Tomahawk as Area Attack

[Dev1200]

Originally Posted by DeltaFart

and matt, the sarcasm isn't appreciated -_-

Word.

Also, a cool video with the Tomahawk firing from ship and sub, hitting a few targets and also about halfway through they have the cluster one.

Tomahawk Cruise Missile - Extreme Weapon. - Video

[BloodBane611]

Originally Posted by Startrekern

I can provide about a billion sources where Tomahawks were used against armored targets, structures, infantry, bunkers, etc. It's true that they're more precise and for more focused targets than the JDAM is but I just feel they're a better choice for maps like Barracuda and Muttrah and Jabal.

But mostly I just feel they would make more sense for carrier-based maps.

I can quote about a billion sources that say the earth is flat, that doesn't make me correct. If you have sources, quote them. Make a reasonable case for your suggestion at least.


I'm not a fan of the tomahawk ingame, as I have yet to find any evidence (and I have looked) that it is used tactically, which makes sense because it requires a ship/submarine to fire it and a fair amount of preparation/travel time. Furthermore, I don't see a big difference between a 1000 lb tomahawk warhead and a 1000 lb JDAM in terms of actual effect on the battlefield.


An MLRS is an interesting idea, but if it replaces the current artillery/JDAM, I don't really see a benefit.

[Zimmer]

Guys you need to ask yourself what will this add to the game as far as I know the engine you can only have one area attack that means that a tomahawk area attack will not differ from a JDAM attack that is used far more in wars because its cost effective and effective at the same time.

[hartbilt]

Originally Posted by [R-COM]BloodBane611

Is there a realistic reason for this? Tomahawks are used for strategic strikes, they are GPS guided, and generally used for known static strategic targets. I don't see how that fits into PR gameplay.

JDAMs are gps-guided as well, The huge reason that Tomahawks are used very rarely compared to JDAMs, Pricetags.

1 Tomahawk cruise = $570,000
1 JDAM equipped dumb bomb = $30,000-60,000

Originally Posted by [R-COM]BloodBane611

I can quote about a billion sources that say the earth is flat, that doesn't make me correct. If you have sources, quote them. Make a reasonable case for your suggestion at least.


I'm not a fan of the tomahawk ingame, as I have yet to find any evidence (and I have looked) that it is used tactically, which makes sense because it requires a ship/submarine to fire it and a fair amount of preparation/travel time. Furthermore, I don't see a big difference between a 1000 lb tomahawk warhead and a 1000 lb JDAM in terms of actual effect on the battlefield.


An MLRS is an interesting idea, but if it replaces the current artillery/JDAM, I don't really see a benefit.

I'm a Fan of the MLRS.
NOT a fan of Tomahawk, at least for PR.

The Plane with the JDAM has to fly from somewhere before it delivers it's munition, carrier or airfield, just like the TLAM.
How are you defining "tactical use" as per the TLAM??

YouTube Video

Sky News caption displays "PATRIOT MISSLES" but that is incorrect.
Read the new ticker "Allies fire 500 cruise missles a day" , wow Who is during there research, that can't be right?!?!

YouTube Video

[hartbilt]

Maybe I'm wrong but aren't CRUISE MISSILES a Re-Suggestion??

[Zimmer]

Originally Posted by hartbilt

JDAMs are gps-guided as well, The huge reason that Tomahawks are used very rarely compared to JDAMs, Pricetags.

1 Tomahawk cruise = $570,000
1 JDAM equipped dumb bomb = $70,000 to $90,000

A JDAM costs around 18 000$ from what this website says

Joint Direct Attack Munition (JDAM) GBU-31 - Smart Weapons

[Rudd]

Originally Posted by DeltaFart

I like this idea actually, I feel they need to add animations in general for the area strikes, and a tomahawk makes sense since the navy would definitly provide a strike group to help the marines in a landing, and tomahawks would be a part of the SG
and matt, the sarcasm isn't appreciated -_-

if you're talking about having a model of a tomahawk come down and explode etc, I don't think thats going to happen, all the stuff like that only ever seemed to work in local afaik

[hartbilt]

Originally Posted by Zimmer

A JDAM costs around 18 000$ from what this website says

Joint Direct Attack Munition (JDAM) GBU-31 - Smart Weapons

As of 2010 it seems Navy will no longer buy JDAM's.

For fiscal year 2010 the USAF plans/has to purchase 7,517 JDAM @ a price of $190,400,000, so that's $25,000/unit, and I believe that just for the guidance/fin package (not including bomb).

United States DOD Fiscal Year 2011 Expected Budget _ WEAPONS/MUNITIONS
source:http://comptroller.defense.gov/defbu...11_Weapons.pdf

[[R-COM]rushn]

I suggest having two option for commander
1. Jdam wide area suppression and etc

2. tomahawk or equivalent mor eprecise less impact area and better curacy maybe have peeps laze for it? even though its GPS or have the commander control it?
I think more people would play commander if they had more options and if it was more fun

[hartbilt]

Originally Posted by rushn

I suggest having two option for commander
1. Jdam wide area suppression and etc

2. tomahawk or equivalent mor eprecise less impact area and better curacy maybe have peeps laze for it? even though its GPS or have the commander control it?
I think more people would play commander if they had more options and if it was more fun

How about JDAMs and L-JDAMs (laser guided JDAM).

Tomahawk strikes are more often than not, coordinated by Special Ops. FO units, and are approved by the tipsy top brass, and are used for targets of the utmost priority/strategic value. I don't see a need for it in PR, as long as the focus is still on Conventional forces.