|
I used to love Strike Commander! But I was so bad at it. I have to look over the equipment choices but I think our squadron should be called The Shrieking Deadbirds.
|
#
¿
Mar 29, 2017 16:01
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 24, 2024 21:22 |
|
|
Dorf me in as Guns Guns Guns. I have not read the update yet but glancing at the thread votes I see an opportunity for eco-terrorism for which I will vote because I got into the mercenary game for all the worst reasons.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 31, 2017 16:23
|
|
|
Enfield303 posted:In the face of the growing tide of Eco terrorists I switch votes to supporting India in Tibet. Well I would also prefer sanctioned terrorism but we don't always get to choose what types of terrorism we get paid for.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 31, 2017 16:33
|
|
|
Enfield303 posted:But we can, first we build up a shiny reputation. Then we do shady poo poo and nobody will believe it plus we don't cut ourselves off from future suppliers. You make a lot of good points and I see your logic but I'm an impatient psychopath and I want to terrorize now.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 31, 2017 16:50
|
|
|
Gotta go with the most evil option, which is the lobbyist in most cases but always the lobbyist if Abramoff is the lobbyist in question.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 1, 2017 03:14
|
|
|
Good Dumplings posted:Also good luck resolution associates!!! This is good but the real test of a PMC's marketing/pr department is the first time we bomb a place of worship.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 1, 2017 20:17
|
|
|
Crazycryodude posted:Are the rebels NATO backed, or is it really just in name only? I think we can probably expect to see mostly old Soviet/Chinese stuff. Yeah, even NATO backing doesn't always imply NATO arms.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 1, 2017 21:04
|
|
|
nothing to seehere posted:We are being paid 6 million for this, and have 100 million. Each flight hour is 0.01% of our takings for the mission. Given that, the extra sensor range granted by the CWACS is worth the cost. I totally agree with this. The only real reason we wouldn't take the CWACS is if for some reason we can't work out the runway time for it and and its escort. Crazycryodude posted:We've got what, like ~$170 million in the bank? That's enough for a (very heavily discounted and out of date) boat and the shells to keep it sinking defenseless fishermen for a while. Plus I'm sure we can talk AngerPEACE into helping out with the costs. I am convinced! I vote bote. Cathode Raymond fucked around with this message at 22:55 on Apr 1, 2017 |
|
#
¿
Apr 1, 2017 22:52
|
|
|
HerpicleOmnicron5 posted:you people do not know how to cut corners Your call sign should be Junk Bond  I agree with Cryo and Davin, a mix of Gripens and definitely send up the AWACS. The only corners we should be cutting are ones involving civilian safety.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 2, 2017 02:43
|
|
|
JcDent posted:Can CMANO simulate a rogue Gripen pilot spotting a TLA MANPAD section and going GUNS GUNS GUNS while ranting something about dead corgies and bootleg dog food*? Excuse you, but I am Guns Guns Guns, and I am not racist. However there is a non-zero chance that I hallucinate that any given civilian might be a threat to one or more corgies in which case I would take the appropriate action to prevent harm to corgie-kind. I would expect you to do the same. Also everyone talking about profit margins, do keep in mind that we should be willing to reduce our margins or even eat a small loss on our very first mission if it means making a good impression and reducing the chance of an unexpected disaster.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 2, 2017 16:14
|
|
|
Crazycryodude posted:Endorsing Bacarruda's plan.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 2, 2017 19:47
|
|
|
That Abramoff is a real piece of
|
|
#
¿
Apr 3, 2017 17:34
|
|
|
Dark_Swordmaster posted:He's going to get arrested. Insider trading or a DUI, either seems likely at this point. Maybe both at once!
