SF2: North Atlantic Ideas

[SFP1Ace 33]

Hmmm, the max horizon distance has already been cut down from 75 to 62 km... I guess now we'll see 50km.....

Edited December 1, 2011 by SFP1Ace

[+Dave 2,318]

Well that settles that Red Storm Rising it is.

[Caesar 305]

Will have to re-read the book!

[+Julhelm 266]

Hmmm, the max horizon distance has already been cut down from 75 to 62 km... I guess now we'll see 50km.....

50km is still ludicrous draw distance.

[+Dave 2,318]

Will have to re-read the book!

 

I just bought it and put it in my Ipad.

[+Major Lee 18]

A-10 Warthogs going anti-ship against the Soviet Fleet.

 

Now that would interesting...

[+Dave 2,318]

Assumptions?

We can assume the Backfires will be going after any carriers. Then Tomcats will be there to ruin their day. Fighters on east side island will be there to escort bombers.

 

How do any of you think it will play out?

[+Dels 594]

...we get delegated to intercep role only, no matter where the threat comes from ?

 

Ummm, boring...

[Stratos 3,166]

Old game from Microprose Fleet Defender presented this area in the North Atlantic scenario. NATO trying to close the entrance to North Atlantic while Soviet Union trys to break from Kola peninsula bases into open ocean and beating carriers in order to not being molested by air power. This let us add land based fighters and bombers of NATO in NOrway and Soviet forces on Kola peninsula.

 

Edited December 2, 2011 by Stratos

[+Stary 2,426]

Ummm, boring...

because ramp start in A-10C is soo exciting...

 

add CAP for Tomcat and A-7, A-10 Iceland strikes in merged install

[+Dels 594]

because ramp start in A-10C is soo exciting...

 

add CAP for Tomcat and A-7, A-10 Iceland strikes in merged install

Not exactly my point, but I think there's only so many times you can do an "Alert 5" launch to intercept the hoard of red bombers coming over the horizon before it gets boring.

 

Somewhat like there was only so many times you did a stike on the (Goddamn) Comm building before it started getting names...

 

In my opinion, the best thing about this game since its beginnings has been variety. Variety of aircraft types, flight models, cockpits, weapons mission types, weather etc.

 

Further proof of this is the copious amounts of modding we do...to create more variety.

 

Call me crazy, but I think this whole SF2:NA thing is going to go down like a cup of cold vomit.

 

Dels

[+Stary 2,426]

crazy you!

j/k

 

we still don't know what gameplay mechanics will change and how much (that is IF), also if there would be beneficts for merged install users like adding extra carrier based squadrons with different roles etc.

 

I think if one of the premises is new terrain engine, then we can assume ground part of the war would have some importance for the player too (extra planes CAS, strikes, AD)

You don't invest resources into new terrain rendering and data just to throw the player into the water corner of the map shooting waves of bombers

[JediMaster 451]

Perhaps that's because he has NA expansions planned? We know of the F1-based expansion, like for SF2E or SF2I, but it wouldn't make sense not to have them for this new one.

[+Zurawski 33]

What I find really cool about this NA scenario is the fact that it has already conjured up so many potential scenarios and possibilities...

 

I've always been a fan of "what-if" scenarios, particularly in flight sims. While I appreciate historical values and have honor the tomb of historical engagements... Problem is we know the outcomes (You know... being historical and all) these too become stale and predictable.

 

At least with this what-if NA scenario there is no artificial limitations tactically aside from logistic constraints.

[DWCAce 19]

I haven't read RSR (yet!), but I do have 'The Third World War: August 1985' that might be have some stuff we can add too.

[+Gepard 10,230]

Red Storm Rising? Wasnt it this talesbook where the USAF used the F-19 stealthfighters to hunt soviet AWACS? Was a really good joke this book. Remembered me on the good old days of old "Harpoon" game i played on my Amiga Computer long long ago. I would bet, that Clancy wrote his book after he played a lot of "Harpoon". The carrier vs bomber battles are pure "Harpoon" strategy.

If TK would finally gave us working and sinkable carriers and carrier escorts which are going with the carrier i would be very satisfied. A real carrier group vs carrier group scanario would be great, lets say british Invincible with Harriers vs Kiev with Yak-38. With this i would need no land mass.

[+Julhelm 266]

Most of the book is actually Larry Bond.

[Gr.Viper 131]

With this i would need no land mass.

But what about the huge... tracts of land?

[+Gepard 10,230]

But what about the huge... tracts of land?

 

The big carrier battles in WW2 were mostly sea to sea battles. No need for land based planes.

[DWCAce 19]

Gepard, he did write it (with Larry Bond) after playing Harpoon.

[+ojcar 157]

I think this game needs a GODDAMNEVILCOMMSHIP!

[+Gepard 10,230]

Gepard, he did write it (with Larry Bond) after playing Harpoon.

 

[+EricJ 3,930]

I haven't read RSR (yet!), but I do have 'The Third World War: August 1985' that might be have some stuff we can add too.

 

Utter blasphemy!

 

You live under a rock?

[+SkateZilla 49]

watch out for the time portal south west of iceland, it will take you back to 1941.

[+EricJ 3,930]

 

In all seriousness it looks pretty good, though I think we should keep it to the timeframe that TK sets it though...