|
Post by ProkAdama on Apr 4, 2012 22:34:46 GMT
The Invasion of Eastern Russia, 1954A Historical MomentThe UT responds with the following: 4,000 infantrymen armed with Model 666 200 Marksmen armed with Model 666 Marksmen 40 Москва Medium Tanks 30 Петербург IFV/APC (Armed with guided missiles) 150 ZSU "Zamalchi" AA Tank (Quad AA MG) 806 TuMiGil-21 Jet Fighters Their positions are unknown until a scout reveals them; the CDU and Alaskan forces can now land at any area indicated by red (beach line).
|
|
|
Post by number4 on Apr 5, 2012 0:34:26 GMT
I don't remember you winning the Surface-to-Air Missile auction. :l
|
|
|
Post by ProkAdama on Apr 5, 2012 0:35:13 GMT
OH SHI...
Damn I completely forgot that the tech didn't exist yet.
I'll change those to AA tanks.
|
|
|
Post by ProkAdama on Apr 5, 2012 0:40:18 GMT
I'm sorry dude. Wanna get this battle going tommorrow?
|
|
|
Post by number4 on Apr 5, 2012 1:09:44 GMT
Palkien Republic Hawks fly in an aerial sweep in one hundred eleven squads of 6, hunting for enemy aircraft. Three squads are assisted by 2 Falcon heavy fighters each. Upon discovering an enemy squadron, the Hawks will use superior maneuverability to gain the six o'clock position, and will fire at the enemy jets with their .70cal machineguns. Should an enemy jet gain the six, the Hawk pilots will use a tactic similar to the Frolov Chakra to reverse the tables. Upon establishing aerial superiority, the Hawk pilots will begin sweeping for enemy air units once again.
The Harrier groundattack planes fly in a random directional pattern to reduce anti-air targetability, flying in fifteen squads of three, escorted by 2 Hawks each; these formations are hunting for enemy armour. Upon discovery of armour or footmobiles, the Hawks will scramble with the Harriers, similar appearance allowing for relative ambiguity. The Harriers will drop their payload in sufficient quantity to disable the enemy and nothing more, and then will continue the sweep.
Palkien Republic infantry are deployed along the easternmost shore, and will move in four hundred 4 man squads; making slow, careful progress through the woods. Upon enemy contact they will drop to a defendable location and combine fire on individual enemy soldiers to reduce incoming fire. Upon clearing the immediate area, the soldiers will continue their progress through the forest.
|
|
|
Post by ProkAdama on Apr 5, 2012 1:54:04 GMT
The Tumigil jets fly in squads of 8, making a total of 100 squads. They will will attempt to get behind the opposing aircraft and machinegun them, using their main nose machinegun and the twin machinegun pods. (3 guns total) They will fly in delta formations, and when attacked from behind, the middle 2 go up, the 2 after that down and the other 4 on the sides will fly to their appropriate sides. They will then do the same 'Frolov Chakra' maneuver to cone into the back of the enemy squad and use all guns to eliminate them. If that fails, they fly out to the sides and repeat the maneuver. After the enemy squad is down, they will continue to search the skies for new targets. They target the ground attack planes equally, and the distinctively larger cockpit is easily noticed and spotted out. The AA tanks are painted dark green, and covered in netting, very hard to find in the dense, Russian forest. They move only when needed, and the turrets move only when an enemy craft is in range. The guns point and fire in front of the moving aircraft, therefore the enemy jets fly into the stream of bullets unless they are quick enough to go over or underneath it. The tanks and IFVs are painted green and netted as well. The noise of the engine is not too loud, but it is heard. Therefore, the engines are turned off when a squad is seen moving toward the armor. When in range, the armor will without any warning fire upon the unsuspecting soldiers. The footmen are covered in green uniforms and carry green guns. They move in squads of 500 squads of 8, which is still divided into two groups of 4 that move a short distance from each other. When attacked, they prone and fire at the location. The second squad then fires upon the enemy from a distance away, the enemy soldiers unsuspecting. The marksmen go alone. They carry green rifles as well, and green uniforms. They and the guns are completely netted and made similar to a Siberian Pea Shrub when they are laying down and aiming.
|
|
AgentFawkes
Leader of the DPR
Operative Anton Kyznetsov
Posts: 1,057
|
Post by AgentFawkes on Apr 5, 2012 2:27:07 GMT
Prokhor, no offence, but I'm not sure that your fighters CAN pull off a Frolov Charka, mainly because only 6 planes can CURRENTLY pull it off, and 4's jets are designed to be super-maneuverable.
|
|
|
Post by ProkAdama on Apr 5, 2012 2:34:21 GMT
No offence, but my engines are also super maneuverable.
If not, then I say he's using modern tech. Or he can't pull it off int he first place.