|
|
#
¿
Apr 3, 2017 19:37
|
|
|
After Abramof dies of alcohol poisoning let's pick a new lobbyist or arms dealer or whatever that gets us set up with way too many poorly thought-out Cold War nuclear weapons. Davy Crockets, nuclear torpedoes/depth charges, dumbfire nuclear air to air rockets, that sort of thing.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 4, 2017 02:17
|
|
|
ManifunkDestiny posted:4 Frogfoots, 2 UAVs and maybe 2 F4s if we can have them operate as Wild Weasels This gets my vote. Don't know why everyone is so wild for F4's unless we're going to cram 10 gun pods on one and I can fly it, in which case we should get all the F4's. This thread moves really fast so I'm going to post a standing vote for buying SCUDS or something similar in case scuds become available and I miss a vote. I can't begin to tell you how important big, dumb missiles are to my plans, and to the mark this company will make on history.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 5, 2017 04:31
|
|
|
Quinntan posted:There was a test where they strapped 15 SUU-11 gunpodss to an F-4 and went all moar dakka with it, I posted a picture of it earlier. Why don't I see anyone voting for 8 F-4's with 15 gunpods each, which works out to 120 gunpods total? That's so many gunpods. Almost halfway to being enough gunpods.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 5, 2017 04:40
|
|
|
This phantom fetish will be our ruin. Phantom-Frog You'll all regret this phantom craze when some of them fail to take off and the rest fail to turn. And then again when we run out of money.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 5, 2017 19:41
|
|
|
Bacarruda posted:
Hey, know who speaks Hindi and Sikh and Bengali? Guns Guns Guns speaks Hindi and Sikh and Bengali. Looks like he'd better suit up! And no, this  Anyway I like Bac Plan A
|
|
#
¿
Apr 5, 2017 22:41
|
|
|
Yes to rifle mercs Having some dudes running around causing trouble is probably really cheap compared to launching missiles all over the place (not that one is a replacement for the other) and also we can get ground intel and other benefits that way,
|
|
#
¿
Apr 6, 2017 01:08
|
|
|
I'm leaning toward package B w/vehicles right now. Those BMP's will make the troops a lot more mobile and effective.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 6, 2017 03:05
|
|
|
HannibalBarca posted:Option C Now you did notice the...erm, suboptimal...ratio of equipment to trooper in that hooligan outfit, right?
|
|
#
¿
Apr 6, 2017 04:19
|
|
|
I would also like to go up in one of the SAAB's.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 6, 2017 15:26
|
|
|
gradenko_2000 posted:If we're letting in goon backseaters, hows about putting all the AWACS sign-ups all join as the S 100B's five-man crew? If that AWACS gets shot down and we can't replace it we've got much bigger problems than pilot attrition.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 6, 2017 15:27
|
|
|
Dong Quixote posted:
I think just the act of getting fired upon is probably what triggered the faction freak out. Although, then again, how would the 747 or anyone else know that an SA-9 fired on it if it didn't get hit?
|
|
#
¿
Apr 7, 2017 14:53
|
|
That 747 probably had it coming, to go low and slow enough to get picked off by an SA-9
|
Davin Valkri posted:As play goes on, will we get the opportunity to replace Jack with someone more professional? Or is this part of the fun? I don't recall drunkards being part of the squadron in Strike Commander... Jack is a professional Evil Lobbyist, and he is complying to the Evil Lobbyist Code of Conduct to the letter. If you wanted someone less evil, you should have voted for that murderous juggalo.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 7, 2017 16:48
|
|
|
Phi230 posted:Lol just you wait until the Ground Element Phoenix Command This might seem like a strange time to make this request given the increasingly grim outlook for the prospects of the ground team's survival but could my pilot, Guns Guns Guns, join the ground team as a riflemerc until a flight position opens up? If he dies to a strange mine misadventure or planning negligence or ancillary effects from evil lobbying I will understand.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 7, 2017 17:17
|
|
|
Yooper posted:Sure! Or it can be your brother, Guns Guns Guns Guns, and you can keep your slot. The two LP's will be run separately. Phi's gonna have his baby, I'll run this, there'll be some overlap. But for the most part if his people die a horrible and fantastic death it won't light all our jets on fire or anything. It will be his grandfather, Guns.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 7, 2017 18:42
|
|
|
I am excited to hear that our drones are so advanced that they can move through both thin air and solid ground with equal ease.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 10, 2017 19:38
|
|
|
