Missles

Combatcontrol88 · Post by **Combatcontrol88** » 2007-03-08 19:04

Well I love the Mod i play it alot and I am very pleased. I am a big Fast Mover fan in real life and I think that in PR they are kinda jipped. I would bow down to the DEV's if they could give me this....
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v7zKPfmSKj0

eddie · Post by **eddie** » 2007-03-08 19:40

So your thread title should be JDAM, not missiles?

BLind · Post by **BLind** » 2007-03-08 19:52

that expolsion was a bit of an anti climax

[PR]ARRC|Gringo · Post by **[PR]ARRC|Gringo** » 2007-03-08 20:22

lol, Agree, Workship that!!!

Sneak Attack · Post by **Sneak Attack** » 2007-03-09 01:04

bombs fall, missiles fly

Guerra · Post by **Guerra** » 2007-03-09 02:45

The guy talking was an *******. They killed Civilians. What a disgusting and dishonorable thing to do.

Desertfox · Post by **Desertfox** » 2007-03-09 03:08

Guerra wrote:The guy talking was an *******. They killed Civilians. What a disgusting and dishonorable thing to do.

If your serious, please tell me what position you are in to judge by 15 seconds of video?

Randleman5102 · Post by **Randleman5102** » 2007-03-09 03:22

Lol I liked the video.

I wish we could call in airstrikes, like have a squad channel that links you directly to pilots and you can direct their fire. Or maybe a class that has a "radio" that can contact airplanes.

Raniak · Post by **Raniak** » 2007-03-09 03:33

Guerra wrote:The guy talking was an *******. They killed Civilians. What a disgusting and dishonorable thing to do.

"Marines took small arms fire and RPG fire from mutiple levels and windows from this hotel"
Something that fire at soldier isn't a civilian... well... it can be but it deserve to die...

Edit: explosion: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JqogUtPc ... ed&search=
crater: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8SegTQhM ... ed&search=

Combatcontrol88 · Post by **Combatcontrol88** » 2007-03-09 05:03

Guerra wrote:The guy talking was an *******. They killed Civilians. What a disgusting and dishonorable thing to do.

wow...your a dumbass please tell me you just didnt make that post. If you are serious then I really have no respect for you at all with that comment. Your the kind of person I cant stand. Next Hotel that we hit with a JDAM you should go inside of it and video tape our dishonorable actions and our evil ways then get back to me on that one.

Smitty4212 · Post by **Smitty4212** » 2007-03-09 06:15

Relax guys

They were taking fire from the hotel... hotel is now gone. I don't think any of us are in a position to say whether or not anyone innocent was killed.

ClaudioPolez · Post by **ClaudioPolez** » 2007-03-09 09:26

I know this is off topicish and I'll probably get flamed but whatever

There is a school of thought, that would suggest dropping a 2000lb in what 'appears' (none of us know for sure) to be civilian area as a counter for small arms fire is a slight over-reaction and would not endear you to the local populace.

The Marines may have been taking fire from that location, but I can't help but think that the amount of heavy weaponry being used will in the end prove to be counter productive. Fair enough the bomb deals with the immediate issue and kills 1 or 100 insurgents firing at the marines, but how many does it create?

*flame retardent suit on*

On Topic - calling in airstrikes in game would be wicked, but maybe that would nerf the commander position.

MadTommy · Post by **MadTommy** » 2007-03-09 09:40

ClaudioPolez wrote:*flame retardent suit on*

i hope its done up tight. lol

Red Halibut · Post by **Red Halibut** » 2007-03-09 13:04

ClaudioPolez wrote:I know this is off topicish and I'll probably get flamed but whatever

There is a school of thought, that would suggest dropping a 2000lb in what 'appears' (none of us know for sure) to be civilian area as a counter for small arms fire is a slight over-reaction and would not endear you to the local populace.

The Marines may have been taking fire from that location, but I can't help but think that the amount of heavy weaponry being used will in the end prove to be counter productive. Fair enough the bomb deals with the immediate issue and kills 1 or 100 insurgents firing at the marines, but how many does it create?

*flame retardent suit on*

On Topic - calling in airstrikes in game would be wicked, but maybe that would nerf the commander position.

I can't believe you would post such ridiculous simplistic twaddle! How on earth would calling in airstrikes nerf the commander's position?

ClaudioPolez · Post by **ClaudioPolez** » 2007-03-09 13:36

classic.

Determined · Post by **Determined** » 2007-03-09 14:07

ClaudioPolez wrote:I know this is off topicish and I'll probably get flamed but whatever

There is a school of thought, that would suggest dropping a 2000lb in what 'appears' (none of us know for sure) to be civilian area as a counter for small arms fire is a slight over-reaction and would not endear you to the local populace.

The Marines may have been taking fire from that location, but I can't help but think that the amount of heavy weaponry being used will in the end prove to be counter productive. Fair enough the bomb deals with the immediate issue and kills 1 or 100 insurgents firing at the marines, but how many does it create?

*flame retardent suit on*

On Topic - calling in airstrikes in game would be wicked, but maybe that would nerf the commander position.