Why would his planes be better if we paid the same for them?
|
|
|
Post by number4 on Apr 5, 2012 2:45:40 GMT
The amount of fail in this is incredible. Design, prok. My planes have geometry that support maneuverability over speed. Yours support speed over maneuverability. Meaning your planes are perfectly designed for getting the fuck out of my airspace. That's like saying if I built a biplane, right now, it would equal your jets since I paid the same. Sorry prok, but design does count to a certain degree.
|
|
|
Post by ProkAdama on Apr 5, 2012 3:09:15 GMT
|
|
|
Post by number4 on Apr 5, 2012 3:25:58 GMT
Super-duper engines =/= awesome maneuverability, dumbfuck. For example: a propeller driven aircraft can outmaneuver a jet. That was why the Americans got their asses kicked and had to come up with Top Gun, because their jets were losing to prop planes in a dogfight. You don't give a shit about geometry? You know who else said that? The creators of multitudes of FAILED aircraft projects. Think before you post.
|
|
shark
Battle Mod
You can't always do what's right. You can always do what's left.
Posts: 1,167
|
Post by shark on Apr 5, 2012 3:47:09 GMT
Let's remember to keep this civil, I can see that Prok is trying to be nice; calling him a "dumbfuck" isn't going to help anything. I've got temporary mod until Mal gets back, and I'm not affiliated with anybody in the battle ATM, so I'll mod for you guys if you are cool with that.
|
|
|
Post by ProkAdama on Apr 5, 2012 11:44:22 GMT
"dumbfuck"
Did I curse you out at least once on this forum? The answer is NO. Do you know why? The rules say to keep the cursing to a minimum. Yet you use it a damn lot.
Yeah, I had no experience at all with jets, but you don't have to call me a dumbfuck, you don't even know me. I might be the best kid in my school, who knows.
(I remember Snipes saying that the materials to produce these jets would not appear until the 80s-90s, and 4 told him to be quiet. Is this true?)
The MiGs can survive a stall better than your guys, and is faster. Right?
Also, the MiG was made for mass-production, cheap and they have sturdy airframes, and because of the cheap delta wind design the cost goes down further. Does this take into account; maybe I can purchase them for $600; have more of them but they would be less maneuverable than the whatever 4 has? Currently I see no dogfight advantages with a swept back wing design.
For some reason, there were only a few airplanes and concepts back in the ww2 days for forward-swept wing designs, they were all further researched only in 1980s+. I wonder why?
|
|
|
Post by number4 on Apr 5, 2012 14:11:38 GMT
I'm sorry, I was in a bad mood yesterday. My apologies, I have nothing against you.
This was in reference to a forward-swept-wing variable geometry design, not the Hawks. I've since scrapped said design, I thought it was ugly.
Faster? Yes. Stall better? Depends.
Yours could cost twice as much as mine and I'd still have better maneuverability. Where have we seen this? Again, prop planes versus jets. Or if it makes more sense, an F35 against an Su37.
Perhaps because people were sticking with what they knew worked instead of taking risks for a sweet design? There are lots of simple concepts that could be understood but aren't.
Whatever. If you want me to back off my troops so damn badly, I'll do it. Until then, the *concept* of my jets will outmaneuver the *concept* of yours, and the *concept* of your jets will outrun the *concept* of mine. Sort of like... An F16 against an F14. Is this fair enough?
|
|
|
Post by ProkAdama on Apr 5, 2012 14:23:52 GMT
Yeah, I did some research. Once a forward swept wing goes into a stall, it is hard*er* to get out of it than a conventional.
Also, for a delta wing (MiG-21) turns take more energy, while going in up/down directions will take less. The delta wing design also allows a durable one piece airframe. I could be wrong; please go ahead and confirm this.
|
|
Sgtsammac
Ruler of the United Kingdom
Admin Acc
Posts: 3,288
|
Post by Sgtsammac on Apr 5, 2012 14:35:04 GMT
Ok, I'm not 100% sure what's going on here, but I do remember way back in the beginning of the game saying that design was important. The first semi auto rifles had an advantage over the bolt actions, even though they were both tier one standard rifles. It's all how you use things. If you pretend every weapon has 10 points to put into things, an M16 puts more of those points into accuracy and less into damage, where the AK does the opposite. But they're still "equal" because it's only 10 points. An upgrade would grant the weapon extra points.
So as far as your jets go, yes, one jet may be more maneuverable, and another faster, while staying "equal". It then comes down to tactics, whoever uses their "advantage" better wins. I know little about airfights, but a semi rifle vs bolt rifle, the semi can't take advantage of its speed if every time the shooter sticks his head out a well aimed (higher bolt accuracy) shot pins him down again, or just kills him. (Tactic is effectively sniping) On the other hand, a soldier can't take good aim if he has a hail of bullets flying at him (Suppressive fire from semi's).