aphid_licker posted:Weaponized graboids would really take this fictional universe to the next level imo You're right, and I can't help but feel like turning our drones into underground anti-runway drillbombs might eventually be the easiest solution to this and other enemy runway problems. But for now I like the idea of dropping the cluster bombs to ding up the runway, bringing bunker busters to wreck the fuel tanks, and bringing enough armament to destroy the flimsy ammo structures but not bending over backwards to bring enough to destroy more hardened buildings in the off chance that the Chinese built new ammo bunkers. I suppose if the Chinese strike force is fueled and ready to go it's like Bacarruda said, we just try and dent the runway and wreck planes on the ground and make peace with the fact that the ones that make it into the air are basically beyond our capabilities to deal with, but that's what we get for attacking a great power's commercial shipping. All in all, I'd say things are going pretty smoothly, and I have absolute confidence that some of our pilots will survive this mission.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 10, 2017 20:14
|
|
|
xthetenth posted:Why am I suddenly wondering if we can entebbe their backup airbase under the cover of enough jamming that we might have a chance of getting their jets to land there? I think we're going an airfield too far. Then again, if we're only risking someone else's troops, it might be worth taking the risk.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 10, 2017 21:29
|
|
|
Yooper posted:Are we in idea zone or "ask the Indians zone" ? At this point I'd ask them kind of casually, maybe slip it in between small talk, maybe with a sudden, awkward seque. Something like, "Hey, how's everything going? Good? That's good. I'm good too. I just got back from my parents' 25th anniversary party and it was a lot of fun! We all went skydiving and it was a blast. Hey, speaking of parachutes, how many dead paratroopers are you willing to trade for one or more intact J-20's? If the answer is 'a lot' well then I have an idea about a certain airfield..."
|
|
#
¿
Apr 11, 2017 01:07
|
|
|
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
|
|
|
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
|
|
|
Strict Parenting, No to Light Attackers I was about to say "yes" to light attackers but then I realized the main reason I'd be doing it is to get pilot attrition up so I could get my pilot in a plane a tad bit faster. Those SK 60's are just so slow and they have to be so close to use their rockets that I don't see any of them coming back.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 11, 2017 17:52
|
|
|
CirclMastr posted:Jack wasn't the one who sank two nominally civilian freighters and a Chinese frigate, you know. Those probably won't be the last nominally civilian ships we sink. Unless we don't make it out of India, that is. I, for one, think things are going swimmingly and I am optimistic that after we flee India our new heightened profile will attract just the kind of work this outfit was made for.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 12, 2017 03:07
|
|
|
Zaodai posted:We should hire Jack the ghost of Johnny Cochran to defend him. Jack is merely moving through different stages of his Evil Lobbyist lifecycle. His upcoming prison time is a natural part of this cycle, and we should not interfere.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 15, 2017 21:24
|
|
|
This is going to come as no surprise but I say we sign on with Angerpeace and enforce sustainable fishing practices the only way we know how. Through air strikes.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 16, 2017 05:01
|
|
|
El Spamo posted:Gah, speaking of which there are no good choices up there in the arctic. As much as I love those icy reaches it's a choice between two soulless corporate pirates, or actual literal pirates. I don't know what you're talking about. All pirates are good choices, and all piracy is a good idea. And in case none of you noticed, humanity has become hopelessly contentious and I have real concerns for its future. That is why it's important to get in good with the whales so that in thousands of years when humans are gone and whales inherit the earth, their historians will sing songs about the brave and noble Hayard Gunnes who took a stand against the reckless fishing practices of their fellow apes.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 16, 2017 17:30
|
|
|
I'm still on the fence regarding whether we should spare our gripens for basically just A2A and farm out our air support to more economical strike craft or try and roll with a more versatile but much more expensive gripen heavy fleet. But I am pretty much convinced that we should not skimp on EW or SAMs. I think we should pick up the growler over the prowler and we should spring for the SA-22's. We'll never be able to prevent a Strict Parenting-type destruction of our airfield by a determined world power like China, but it might help deter small PMC's or overstretched national air forces.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 16, 2017 20:17
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 24, 2024 21:22 |
|
|
I think some old SCUDS or comparably shoddy ballistic missiles would be more sensible than a B-52 if we need to just blow up a big chunk of the earth at some point.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 16, 2017 20:34
|
|