|
Yooper posted:
You're on the right track here but you've got to think about what kind of movie you're going to make. I'm not sure Bronson is right for this one. You've got to spend a lot of time building up the pathos and make us really care about all these paratroopers before the ~1-3 minute scene of them all getting shot to death on the runway. That's a lot of non-action onscreen time. Also, Peter Finch as Prime Minister Psawhn? #LhasaSoWhite But I do like the idea of rebranding a hugely risky and irresponsible wartime operation as a tear-jerking story of national heroism and then selling the movie rights. It's a natural revenue stream for us when you think about it!
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2017 02:34
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 29, 2024 02:08 |
|
|
I don't know if you've noticed, but Operation Thunderbolt isn't the right comparison; try Operation loving Mikado, a plan so crazy even Thatcher wouldn't sign off on it. I have to vote to kill the runways; the Indian volunteers can handle cleanup. EDIT: It even has all the flaws of Operation Mikado! How will we know where the J-20s are stored, and if any will be available to steal (rather than laid up for maintenance or simply not there, having all departed to attack the IAF)? How will we know our big fat CN235 won't get pinged by a JF-17 or J-16? We have information about what kind of AAA/SAMs we'll be facing, but zero in the way of location and count--one MANPADS means the entire op is screwed. Davin Valkri fucked around with this message at 02:40 on Apr 11, 2017 |
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2017 02:36
|
|
|
I thought the plan to take the airfield was not to take Lhasa, but rather to take the lovely backup airfield where the J-20's are likely to be diverted if we take out the Lhasa runways while some of the J-20's are airborne.
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2017 02:53
|
|
|
Ah hell, why not, we have the rugged transport plane. designed for small airfields too.. Okay if we want to do this, here are some fun CN-235 Facts -It has room for 51 Passengers or 35 Paratroopers, so for non paratroopers probably room for 40 or so give or take. -Range of 2,350 nmi and a ceiling of 25,000 ft. -450 km/h (248 knots, 286 mph) -7.8 m/s (1,780 ft/min)
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2017 02:56
|
|
|
I vote to kill the airfield, but trying to capture it does sound...
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2017 02:58
|
|
|
While I love the boldness of the plan, I say we should Kill the airfield. Also please add me to the reserve pilot list with the call sign Hawaiian Pizza
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2017 03:00
|
|
|
I vote Entebbe, if only because I am an impartial observer that wants to see that, and the movie recreating it. . Having said that, please put on the reserve pilot with the call-sign Pegasus.
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2017 03:10
|
|
|
kill it. There might be a time for such a thing in the future, but this is not that time. Good to know you have our backs for trying bizarre things! Besides, if we Entebbe it we will either fail and have to quit/restart or succeed and be unable to top it.
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2017 03:12
|
|
|
As daring as it is, I'm going to vote kill on the side of caution.
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2017 03:12
|
|
|
EDIT: Changing my vote to Entebbe
CirclMastr fucked around with this message at 05:51 on Apr 11, 2017 |
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2017 03:12
|
|
|
 Let's give it our very Entebbest
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2017 03:13
|
|
|
Entebbe but with the backup airfield and not wrecking our lives completely.
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2017 03:14
|
|
|
We should kill the airfield. But I think someone should run a Raid on Lhasa in CMANO once Yooper releases the scenarios.
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2017 03:15
|
|
|
glynnenstein posted:Depending on era of missile, CMANO gives max ranges of 3, 6, or 8 nm. There's a turbogrog thread somewhere on the Matrix forums where you can post corrections and have the devs fix them in the DB. Zaodai posted:It seems odd to me that this game is one of those ultra-groggy sims and yet (apparently) artificially caps weapon ranges super hard and has poo poo damage models. As a filthy casual, I can't hope to see how that makes sense to grogs, but I'd love to know. The annoying thing is that missiles, by and by large, don't have a range. For example, air-to-air missiles are widely considered to have several range figures which matter, and none of them can take into account all of the factors necessary to know if a target is actually in range or not. Modern aircraft actually show the pilot several of these on a constantly changing scale that takes into account the relative positions, attitudes, and velocities of you and your prospective target (though nothing limits them to using just those factors). I can go into way too much detail on this if you're interested. CMANO isn't perfect, but it is pretty good.
