Jump to content

Helicopters?


Imperial Grunt

Recommended Posts

I think Ions would make them suicidal with any reasonable level of armor. They shred shrikes awfully well and helicopters are rather easier to break.

Especially if they got ahead of their jamming. The little kill me triangle is a bad thnng for light vehicles.

What I would like to see is infantry be able to designate for a shrikes atgms. The way it works for remote designation for the Apaches now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hmmm, I don't have the game, but you need an atmosphere to use a helo, right? And given the huge difference in atmospheres on different planets, I can't see the utility of a helo;

'What's tomorrow's objective?'

'Pluto.'

'What are the helo guys doing?'

'Playing spades.'

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree that hover-tanks would probably be more useful than helicopters.

But for that we need anti-grav technology...

And then armoured vehicles become virtually indistinguishable from aircraft. Except they're a lot heavier...

Gunships today utilize terrain to hide from the enemy. They're just less limited by restrictive terrain than armoured vehicles.

Being a Gunship pilot in DropTeam would require extensive revision of the aircraft.

After all, if DropShips can survive, Gunships could probably give it a go, terrain permitting. (Desert terrain/Plains probably not so much...)

You would have to put a buttload of armour up front, shield all your sensors and optics, and heavily armour the cockpit from beamers.

It would be a heavy, short-range monster. I'd put a lot of fire-and-forget ATGMs on it, and then a low velocity/high ROF gun with HEAT for destroying targets once it establishes a permissive environment. It'd be more of a close-air-support ship than a deep-strike type vehicle.

You would have to rely heavily on your comrades establishing the situation, but it could be done. Sounds like it'd be worth a try.

I'd use vectored thrust rather than rotors, to give you a broader environment to operate in. (I never liked that tail-rotor anyway...)

You're trading off a lot of armour for 3-D mobility. Definitey put a heavy jammer and sensor fit... Gotta' see the enemy before they see you within line of sight...

[ August 06, 2006, 06:57 AM: Message edited by: Caseck ]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Galaxy has a better uniform armor than many of the ground vehicles and three point defense turrets.

Trade out the ammo reloader deal for some long range rocket/ion pods and you've got yourself a gunship to be proud of.

Not that I'd ever want to be fighting it...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think a lot of it would depend apon its intended role and how you designed it. Rotors are no use but Vectorable jets / rockets would give the same effect. Again thinking of the Flying HK's from Terminator. I think the Unit Yurch is describing above would be too powerfull but very doable. However I could see much more use and balance if it was more based on the Comanche idea. A small, light stealth vehicle who's major role is scouting / Forward Recon / CAS. Maybe an Ion or a 20mm and 4 ATGM's and the EW package from the Herpes to give it a fighting chance... Maybe only give it EW capability vs Deployed turrets rather than against fixed AAD emplacements. This would be especially usefull for the FO role.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My continuing issue is that Dropships are too pleantiful in this game. They should far and away be the most expensive and rare unit in the game, but players get opportunity after opportunity to squander them.

Yes, it's nifty how you can sometimes sneak a drop into enemy territory, but it shouldn't pay to lose 5 DropShips, using them as loaded scouts, looking for a safe DZ behind enemy lines...

If the decision is made to make GunShips, they have to revisit the arbitrary system of giving the sides set numbers of vehicles...

A cash and carry system would penalize overzealous use of these systems...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...