AWCS Vs. Mobile Radar.

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

  • KFGauss wrote:

    FarmerJG wrote:

    Which Darodo developer told us that we were wrong in this thread? Also, when the CoN YouTubers post about their strategies, the style of gameplay changes. Even if the post was from 2021, it is nice to have an updated opinion.
    Don't be a troll.
    How is this being a troll? If anything, you are being a troll.
    “This We'll Defend” - U.S. Army :thumbsup:

  • I use mobile radar:

    • Less resources
    • Uses supplies vs components
    • The radar can detect infantry when leveled up enough
    • Most air and naval units have some type of radar / sonar. And if not, I can pair them with a unit that does. Therefore, I do not need an AWACS for coverage over the sea and I almost always use NPAs on larger maps for coverage.
    Oh and also,

    Here is the definition of a forum:
    (Which I googled)

    • a place, meeting, or medium where ideas and views on a particular issue can be exchanged.
    • a public meeting place for open discussion
    • An Internet forum, or message board, is an online discussion site where people can hold conversations in the form of posted messages
    So the whole "google it" argument is a moot point.

    Someone has appointed themselves the gate keeper / rule maker of how members are to use this forum in a rigid zealous manner where everyone MUST google the topic first.

    Which is Complete dog sh1t, and respond with "BLOW IT OUT YOUR A$$".

    The other day I went ahead and googled elite submarine for sh1ts and giggles.

    And hey guess what folks? The results...complete dog sh1t.

  • Im On Smoko wrote:

    ...


    Oh and also,

    Here is the definition of a forum:
    (Which I googled)

    • a place, meeting, or medium where ideas and views on a particular issue can be exchanged.
    • a public meeting place for open discussion
    • An Internet forum, or message board, is an online discussion site where people can hold conversations in the form of posted messages
    So the whole "google it" argument is a moot point.

    Someone has appointed themselves the gate keeper / rule maker of how members are to use this forum in a rigid zealous manner where everyone MUST google the topic first.

    Which is Complete dog sh1t, and respond with "BLOW IT OUT YOUR A$$".

    The other day I went ahead and googled elite submarine for sh1ts and giggles.

    And hey guess what folks? The results...complete dog sh1t.
    LMAO - Based on what he has written here, Smoko has appointed himself the gate keeper / rule maker of how members are to use this forum. In other words he is announcing that forum users must defy a "rule" that doesn't even exist.

    What's really odd is that no matter how much he wants to imagine that anyone has proclaimed that people must search the forum before adding to it, no one has ever declared it a "rule". If he can find any place where that was declared a "rule", I'll be surprised.

    However, IIRC, I do recall that Yak, Opulon, Teburu, Aenaeas of Troy, Zozo001, I and other forum users (I apologize if I forgot anyone) have recommended doing a quick search before posting, mainly because it helps the poster avoid embarrassment and reduces readers' aggravation.

    For the search-reluctant among us, here's a handy link to Yak's suggestion.
    It's item #1 in the "A Few notes:" section of Yak's Forum Rules.
    Those rules and the associated suggestions have been around since Dec 2016.
    You would think that 6.5 years would have been plenty long enough for motivated forum users to find, read, and heed the suggestion, but apparently not.
    Forum rules

    PS: Googling the forum site for AIP submarine return 44 hits (forum threads) that Google thought were more or less unique.
    Glancing at those 44 hits I got a warm fuzzy that they represented quite a bit of Elite (aka AIP) Submarine info.
    If you're looking for Elite AIP Submarine info, maybe you'll need to invest a little effort into the investigation by trying more than one set of search parameters.
    And if after that you still can't find what you're looking for, maybe appending a new question to the most on-topic of the existing threads becomes the right thing to do next?

    I bet doing that will make Yak proud of you. ;)

    The post was edited 4 times, last by KFGauss ().

  • KFGauss wrote:

    Im On Smoko wrote:

    ...


    Oh and also,

    Here is the definition of a forum:
    (Which I googled)

    • a place, meeting, or medium where ideas and views on a particular issue can be exchanged.
    • a public meeting place for open discussion
    • An Internet forum, or message board, is an online discussion site where people can hold conversations in the form of posted messages
    So the whole "google it" argument is a moot point.

    Someone has appointed themselves the gate keeper / rule maker of how members are to use this forum in a rigid zealous manner where everyone MUST google the topic first.

    Which is Complete dog sh1t, and respond with "BLOW IT OUT YOUR A$$".

    The other day I went ahead and googled elite submarine for sh1ts and giggles.

