Wishlist: AC-130 targeting

[Sniper23]

Originally Posted by Ramm

For precisely that reason I don't use them, they are a waste of points same as auto cannons are now.

well with my battles with auto cannons they are very useful,but thats just my 2 cents

[Ramm]

Originally Posted by Sniper23

well with my battles with auto cannons they are very useful,but thats just my 2 cents

Please let me clarify myself. I do not mean that auto cannons are never usefull, I have used them to devastating effect at times the same as you have. I mean that they don't carry enough ammunition to justify their relitvly high cost and are therefor a waste of points.

Sincerly,
Andrew Nault

this godamn IE doesnt have spellcheck (I'm at work)

[Sniper23]

Originally Posted by Ramm

Please let me clarify myself. I do not mean that auto cannons are never usefull, I have used them to devastating effect at times the same as you have. I mean that they don't carry enough ammunition to justify their relitvly high cost and are therefor a waste of points.

Sincerly,
Andrew Nault

this godamn IE doesnt have spellcheck (I'm at work)

well ive alwas used the bradly AFV,and it has alot of auto cannon rounds,but i agree with u most of them have very low round count,thats why i got ammo carriers right behind them

[Ramm]

Originally Posted by Sniper23

well ive alwas used the bradly AFV,and it has alot of auto cannon rounds,but i agree with u most of them have very low round count,thats why i got ammo carriers right behind them

Your right about the Bradley, it actually does have enough ammo.

Thats a really good idea about the resupply

[Imp]

Please let me clarify myself. I do not mean that auto cannons are never usefull, I have used them to devastating effect at times the same as you have. I mean that they don't carry enough ammunition to justify their relitvly high cost and are therefor a waste of points

We have gone off topic here but lets put things straight, firstly Andrew you have an unhealthy obsession with ammo.
Secondly why do many vehicles now carry them in place of MGs despite the fact they chew through ammo.
Better penetration & burst gives a good chance of a hit with decent fire control even vs a chopper.
They are deadly to infantry resulting in a quick kill, this means less casulties for you.
So sometimes they run out of ammo a bit quick but the enemy is in a mess, if they have a MG as back up thats fine, if not taking some APCs with MGs as backup might make sense.
My view give me something mounting a helicopter chaingun any day it smarts.
Good high tech stuff like the Swedish 904 (or something) now thats nice kills Russian MBTs from the flanks give me it over a Bradley any day. Thats just me though as prefer ATGMs on dedicated vehicles you can't play taxi & engage armour sort of a jack of no trade.
As a simple hard to beat in virtually any time frame OOB try the Brits as they do not muck about with changing force structure much. So similar force just Warriors instead of FV432s oh look at them run.
The chaingun now means IFVs are filling the tanks infantry support role & the tanks are hunting there counterparts

[Imp]

Sorry I am not wishing to be negative I am just trying to point out that you are making purchase decisions based on to be frank weird ideas of what works. Try everything don't just discount stuff because you think it doesn't work. For example it was a long time before I tried light tanks why would I want something thats poorly armoured probably has poor FC compared to a MBT & struggles to kill one. Because they are cheap fast so can set up ambushes or get in place quick to take out troop transport stopping MBT getting distracted is why. You just don't go head to head with a MBT is all but you do get one with a flank shot while supporting your big brothers.

[PanzerBob]

I concur with IMP with regards to auto cannons. (which is general term for cannons with high rates of fire).

As for Gunships in general I think they work fine but you really must be up against an enemy with poor to no AAA or SAM capability or have killed those assets. I've used these on occasion and even though I didn't kill but one unit in the target area, the others were suppressed to the point it was a mop up operation only. Another point with Gunships is targeting, they will mostly kill everything in the designated target, just make sure the target hex you give it has a target, as Gunship will show up and move down trees and weeds exactly were you told them to fire.. These guys should be pricey as this is a very specialized kind of strike and certainly not for every battle situation.

My best Gunship strike was Puff the Magic Dragoon against troops in an area I wanted the put Marines ashore in their LTVP's and a few landing craft. I had two Puffs’ on call and had them hit two targets 150m away from each other and 50m inland. Once they finished with the area I had a landing area 500m wide with nothing but broken troops holding it, I lost not a single Marine and only one Puff drew fire leaving the scene. Pretty good value for the buck I thought.

How I have lost a few too, most because I wrongly assumed the EN AA capability! A slow circling target for a SA7 is easy meat!!

Bob out

[Ramm]

[quote=Imp;681018]Sorry I am not wishing to be negative I am just trying to point out that you are making purchase decisions based on to be frank weird ideas of what works. Try everything don't just discount stuff because you think it doesn't work. For example it was a long time before I tried light tanks why would I want something thats poorly armoured probably has poor FC compared to a MBT & struggles to kill one. Because they are cheap fast so can set up ambushes or get in place quick to take out troop transport stopping MBT getting distracted is why. You just don't go head to head with a MBT is all but you do get one with a flank shot while supporting your big brothers.[/QUOTE

no worries, I respect people who are frank. Consider the subject dropped.