I have to ask how long you have been in the military and how many urban combat missions you have been on?

Reason I say this is quite simple, the military has systems in place that have to be fulfilled before one can engage the enemy with deadly force. Obvioulsy the system for returning or engaging your rifle is a lot simpler than one where you are requesting a 2000lb JDAM. Fighting in an urban environment is highly dangerous and a buzzsaw against the attacking force. Defenses are easily set up as are booby traps. If I am a platoon leader tasked with clearing a part of town then it is my responsibility to keep in mind not only the safety of my troops but the INNOCENT civilians in the area of conflict.

So now here I sit locked in a street to street battle in a relatively deserted part of town (by deserted I mean no real civilian numbers, just insurgents) and I come across a particular part of town that is giving me trouble. At one end is a heavily defended tall hotel like structure that overlooks my area of focus. The insurgents are using their height advantage to lay fire over all parts of this sector. Now I could push my men forward, tasking them with clearing the buildings in front of them while keeping eyes on the hotel. Not easy to do. If you catch hell in one of the streets your focus is on the guy shooting at you who is ten feet away, not on the snipers and rpg guys in said hotel. That leads to a bloodbath. Why is it not tactically sound to safely eliminate the hotel from the equation? You kill the bad guys without losing any troops. Also the JDAM strikes the hotel perfectly and limits (very well) the collateral damage.

Now tell me what is wrong with this scenario? Seems logical to me.

ClaudioPolez · Post by **ClaudioPolez** » 2007-03-09 15:32

It also seems logical to me and it very much seems tactically sound to eliminate the hotel in this scenario. However, my point is, is it strategically sound? Is the best way to fight an insurgency to have these incidents escalate this way. It just seems entirely reactive, insurgents on the streets, troops go in, they clash, blah, blah, blah, kill everyone. End point...Everyone hates the coalition. Maybe it's too late and this is the way it is going to be. Maybe there is a way to avoid this stare-off by working better with local security forces, I dunno, thankfully it's not my job.

In answer to your question I have absolutely noooooooooo military experience, but that doesn't make anybodies political opinions less valid in my view.

Determined · Post by **Determined** » 2007-03-09 15:56

ClaudioPolez wrote:It also seems logical to me and it very much seems tactically sound to eliminate the hotel in this scenario. However, my point is, is it strategically sound? Is the best way to fight an insurgency to have these incidents escalate this way. It just seems entirely reactive, insurgents on the streets, troops go in, they clash, blah, blah, blah, kill everyone. End point...Everyone hates the coalition. Maybe it's too late and this is the way it is going to be. Maybe there is a way to avoid this stare-off by working better with local security forces, I dunno, thankfully it's not my job.

In answer to your question I have absolutely noooooooooo military experience, but that doesn't make anybodies political opinions less valid in my view.

Your lack of experience shows by your ignorance to how things really go down out there. I am not trying to say your are an ignorant person in general, but just ignorant in regards to the subject at hand. We are working with local police and building Iraqs own military. This is not a 1 week war like liberals or others would like you to believe. This conflict is not failing, or a failure yet. Time and history will be a true judge of that. To turn around a country your looking at 10 years. That is a low estimate. It takes time to turn around a generation of people. Hell in the end they don't have to love us, just stop hating eachother. The issues we are facing in Iraq are much different from those we faced in restoring post WW2 Germany and Japan. Despite all the negative things the media portrays, great strides are being made in Iraq. Obviously bad things are going down as well. It's to be expected.

Back on subject, I posted my thoughts on a possible "big bomb" being used by the commander. I don't think it is something that should be used in the standard AAS maps. It should also not be something that can be used regularly. It would take away from gameplay if you could just spam the enemy with huge bombs. Maybe on some type of scenario map it would find a good use.

ClaudioPolez · Post by **ClaudioPolez** » 2007-03-09 16:11

I don't doubt that I am fairly ignorant of what is going on in Iraq, as probably 90% of us are and I agree that anyone who thinks this is going to be a flash in the pan is kidding themselves, I reckon ten years if we are lucky! Not sure if I agree with you about the 'failing' bit, but then failure can be a difficult thing to measure when we seemed to be unsure what our goals were in the first place.

Anyway nice to exchange considered opinions.

Right I'm off cos if I stay in work one more second and anyone asks me one more thing, I'm gonna go off like one of those 'big bombs'.

have a good weekend

Determined · Post by **Determined** » 2007-03-09 16:13

ClaudioPolez wrote:I don't doubt that I am fairly ignorant of what is going on in Iraq, as probably 90% of us are and I agree that anyone who thinks this is going to be a flash in the pan is kidding themselves, I reckon ten years if we are lucky! Not sure if I agree with you about the 'failing' bit, but then failure can be a difficult thing to measure when we seemed to be unsure what our goals were in the first place.

Anyway nice to exchange considered opinions.

Right I'm off cos if I stay in work one more second and anyone asks me one more thing, I'm gonna go off like one of those 'big bombs'.

have a good weekend

Agreed. You can't measure failure or success on a day to day, or a week to week basis. Time will tell, its shitty, but that is how it is. These things take time.