    And hey guess what folks? The results...complete dog sh1t.
    "LMAO - Based on what he has written here, Smoko has appointed himself the gate keeper / rule maker of how members are to use this forum. In other words he is announcing that forum users must defy a "rule" that doesn't even exist."



    • No, I was referring to you. "rule maker" is an analogy. You have all these rules in your head on how people are to use this forum.
    "What's really odd is that no matter how much he wants to imagine that anyone has proclaimed that people must search the forum before adding to it, no one has ever declared it a "rule". If he can find any place where that was declared a "rule", I'll be surprised."


    • Word salad and yeah, here you again putting words in my mouth / keyboard. I won't explain the concept of analogy. And I am not "surprised". The same thing over and over and over. Just google it duuude.
    However, I do recall that Yak, Opulon, Teburu, Aenaeas, and several other forum users have recommended doing a quick search before posting, mainly because it helps the poster avoid embarrassment.
    • "Embarrassment". Coming from the expert himself. I wont go into the details, you either have the intellect to get it or you don't. Since you are an / the expert, I know for sure you have the intellect to get it. And I won't go into simpleton explanations for the famously obtuse of this forum.
    For the search-reluctant among us, here's a handy link to Yak's suggestion. It's item #1 in the "A Few notes:" section of Yak's Forum Rules. That suggestion has been around since 2016 - You'd think that would have been plenty long enough for motivated forum users to read and heed it.
    Forum rules

    • Did anyone else pick up on the reference of a suggestion from 2016 for an online video game? A suggestion from SEVEN years ago?

    • Dude, you are a real piece of work.
    • This game is not that important to me to go sifting through a game forum looking for a post from 2016 about the minutia of forum rules.
    The small glimpses of your reality I get to see on a regular basis...

    The post was edited 2 times, last by Im On Smoko ().

  • You guys can either get back on topic or this Thread gets locked.

    Your consistent derailing of just about any Thread is not appreciated. If you like to discuss the search function so much then go and create an extra Thread for it.


    That being said @FarmerJG @Im On Smoko
    restarting this completely offtopic discussion really was not necessary
    I am The Baseline for opinions

  • Teburu wrote:

    You guys can either get back on topic or this Thread gets locked.

    Your consistent derailing of just about any Thread is not appreciated. If you like to discuss the search function so much then go and create an extra Thread for it.


    That being said @FarmerJG @Im On Smoko
    restarting this completely offtopic discussion really was not necessary
    Why didn't you list the usual suspect who repeatedly derails forum threads?

    I posted helpful relevant information on topic and addressed a forum member's repeated inability to understand how a forum works, who furthermore arguably shoos away people from posting on the forum. I get lumped in with the person who continually derails threads and goes off topic. OK.

    I don't know, maybe you all who are in charge like it more quiet in this forum? So you allow the goon to roam free. That has to be it. What do they say about when actions and words conflict?

    For crying out loud if it is SO important to get the data of this forum organized to cut down on all the unnecessary posts maybe @KFGauss could come up with a Dewey Decimal System for our CON Forum?

    We could call it the KFGauss System.

    The post was edited 1 time, last by Im On Smoko ().

  • Im On Smoko wrote:

    Teburu wrote:

    You guys can either get back on topic or this Thread gets locked.

    Your consistent derailing of just about any Thread is not appreciated. If you like to discuss the search function so much then go and create an extra Thread for it.


    That being said @FarmerJG @Im On Smoko
    restarting this completely offtopic discussion really was not necessary
    Why didn't you list the usual suspect who repeatedly derails forum threads?
    I posted helpful relevant information on topic and addressed a forum member's repeated inability to understand how a forum works, who furthermore arguably shoos away people from posting on the forum. I get lumped in with the person who continually derails threads and goes off topic. OK.

    I don't know, maybe you all who are in charge like it more quiet in this forum? So you allow the goon to roam free. That has to be it. What do they say about when actions and words conflict?

    For crying out loud if it is SO important to get the data of this forum organized to cut down on all the unnecessary posts maybe @KFGauss could come up with a Dewey Decimal System for our CON Forum?

    We could call it the KFGauss System.
    - KF (as well as the people that usually start arguing with him) were addressed in the initial sentence
    - tbh your ontopic stuff completely got drowned out by the rant about KF and the Forum
    - my primary issue was restarting a debate that is completely off-topic
    I am The Baseline for opinions

  • Mother Hen wrote:

    Im On Smoko wrote:

    For crying out loud if it is SO important to get the data of this forum organized to cut down on all the unnecessary posts maybe @KFGauss could come up with a Dewey Decimal System for our CON Forum?