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2017 03:18
|
|
|
As much as I really really like the raid option, gonna have to go with kill right now
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2017 03:24
|
|
|
Voting Kill It
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2017 03:24
|
|
|
Mr. Showtime posted:There's a turbogrog thread somewhere on the Matrix forums where you can post corrections and have the devs fix them in the DB. Here it is, good luck goons. The sane vote here is certainly to kill the airfield, but I can't stop myself from voting to Entebbe. Look at the production value of that movie poster, he have future history on our side.
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2017 03:27
|
|
|
Kill the airfield
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2017 03:27
|
|
|
gradenko_2000 posted:
Is this an intentional mispelling of Baloogan? Also, the CMANO dev team is quite small. They very smartly started with a good system and have been continuing development by adding extra grognard where applicable. The grognard-ary is made, not born. My vote is Kill, I worry about being able to pull this off within the engine in any reasonable way. pthighs fucked around with this message at 03:46 on Apr 11, 2017 |
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2017 03:28
|
|
|
On a side note we should buy some planes capable of using napalm for maximum
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2017 03:35
|
|
|
Okay, so the Entebbe idea sounds so utterly reckless that it just might actually work somehow. ...Though looking at the facts we might actually have a shot if we wanted to try it. It'd be risky as all hell, and we'd have to hurl every single plane we have at Lhasa...but if it worked we'd have our very own Gen 5 stealth fighter, fresh off the line and practically unkillable. It's a stupid idea, and will probably get a lot of people killed, myself included. So in other words, Entebbe, motherfuckers!
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2017 03:41
|
|
|
Marry, gently caress or kill? Kill
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2017 03:45
|
|
|
Yooper, You haven't set the orientation of the runways. They're currently at 0 degrees, but they should be nearish 90/270. You can reorient them with Editor -> Unit Actions -> Set Orientation. Normally it wouldn't matter, and it doesn't seem to affect taking off and landing orientation (Baloogaaaaaaan!  ), but it does actually makes a difference for dropping the anti-runway cluster bombs. Dropping these bombs parallel to the runway orientation does much more damage than dropping them crosswise to the runway. (This is also why I was saying we couldn't hurt the runways much. I was dropping them "across the street" not "down the road." Now that I know the right way to do it, we actually can heavily damage the runways even with only two Phantoms and Frogfoots.) Tythas posted:On a side note we should buy some planes capable of using napalm for maximum Frogfoots can carry incendiary bombs! 
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2017 03:45
|
|
|
Psawhn posted:Frogfoots can carry incendiary bombs!  
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2017 03:50
|
|
|
Frogfoots baby, let's make this runway a sewage ditch.
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2017 03:51
|
|
|
That loving poster sold it, Entebbe all the way.
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2017 03:56
|
|
|
Yooper posted:
Best thread of all time. I'm loving that I get to be the terrorist. Bacarruda fucked around with this message at 04:20 on Apr 11, 2017 |
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2017 04:12
|
|
|
Killing is obviously the right choice; that's why I'm voting Entebbe!
