round and swoopy. I agree 100%. There's something about the Tomcat's broad profile that really just works (especially when you see them tossing it around like a ballerina in videos of F-14s in flight). And I'm normally the sort of person who prefers thinner, sleeker aircraft. Then again I'm a big sucker for variable geometry wings. Arglebargle III posted:Also, I think the "overweight missile delivery gadget with a bitchin' radar" was a great doctrinal choice and I think it only died because the Navy never actually needed to use it for anything. If there had been a hot war the Tomcat would have been a zillion times better flying CAP over a carrier group than anything before or since. How else are you going to shoot down Russian naval bombers armed with cruise missiles before they reach launch range? Wasn't the F-14 conceived as a fleet defence fighter that would pick off enemy aircraft from stand-off ranges? Hence I'm not particularly surprised that it would excel at its job.
|
|
#
?
Jul 4, 2014 15:33
|
|