Now I don't know if 4's jets can pull off something that is almost impossible in current times, that's pushing things rather far, but I will grant him the ability to out maneuver other jets 'in general' due to design.
|
|
|
Post by ProkAdama on Apr 5, 2012 15:00:53 GMT
Well then, I know a simple maneuver instead of "Frolov Charka". The planes fly in squads of 8, in deltas. Upon contact (enemy in front) they cone in onto the enemy in front and fire all guns, the main MG and 2 machinegun pods mounted on wings. When they are attacked from behind, they will do the following: Middle 2 fly up; the outer 2 fly down, the outer 2 fly up, the outermost fly down. They do a loop all the way until they can cone in onto the enemy squad.
|
|
|
Post by number4 on Apr 5, 2012 15:26:04 GMT
Fighters with speed>maneuver are better for interceptor roles, whereas maneuvre>speed fighters are better for air superiority. Therefore, the TuMiGils are better suited for downing bomber squadrons than the Hawks are, and the Hawks are better suited for obtaining dominance over other fighters. Thus, the TuMiGils would stop a full out carpet bombing, but the Hawks would protect a full out carpet bombing. In a dogfighting scenario; maneuver>speed. :l
Anyways, my counter will be daring, risky, and hopefully creative enough to work: The 6 Hawk Squadrons will fly in a reverse delta; outermost planes are furthest forward. Upon discovering what the TuMiGil pilots intend to do, the outermost Hawks will bank outwards and pull into a tight spin to attack from a perpendicular angle, the middlemost Hawks will do the same, but from below, and the others will do the same from above. It's a bit risky, but the resulting outcome should be a wall of .70 bullets right in front of the enemy jets, and the pilots of the Hawks will need to take extra care not to hit each other with bullets or planes. What do you think? :b
Failing that, the Hawks will trail the movements of the TuMiGils one at a time, combining fire to slowly decommission the enemy squadron, IE ganging up on single fighters to reduce the amount of incoming fire. The Hawks will always fly in pairs or triplets, and will trace fire ahead of enemy jets to allow the .70s to impact with the faster moving TuMiGils. Once the enemy squad has been reduced to three, the Hawks will use the tactic they used in Taiwan: trailing at the 5 and 7 o'clock positions, trading fire.
If the Hawks are unable to gain a twotoone advantage, they will continue as before; all following the loops of a single enemy, and combining to eliminate.
|
|
|
Post by ProkAdama on Apr 5, 2012 15:46:40 GMT
The TuMiGils, upon seeing this (remember the old technique will be used several times, before the Hawks counter it) will (instead of completing the curve) split. The two split squads of 4 that are going down and up will again split in two and move in opposite directions. They will then turn back in squads of 2 together and target individual planes. That way the odds will be 2 v 1 in the dogfight. After destroying a plane the 2 plane squad will simply split into opposite directions, they do a circle and join again to target another plane. That way there are always 2 planes attacking an individual, and when they are not attacking they will be far away from each other (weird idea, but it looks quite efficient, considering I have 8 in a squad and you have 6)
|
|
Sgtsammac
Ruler of the United Kingdom
Admin Acc
Posts: 3,288
|
Post by Sgtsammac on Apr 5, 2012 15:54:50 GMT
Ugh dam, I had a bunch of stuff typed then I went to the first page to check something.
Long story short so far: 4 has current advantage because dogfight=maneuverability. 4's teamwork sounds solid and his jets should have the turning ability to pull it off, but they are also slightly out numbered.
I feel like 4 is going to gain air control. For the faster jets to have come out victorious they would need rear firing weapons of some kind, using their speed to force the slower jets into a game of catchup before suddenly tearing into them using an aft gun of some kind.
That said, I honestly don't comprehend the intricacies of what you two have said, I'm working off of what I've been able to understand. I'd have to see it happen in full 3D to fully understand.
(Edit: Oh sorry, you're still posting, I'll wait for a final decision, my bad)
|
|
|
Post by number4 on Apr 5, 2012 15:59:33 GMT
The Hawks will fight together and offensively rather than apart and defensively; so your chances of catching them alone are very, very slim. Regardless: Should the tactics previously mentioned by me fail, the Hawks will perform increasingly complex loops and twists to gain the 6 o'clock. Once again, the Hawks will fight for a five and seven o'clock position advantage, not attacking the other jets but not keeping them out of sight, so as to fall into an ambush; which would be counterproductive. Thus, the Hawks will concentrate every bullet on one target but remain aware of the others in the sky.
Should an enemy gain the six, the Hawks will turn and attack the enemy jets head on. If possible, the pilots will use sunlight to their advantage, attacking with their back to the light.