    We could call it the KFGauss System.
    Hes named after a mathematican, so that should be easy for him to do.
    Such a shame really. Reminds me of this "city" Harvey located in Illinois I had to work in as a consultant. Close to Chicago. A real dump. Harvey was named after Turlington W. Harvey an inventor and entrepreneur.

    Notable historical people having their good names sullied by someone adopting it or being used for some dumpster fire settlement. So sad.

    Maybe naming oneself Thomas Crapper would have been a more fitting / apropos name to use as an avatar?

    Besides, I get more use out of a crapper than some nitwit on some game forum.

    And it would be funny.

  • Im On Smoko wrote:

    I use mobile radar:

    • Less resources
    • Uses supplies vs components
    • The radar can detect infantry when leveled up enough
    • Most air and naval units have some type of radar / sonar. And if not, I can pair them with a unit that does. Therefore, I do not need an AWACS for coverage over the sea and I almost always use NPAs on larger maps for coverage.

    Oh, and I will add one other point regarding mobile radar:

    As I mentioned earlier, mobile radar is capable of detecting infantry once leveled up enough. In my experience of playing public games, the majority of ground units I encounter are...infantry. Ipso facto, why I use mobile radar over AWACs.

    I dunno the exact % of armor vs infantry I go against in CON, however maybe someone who is a savant at math or sumptin' can crunch the numbers and get more exacting data.

    Some inspirational savant music from the classic RAIN MAN:

  • KFGauss wrote:

    Im On Smoko wrote:

    Such a shame really. . . .
    If you want to pick a fight instead of staying on topic, you should try to pick it with Teb, Op, Zozo, Aeneas, Yak, or someone else - Just to put a little variety into your trolling.
    This post will be deleted in about 24 hours (because it too is off-topic).
    Lets see,

    A few month ago you swooped in and derailed my Sengoku thread, after my specific response of "no". You had a melt down. That is toxic and trolling. Furthermore, you tried to boss around a grown accomplished man. Insulting and toxic.

    Link to my Sengoku thread so forum members can see your disgusting behavior:

    Sengoku, List of Countries (territories), How Many Cities, & Doctrines, etc.


    You routinely try to twist my words. Toxic, trolling.

    And now, you are trying to tell me what to do "you should try to pick it with...". Again, you are attempting tell a grown accomplished man what he should do. Insulting, toxic, trolling behavior. And, also trying to bait more people into your nonsense forum drama. Toxic, trolling behavior.

    You have used the word "fight" repeatedly. Violent connotation noted.

    There is no fight. It is teamwork. This is your second lesson in FAFO.

    Let me put this in simple terms FA+FO = your training.

    • FA (that is you).
    • FO (that is me).
    • = your training, and you are welcome.



    Now to sum up your FAFO training. Like I said there is no fight. I decide who, why, how, and when, I want to take you into that deep water. I get to say how deep we go. Like right now we went a bit deeper.

    Here is another example of me taking you into that deep water and another lesson in FAFO.

    Put you hand in front of your face. Make a fist and extend a pinky finger. Now envision your FAFO instructor (that is me) making a small circle around your pinky finger with his own index finger and saying "See this pinky finger? I have more balls, brains and character in my pinky finger (i.e. Smoko's pinky finger) than you do in your entire body."

    It seems to me you are a lonely old man who will take ANY type of attention whether good or bad. And that this forum has some how become your territory / club house.

    Which brings to me another point. You routinely boss people around on this forum. There are young / new people who try to participate who do not know any better in dealing with you.


    Again, welcome to the deep water.


    Your swimmies will be taken off shortly.


    Edit: Added my Sengoku thread link for forum members to see your disgusting behavior:

    Sengoku, List of Countries (territories), How Many Cities, & Doctrines, etc.

    The post was edited 3 times, last by Im On Smoko ().

  • Agent White wrote:

    Me thinking here, what are their use either?
    They are for detecting units in a big radius, while they can’t identify exact units composition they dont really need to. The general knowledge of unit position and movement in a pretty big radius (about 250-300)

    The main difference is that:
    Ground Radar:
    - can detect ground units with low signature (inf)
    - can’t detect low aircraft with low signature (helis/ max lvl fighters)
    - low mobility due to being a ground unit

    AWACs:
    - can detect low signature aircraft
    - can’t detect low ground signatures
    - highly mobile because its an aircraft
    (high mobility makes it useful for naval warfare)


    Anyway I’m gonna lock this thread for two simple reasons:
    - people seem to like going offtopic even when warned not to do that
    - the locking doesnt really hurt the Thread because it has been imo sufficiently elaborated on and latests posts don’t concern themselves with it anyway
    I am The Baseline for opinions