Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Aseaheru]

Yah, but we cant shove one at two dudes and tell them to shoot something with it.

What would we do if we cant use our vehicles and we still need to shoot aircraft?

-Edit-
Dang ninjas.

[10ebbor10]

Can you anti vote stuff? Because I am against Proposal Alpha.

We might not need lots of missile right now, but they're still some of the best long ranged anti air, anti ship, and anti structure weapons we can get. They outrange artillery, they can home in on targets, they can be made in disposable one shot forms that we can easily give to the troops... (Much easier then an anti tank rifle, at least.)

Missiles are good, and abandoning them is stupid, even if we have reasons not to build many on these first turns.

Counter proposal.

[Taricus]

What do you propose to shoot down the many, many aircraft that would turn us into dust when people attack us?

Ballistics, our own fighters and such. Furthermore, we can invest in developing new countermeasures and hardkill anti-missile systems which would significantly reduce the risk of missile attacks on our troops.

For infantry, we can just deploy recoiless rifles rather than any shoulder-launched missiles, and they're still relatively effective against structures as well, depending on the munition it's firing. And as Tryrar said, we also have the railgun in the works (Though in my opinion, it was probably not the best time to develop it >.>) which means navally, there's no use for any more missiles.

And Gunin, that's actually contrary to my opinion. A huge fuckoff missile is fine because between the payload, and the relatively inexpensive guidance package (To a shoulder-launched missile anyway) make it actually viable somewhat.

[Ukrainian Ranger]

You guys are too optimistic to get actually good railguns

No missiles = WW2 army.

[~Neri]

Keep missiles as possible. But not primary focus.

[Aseaheru]

Plus, railguns need vehicles or emplacements, rifles dont do much (Most attack helicopters are armored, particularly the flying tank that is the Hind), recoilless rifles are dumb fire, so good luck getting a attack heli staying still long enough to bop it in the head with one. There is ALWAYS use for missiles, since they can change course at will, speed up, slow down, etc. Heck, if we go and start to fight in space we could use them as mines. You cant do that with a railgun.
-Dang ninja-

[Parsely]

Ballistics, our own fighters and such.

Furthermore, we can invest in developing new countermeasures and hardkill anti-missile systems which would significantly reduce the risk of missile attacks on our troops.

For infantry, we can just deploy recoiless rifles rather than any shoulder-launched missiles, and they're still relatively effective against structures as well, depending on the munition it's firing. And as Tryrar said, we also have the railgun in the works (Though in my opinion, it was probably not the best time to develop it >.>)

which means navally, there's no use for any more missiles.

CIWS might bring down a fighter attacking a ship if it flies really really close (which they never would because they have missiles), but they can't even touch a bomber. Also we need missiles for our fighters to be effective.

Can't shoot down gravity bombs..

I don't think an infantryman can field a rifle big enough to take out a jet in flight, and good god he'd actually have to be trained to aim it as well. You need very little training to use a Stinger.

A railgun is limited to what you can see, missiles can strike targets beyond the horizon, thousands of miles away.

[Ukrainian Ranger]

Without missiles you have very slim chances to shoot down a modern aircraft. What will we do if we'll get attacked from the air, Tarcius? F-16 are old and their Air-Air missiles aren't suited to hunt modern enemy, especially strike drones.

[Taricus]

For helicopters, we have our trusty 14.5mm MGs and possibly anti-material rifles. Helicopters don't tend to be heavily armoured like tanks. Aircraft like fighters, we're going to have to do a crash development course in our own fighter, preferably one with a stealth design to more or less flip off anything that uses missiles.

And the CIWS won't be targeting the fighter gunin, it'll be shooting down any missiles it fires.

[Ukrainian Ranger]

For helicopters, we have our trusty 14.5mm MGs and possibly anti-material rifles.

Ground Attack helicopters laugh here.

we're going to have to do a crash development course in our own fighter, preferably one with a stealth design to more or less flip off anything that uses missiles.

Stop, you mean a fighter without missiles, really? Hello WW2

[Taricus]

Well, you tell me where we're going to mount missiles on a stealth fighter that won't give it away, and I'll slap a few on then

[Aseaheru]

In internal bays. Hell, even eagle fighters have internal weapon bays.

And attack helis are armored. Some even rival tanks.

[Parsely]

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

Admittedly that's a laser-guided bomb but my point stands.

For helicopters, we have our trusty 14.5mm MGs and possibly anti-material rifles.

Ground Attack helicopters laugh here.

^^

You simply can't realistically expect to take down jet aircraft without SAMs.

[Aseaheru]

Oh, heres a quote from wikipedia on the Hind.

The Mi-24 fuselage body is heavily armored and can resist impacts from 12.7 mm (0.50 in) rounds from all angles. The titanium rotor blades are also resistant to 12.7 mm rounds.

[urlhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mil_Mi-24#Overview]linky[/url]

[~Neri]

Personally, when it comes to space defensive systems, I'm a fan of "mines" that are effectively stationary multimissile launchers, as in thirty or forty missiles in one massive burst. Put a couple engines on there and it can flee to a ship upon firing it's payload and get reloaded. If you've ever used the REARM mod in Homeworkd 2, it's the kind of thing that the advanced missile corvettes can build with the drone facility. One of my favorite things to do with those is build a bunch of them and just launch them towards an enemy defensive position. Soon as they stop, massive cloud of homing missiles that kills pretty much everything.

Ground and air wise, missiles tend to be overkill, however they are extremely useful for quickly removing a target before it can get off a shot, I prefer engaging from long ranges as the primary damage dealer and massive blocks of armor with guns to prevent the enemy from closing on the fragile artillety. Same applies to ships. Armor is cheaper to build then weapons. Therefore, heavily armored damage tankers up front with ship to ship weapons and lightly armored, maneuverable long range damage dealers further back.