chaos49 Posted February 8, 2011 Share Posted February 8, 2011 Hi when i design new maps i like to see some option were u can say that blue has to destroy all AA Guns before any air can help blue side. when AA guns are destroy blue will have access to air support. i know this cant be made in this version of CMSF but would be great to have in the next CMSF version. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rune Posted February 8, 2011 Share Posted February 8, 2011 Why? Not very realistic at all. We would still be waiting for the beginning of the first gulf war if every aa gun had to be destroyed. Poor helicopters would never leave the airport and A-10 pilots better retire now. I can picture the briefing now.. "Your ip is the muab'dib oasis, on a heading on 340 degrees at angels 15. Target is a column of tanks bearing e-w on a highway. You armament of mavericks and cbus are being loaded. However, if there is any anti-aircraft in the area, you are to rtb via point zero without dropping weapons" If I was ever in a briefing like that, there would have been a mission planner overboard so fast he would make the catapult look like ancient technology. Rune 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alan8325 Posted February 8, 2011 Share Posted February 8, 2011 As far as AA (even on-map) being a threat to aircraft in CMSF though, I believe that that will happen at some point. It would, however, almost certainly be abstracted in a way that it's just implemented as a probability of a particular air asset disappearing from your CAS menu (been shot down) and maybe being unavailable in later missions, until replaced. Unless an actual CMSF scenario is a ground assault against an AA battery however, modern AA would likely be far off-map from your little 2kmX2km section of ground. On-map AA, if we ever get it, would likely be a probability that an on-map unit such as the Shilka or an infantry man with Stinger would aim skywards and fire at the abstracted aircraft, with a subsequent probability that the aircraft is hit, and then a probability that it sustained catastrophic damage, etc. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chaos49 Posted February 8, 2011 Author Share Posted February 8, 2011 Its a game. how realistic it is dont mater as long its fun to play and i like as manny option we can have in the game. the desinger dont need to use all options that the game offer. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sakai007 Posted February 8, 2011 Share Posted February 8, 2011 True, a game is a game. But I feel CM is way more then that. 90% of the people here want a realistic representation of commanding troops in combat. Now, we do play platoon commander and company commander at the same time, not realistic, but as far as weapon systems and how you must employ them, much more so. The "fun" I get out of this game is knowing I defeated my enemy with minimal casualties, not always an easy task. I think AA is out of the scope of CM. Very often, SA-6,10,11 SAM systems would have engaged the aircraft far, far away from the battle space. And when aircraft are on a CAS run with guided weapons, they are often out of the range of AAA and MANPADS. Helicopters on the other hand, are not, and are often engaged with RPGs. That is something I would like to see in game, but it's not likely, and not a deal breaker if it's not there. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.