As a last resort, the Hawks will fall into a dive, and use their superior maneuverability to lure the TuMiGils into following them (presumably guns blazing), and will pull up before they crash, leaving the faster TuMiGils to turn into ground pizza (:b). If the Hawks are not followed into the dive, they will break off and rejoin another squadron and live to fight another battle.
(You can pootis verdict now, Malachi. c: )
|
|
|
Post by ProkAdama on Apr 5, 2012 16:00:07 GMT
I pretty much have 2 plane squads now, using the speed to GTFO, do a circle and come back attacking one plane together, splitting apart, and doing the GTFO maneuver again. Since I have more planes in a squad this should work with minimal losses :/
|
|
Sgtsammac
Ruler of the United Kingdom
Admin Acc
Posts: 3,288
|
Post by Sgtsammac on Apr 5, 2012 16:21:38 GMT
Ok...
Air superiority goes to 4 as every time Prokhor's jets come in for their run, 4's screw out of the way. The larger force of Prokhor however does manage to inflict heavy losses before losing the battle.
At whatever point you decide to retreat, 4 will take half the damage you took. So fighting to the last man means he loses half his force. If you retreat at 50% loss, he loses 25%.
Oh and 4, subtract another 100 losses because as your jets try to lure Prokhor's towards the ground, his AA tanks chew into you.
|
|
|
Post by ProkAdama on Apr 5, 2012 16:29:40 GMT
So my MiGs will always be useless against Hawks, no matter what Lets say that I fight to last man; he establishes aerial superiority. Lets say I win on the ground. What then, he can't possibly take over Russia that way :/
|
|
Sgtsammac
Ruler of the United Kingdom
Admin Acc
Posts: 3,288
|
Post by Sgtsammac on Apr 5, 2012 16:55:15 GMT
Not no matter what, but you'd have to out number him by more than you did, enough to overwhelm him so that every time he makes a turn to get out of your sights, he's in someone else's sights instead. Or you'd have to modify your MiGs in some way to beat someone that can turn quicker, like the defense weapons. Rear facing rockets perhaps.
Like he said earlier, speed is good for intercepting, not so much for dogfighting. Now if you could pull the fight into higher altitudes where your beefier engines can keep going better than his, you might stand more of a chance.
Or if your MiGs had a lot of armor so they could stand up to more hits, but that would drop overall speed back to the same as his, while still being less maneuverable.
As for what happens next, if he owns the air, he can call in bombers to his heart's content, which would make owning the ground hard for you. But if you can still win the ground even though he can call in bombers and heli's then you're right, he couldn't take the country. Luckily for you, bombers' worst enemy are AA tanks, which you have. So even though he can keep them in the air, he can't just toss them around where ever he wants.
|
|
|
Post by ProkAdama on Apr 5, 2012 17:01:57 GMT
I did some research; delta wings allow a good sturdy one piece airframe. My planes can withstand guns more than his.
I can't use rockets; AA missiles weren't invented yet.
If I have to outnumber him, then why do I pay the same amount of money for the planes? MiGs were made to be mass produced and cheap. ...
|
|
Sgtsammac
Ruler of the United Kingdom
Admin Acc
Posts: 3,288
|
Post by Sgtsammac on Apr 5, 2012 19:27:15 GMT
You pay the same because they're still rated the same overall. I explained that already. Just build a second type of jet for dogfighting and buy some of those. This is exactly why I wanted to add a point based unit builder, but it was deemed too complicated.
And AA missiles weren't, but I thought unguided rockets were o.0 I could be wrong though.
|
|
|
Post by number4 on Apr 5, 2012 19:36:14 GMT
My jets only carry a single .70calibre machine gun, and that's all they need. That's 17.5mm, and it's verging on the level of autocannon, so I don't need any other weapons to go along with that :b If you're referring to your planes being able to take more hits, then you're probably right. However, .70calibre will still leave a mark.
Rockets are unguided, we have that tech. Just an idea for you to play with until we get SAMs. (;
Relatively speaking, you do pay less. Remember, you do get almost a million dollars a day. I get $15k. :l
In any case, I'll be pulling out of Russia. What with you buying Martyr off with APCs x3
The Hawk, Harrier, and Falcon pilots fall back to Palkien airbases in Alaska and Taiwan. The 1600 Palkien Republic troops were found out to have never left base; they had committed insubordination and stayed home. Those troops were immediately discharged and imprisoned, and replaced. -insert number here depending on Prok's losses- amount of Hawks were destroyed.
|
|
AgentFawkes
Leader of the DPR
Operative Anton Kyznetsov
Posts: 1,057
|
Post by AgentFawkes on Apr 5, 2012 19:39:25 GMT
(aww, 4, you ruined the surprise.) Due to the recently signed Treaty between the UDKA and UT, and the out-of-battle agreement reached between the CDU and UT, all forces are withdrawn from Russian airspace and ground.
|
|