AC-130 Gunship and/or A-10 Warthog

    This site uses cookies. By continuing to browse this site, you are agreeing to our Cookie Policy.

    • AC-130 Gunship and/or A-10 Warthog

      There should be AC-130 Gunships or A-10 Warthogs in the game, as an elite unit. The premise behind them is that they would be able to attack without having to refuel, kind of like how anti air can attack every few minutes by reloading. They would be considered low flying aircraft and the only anti air that would be able to counter them would be mobile aa and upgraded versions would be able to have a slight defense against air threats, like the elite chopper. They would require a lvl 3 air base at lower levels and lvl 5 at max lvls. It would be cool to see planes like these that are used often in modern combat get used in the game and should be included

      The post was edited 2 times, last by Job_ee ().

    • WalterChang wrote:

      If they just changed the name of one of the Western doctrine's Strike Fighter units to A-10 instead of, say, F111, would that do?

      Or do you want a whole new unit type that's somewhere between a Strike Fighter and a Helicopter?
      A-10's are far more powerful against ground targets that F-111's with their 30mm cannon and can carry at least 11 500lb bombs. Respectfully, there's a reason why the military doesn't use F-111's and still uses A-10 Warthogs, even in it's old age. It should be the later of your 2 suggestions. One of the main differences between the elite chopper and the A-10 would be that it could defend itself from asf more the elite choppers, due to it's capability to carry some AIM missiles. Another one would be that it could attack repeatedly without the need to refuel.
    • Job_ee wrote:

      WalterChang wrote:

      If they just changed the name of one of the Western doctrine's Strike Fighter units to A-10 instead of, say, F111, would that do?

      Or do you want a whole new unit type that's somewhere between a Strike Fighter and a Helicopter?
      A-10's are far more powerful against ground targets that F-111's with their 30mm cannon and can carry at least 11 500lb bombs. Respectfully, there's a reason why the military doesn't use F-111's and still uses A-10 Warthogs, even in it's old age. It should be the later of your 2 suggestions. One of the main differences between the elite chopper and the A-10 would be that it could defend itself from asf more the elite choppers, due to it's capability to carry some AIM missiles. Another one would be that it could attack repeatedly without the need to refuel.
      So this would be an elite special season unlock unit, yeah? Separate from the main tech tree?

      [Edit: sorry, you said that in the first post. The way you describe them sounds a little bit overpowered, but then again several of the existing elite units are already so maybe that's ok.]

      The post was edited 1 time, last by WalterChang ().

    • WalterChang wrote:

      Job_ee wrote:

      WalterChang wrote:

      If they just changed the name of one of the Western doctrine's Strike Fighter units to A-10 instead of, say, F111, would that do?

      Or do you want a whole new unit type that's somewhere between a Strike Fighter and a Helicopter?
      A-10's are far more powerful against ground targets that F-111's with their 30mm cannon and can carry at least 11 500lb bombs. Respectfully, there's a reason why the military doesn't use F-111's and still uses A-10 Warthogs, even in it's old age. It should be the later of your 2 suggestions. One of the main differences between the elite chopper and the A-10 would be that it could defend itself from asf more the elite choppers, due to it's capability to carry some AIM missiles. Another one would be that it could attack repeatedly without the need to refuel.
      So this would be an elite special season unlock unit, yeah? Separate from the main tech tree?
      [Edit: sorry, you said that in the first post. The way you describe them sounds a little bit overpowered, but then again several of the existing elite units are already so maybe that's ok.]
      Maybe, or maybe there could be units special to only specific doctrine types. The A-10 or the AC-130 gunship would make a great western doctrine specific unit. I agree that some units are OP like the ballistic bomber for ex.
    • KFGauss wrote:

      Job_ee wrote:

      KFGauss wrote:

      CoN is a game, not a simulation.
      If the game's goal is to use real life troop types, then it should be done correctly.
      If the game's goal was to use real life troop types (in the sense I think you mean) (and not just names & pictures, and vaguely similar behaviors taken from real life troop types) then it would be a simulation.
      You tell 'em KFC!
      *** The Creator of Zombie Farming ***
      The KING of CoN News!!!
      The "Get off my lawn!" cranky CoN Forums Poster - not affiliated with Dorado in any way


      "Death comes to us all. Shall I deal you in?" - DoD
    • KFGauss wrote:

      Job_ee wrote:

      KFGauss wrote:

      CoN is a game, not a simulation.
      If the game's goal is to use real life troop types, then it should be done correctly.
      If the game's goal was to use real life troop types (in the sense I think you mean) (and not just names & pictures, and vaguely similar behaviors taken from real life troop types) then it would be a simulation.
      Then by your definition it is. The game lists every troop type whether it's Eastern Doctrine SAMs, to Western air sups, to EU tanks, it gives the exact real life name of the troop and even tries to make the troops more accurate to what they would do in real life by giving some doctrines advantages over others EX: Eastern vs Western Air Superiority fighters. A game can use real life weapons, troops, equipment, etc and it not be a simulation. It can merely just want to be accurate, which it should strive to do so after all it's done to be accurate to real life so far. Take it from someone who works with this type of stuff.
    • Job_ee wrote:

      KFGauss wrote:

      Job_ee wrote:

      KFGauss wrote:

      CoN is a game, not a simulation.
      If the game's goal is to use real life troop types, then it should be done correctly.
      If the game's goal was to use real life troop types (in the sense I think you mean) (and not just names & pictures, and vaguely similar behaviors taken from real life troop types) then it would be a simulation.
      Then by your definition it is. The game lists every troop type whether it's Eastern Doctrine SAMs, to Western air sups, to EU tanks, it gives the exact real life name of the troop and even tries to make the troops more accurate to what they would do in real life by giving some doctrines advantages over others EX: Eastern vs Western Air Superiority fighters. A game can use real life weapons, troops, equipment, etc and it not be a simulation. It can merely just want to be accurate, which it should strive to do so after all it's done to be accurate to real life so far. Take it from someone who works with this type of stuff.
      robert downey.jpg
      *** The Creator of Zombie Farming ***
      The KING of CoN News!!!
      The "Get off my lawn!" cranky CoN Forums Poster - not affiliated with Dorado in any way


      "Death comes to us all. Shall I deal you in?" - DoD
    • Job_ee wrote:

      KFGauss wrote:

      Job_ee wrote:

      KFGauss wrote:

      CoN is a game, not a simulation.
      If the game's goal is to use real life troop types, then it should be done correctly.
      If the game's goal was to use real life troop types (in the sense I think you mean) (and not just names & pictures, and vaguely similar behaviors taken from real life troop types) then it would be a simulation.
      Then by your definition it is. The game lists every troop type whether it's Eastern Doctrine SAMs, to Western air sups, to EU tanks, it gives the exact real life name of the troop and even tries to make the troops more accurate to what they would do in real life by giving some doctrines advantages over others EX: Eastern vs Western Air Superiority fighters. A game can use real life weapons, troops, equipment, etc and it not be a simulation. It can merely just want to be accurate, which it should strive to do so after all it's done to be accurate to real life so far. Take it from someone who works with this type of stuff.
      Arguing semantics while entirely missing the point, Good Job!
      If CON truly was aiming to be a simulation, then you’d have a lot more updates actually focussed on the accuracy of stuff (iirc there are unit pictures/models/names that are wrong and still not corrected?); as it is currently CON could at best be described as taking the real word as an inspiration for it’s game design and units. In that sense CON is as much of a simulation as COD or Battlefield are.


      Its always nice to see that pointless discussions manage to derail threads
      I am The Baseline for opinions