Real World Scenario

[Timeline]

quote: Originally posted by OmniGod on 12-12-2000 11:55 PM Machine Gunners (GI) - I thought about making them, name changed the standard grunt force of the army. Since there is the graphic, and I want a grunt.. then he's the candidate Destroyer - I plan to decrease the range of a helo, thus it can't cross the ocean... which it generally can't, and since some destroyers and cruisers even have helos on board, I figured destroyer and carrier would make a good transport across vast oceans.. B2 is an early bomber and stealth is the more advanced at least that is my belief... I thought the B2 dropped the first hydrogen bomb in Japan... thus the US might have some in reserve to compliment the larger stealth.. Attack Helos... I have the Russian Hind, but need the Apache... Tanks & Artillery... care of Harlan I believe, from CTP Troop/Weapon Transport... why not put some missles, and troops to be moved in a truck and get them there faster rather than waiting 2 turns to go from LA to NYC (roughly two months in the scenario), why not put them in a truck and be there in 1... or something along those lines... The troop transport, I'll check if I have any sprites for that but I believe I do.. if not there's always someone willing to make one probably... But that's all I can say for now, I have a test tomorrow... time to study... Omni

All I can say is ... WOO HOO!! I love you . This all sounds really nice, especially the land transport .

I think the B2 is the current stealth bomber the U.S. uses, and the airplane that is represented by the “stealth bomber” unit. Please see the historical article in the game on the stealth bomber unit, it confirms what I said.

I guess I will wait until you have some more time for you to answer all my other questions .

Thnx, and bye for now .

Timeline

[Savant]

Some (unknown) Bomber History:

B-17 Flying fortress & B-24 Liberator were US heavy bombers in WW2. The B-29 Superfortress appeared in late 1944 for largely Pacific campaigns and was the one to drop the atomic bomb on Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

The B-36 (Peacemaker) was the follow-up to the B-29 with piston-pusher engines (rotors behind the wings) and jet engine pods (still the largest production bomber in history - yes, larger than the B-52 by a fair amount: 230 ft versus 185 ft wing span for example), designed during WW2 for transatlantic bombing (round-trip, no refueling!). The B-36 could fly at a top speed of 435 mph which was faster than most fighter planes at the time and was virtually immune to anti-air defense. It had a range of some 8,000+ miles without refueling! It once made a trip of over 9,000+ miles as a demonstration. The US made some 400 of them in the late 1940's. During this time, the famed "Flying Wing" bomber featured in the "War of the Worlds" movie moved from prop to jet engines and then was never put in production.

The B-47 Stratojet was a medium bomber with jet engines, smaller range and payload and a "stop-gap" prior to the B-52 Stratofortess. The B-47 had those "rocket pods" to assist with fast take-offs.

The B-47 Stratojet was followed-up by the B-58 (Hustler). The Hustler was a delta wing bomber and was obsolete virtually as it came off production lines due to anti-air missile successes in the early 1960's.

The B-52 has been the mainstay of US strategic aviation for some 40 years until the arrival of the B-1 Bomber. Since we know so much about it...'nuff said.

In the 1960's the US made two prototypes of a great-looking Bomber called the B-71 Valkyrie which was as sleek as bombers would ever get. Unfortunately, it too couldn't outrun misiles and was never put into production.

The FB-111 (this is the plane called the "Ardvark".. sorry for the earlier error) was a light bomber designed for low elevation penetration. It saw action in Vietnam and more recently in Lybia in the 1980's.

The B-1 was the controversial plane built in the 80's to replace the B-52. Just a fraction of the size, it could carry twice the payload! It has some stealth features, higher speed, greater maneuvrability, and carries the latest weapons payloads. Less than 100 of these swing-wing bombers were built (It is my favorite production bomber!).

The B-2 is the modern version of the flying wing and it is rumoured the US has about 50 of these. Many of the specs remain classified but recently, accomodations have been made to foreign air bases so that they can host B-2's so that they need not fly from Missouri to whatever target like they did during the Nato campaign in Serbia.

------------------
'Blood will run'
[This message has been edited by Savant (edited December 16, 2000).]
[This message has been edited by Savant (edited December 16, 2000).]

[Kreisky]

Helmut Kohl as the EU-leader???
LOL
Helmut Kohl is having many problems in Germany right now, because he was taking money from different interest groups. I think the best way would be to take the leader of the european commision. I wouldnt call it EU, what about only Europe. In that case u could have all the eastern european states in that block.

[Timeline]

quote: Originally posted by Savant on 12-14-2000 08:01 AM Some (unknown) Bomber History:

Thnx for the info Savant!


[This message has been edited by Timeline (edited December 14, 2000).]

[Sorn Xorin]

Why not use an Armour, Mech, Motorised unit system?
Similar to Civ2

Armour Unit: your traditional tank unit
High attack scores and good-to average defense scores

Mechanized unit: Infantry equipped in APCs suck as the American Bradley or the Russian BMP

Give it good Attack and defense

Motorized Infantry: Traditional non mechanized Infantry
troops ride into battle in trucks where they dismount.

Give this unit a low attack score and an excellent defensive score (Modern entrenched Infantry would be very difficult to dig out particularly in cities)

I imagine if Activision are going to make a ww2 Scenario that you will be able to choose which side u want to play...

Thats my 2 cents

[OmniGod]

The idea of being able to choose sides is the key, but we can't seem to realize how to do it just yet... so hopefully, Sorin, you are correct about activision doing it since we could learn a lot from that... but for now we are just planning... The motorized infantry is an idea... but the idea of the troop transport is also to transport missles and such without another player realizing it... not that the computer misses much.. but I would love to modify this later to multiplayer, once some documentation about it is out. As for the B2 controversy... I accept that I was wrong, little misinformed I guess... not a major american history buff, but thought I had that right... anyway... the other bombers are an interesting bit of info since the Americans must have some of those in reserve and who's to say Europe hasn't bought some thus they too could have bombers.. not just Russia and the US.... anyway... back to my other map for the time being... must get the computer to build roads... a definate must..!!!

Omni

[Timeline]

Keep it up Omni, I know you and Matte will find the answer .


Timeline

[Babayaga]

Hey, lets not forget about our world counter-parts, which is just as good as Western World stuff. Tupolev, Sukhoi, Mikoyan, the tanks, etc...

[Timeline]

Hey, just checking up. How's the modding going Omni?


Timeline

[OmniGod]

The background... ie the untils and changes to AI are going without any real problems as for making the actual map setup... I stopped again cuz the idea of having to make this again... and dam there's a lot of cities and units to place... I need and want the patch to finish this... and how the heck to do you get the relations between nations to change, without actually having to play the scenario and reseting the units... ARRRRRRRRGGG!!!! Not that I'm frustrated with the setup that they've given us...

Omni - the hairless one

[Timeline]

quote: Omni - the hairless one

hehe, I know, this scenario editer they gave us sucks!! In civ2 you could set alliances and regard in the editer, it was much better all around. I am quite surprised that interfaces and options become more limited with newer versions of the same concept, shouldn't it be the other way around?


Timeline