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2017 04:25
|
|
|
Bacarruda posted:We should kill the airfield. These are both true. We need to know how entebbe goes but I can't in good faith expose stockholders to risk like that. Kill, but run entebbe
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2017 04:33
|
|
|
Trying to take the airfield is absolutely insane, with a crazy low chance of success. That's just a fact. But..... with the J-20's being bleeding edge tech in a country with serious corruption and logistic problems BEFORE it pretty much collapsed, it seems highly likely at least a few will be grounded for maintenance. And while orders would be in place to destroy them before capture, it's unlikely that would be the first choice. It would be assumed that either there would be enough time to fly them out, or at least get a higher up to sign off on destroying the $100 million+ fighters before blowing them up. So a sudden strike would have a chance of capturing them intact, simply due to no one considering this even being possible. What's more, maybe we can be a little sneaky with the plane, since again, who would even consider this type of attack? The airfield gets regular transports in, right? Any chance we could rustle up a similar transport ourselves? Now, this would not be enough to fool anyone normally, but in the middle of a massive attack, maybe. Have the transport call out that it was attacked on the way in, it's escort assumed lost, and is making a crash landing. Maybe have a smoke generator on one engine for effect? At the very least may make the MANPADS and light AAA we may miss less likely to engage it. (To simulate this, make the transport neutral as it comes in?). The more I think about it, the more I like this. Even if/when it fails, we will gain quite the reputation. I would expect our future clients to offer some very exciting missions. So, ENTEBBE it is!
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2017 04:38
|
|
|
I am so, so tempted to go for Entebbe. It's too much of a risk though, and all we need is one lovely MANPADS or one AAA emplacement to still be active there and we are hosed. Trying to take it will take a lot longer too, which will give the J-20s plenty of time to return and light our aircraft up. I have to vote for killing the airfield
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2017 04:44
|
|
|
Kill the airfield.
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2017 04:46
|
|
|
Entebbe The Dragon If we go for this plan and someone flying didn't vote for it, and doesn't want to be flying in case they die on a ridiculous mission, I will offer to take the seat. After all, I apparently become a hostage anyway according to the poster! simplefish fucked around with this message at 04:57 on Apr 11, 2017 |
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2017 04:46
|
|
|
One more thing, while I think of it: is a platoon of dudes going to be enough to capture an airbase?
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2017 04:53
|
|
|
Look If you had One shot Or one opportunity To seize everything you ever wanted In one moment Would you capture it Or just let it slip? Crazycryodude fucked around with this message at 05:02 on Apr 11, 2017 |
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2017 04:58
|
|
|
I imagine China, a country with the largest standing army will better defend an airfield containing their top of the line J-20s. This isn't the Ugandan national guard. There is no way we would be able to take that air field.
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2017 05:01
|
|
|
Popete posted:I imagine China, a country with the largest standing army will better defend an airfield containing their top of the line J-20s. This isn't the Ugandan national guard. There is no way we would be able to take that air field. Oh come now, what would they need to defend it from? The Indians would never be this foolish.
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2017 05:07
|
|
|
Popete posted:I imagine China, a country with the largest standing army will better defend an airfield containing their top of the line J-20s. This isn't the Ugandan national guard. There is no way we would be able to take that air field. I don't know man. They have issues moving land units around, we were told that last mission. They have the rogue general to deal with, the Indians to deal with, and if I remember correctly they're embroiled in another conflict elsewhere in this timeline. An airbase that they think is safe from land attack may not actually have that many people hanging around on sentry duty.
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2017 05:10
|
|
|
We only get one shot, let's not miss our chance to blow This opportunity comes once in a lifetime, yo The genius of the plan is in how insane it is. Nobody in their right mind would ever try it, so who would defend against it? The Chinese have been through a nuclear war, are way out on the tenuous end of their supply lines, and are throwing everything they've got at the TLA and Volunteers and STILL losing. Why would they spare anything beyond a skeleton garrison for the airbase when those men are desperately needed to stop the Volunteers from breaking through and taking the airbase anyways? We can pull this off. This can be what puts us on the map. On EVERYONE's map. Do you want to spend another 5 years as a mid-rate PMC struggling to build up a reputation? Do you really want to let a once in a century opportunity slip through our fingers because we're too afraid to risk it? Or do you want to become gods among men? Crazycryodude fucked around with this message at 05:17 on Apr 11, 2017 |
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2017 05:14
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 29, 2024 02:08 |
|
|
My heart says kill, because I'm sure some rear end in a top hat with a 25mm will shoot down the transport and ruin everything. But this is so absolutely insane that we need to try it anyway just because the success outcome will be utterly out of left field so gently caress it, let's do it live. Entebbe this fucker.
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2017 05:27
|
|
