The GMs Court

[DeSchaine]

[quote name='Karl Martin' date='21 April 2010 - 01:13 AM' timestamp='1271826806' post='2268846']
They hover, not fly.
[/quote]

I have never seen a more incorrect statement. Yes, they do hover, but *gasp* they also are capable of forward FLIGHT through careful manipulation of the collective and the cyclic via the controls. But, don't take my word for it. Go talk to anyone that pilots an Apache or a Blackhawk.

And I would agree that the Specter gunships should be counted as bombers.

[Subtleknifewielder]

Any aircraft that has any kind of useable weapon, or is designed specifically to somehow inflict casualties on an enemy at ALL, should be counted as part of the IG count.

Transports do not fit this description.

Edited April 21, 2010 by Subtleknifewielder

[iamthey]

[quote name='king of cochin' date='21 April 2010 - 04:53 AM' timestamp='1271821990' post='2268741']
Seeing as they are ineffective in terms of aerial combat and are as vulnerable as any of the transport aircrafts, can they truly be considered on par with fighters ad bombers? As TBM said, any person with a superb MANPADS can bring them if they use it smartly. For all purposes they are effectively artillery in sky.
[/quote]

Bombers and fighters are not limited in number for the type of weapon they fire, they are limited more for their mobility, and range. Under the logic you are using, a fighter like say an f-22 shouldn't be considered part of the IG aircraft because I could conceivably place similar missiles and give a similar roll to a ground based mobil missile battery. Obviously this undermines the function of even having an IG based cap on the number of aircraft you can have in use/deployed at any one point.

[Captain Enema]

[quote name='Subtleknifewielder' date='21 April 2010 - 03:02 PM' timestamp='1271883735' post='2269527']
Any aircraft that has any kind of useable weapon, or is designed specifically to somehow inflict casualties on an enemy at ALL, should be counted as part of the IG count.

Transports do not fit this description.
[/quote]

Occam's razor answer wins.

[Fizzydog]

I'm rerolling on the 28th, can I put my nation under lock when I reroll or do I have to lose it? I don't want to lose my RP nation as I'm going to to reroll for better resources.

[Voodoo Nova]

[quote name='Subtleknifewielder' date='21 April 2010 - 05:02 PM' timestamp='1271883735' post='2269527']
Any aircraft that has any kind of useable weapon, or is designed specifically to somehow inflict casualties on an enemy at ALL, should be counted as part of the IG count.

Transports do not fit this description.
[/quote]

You can make a transport designed to specifically inflict casualties.

[Captain Enema]

C-130s are used to drop daisy cutters all the time.

[iamthey]

It would depend on what the plane was being used for in that moment.

[Executive Minister]

We need a ruling. Especially on helicopters after Gunther's comment of IG apaches being bombers.

[Subtleknifewielder]

[quote name='Tidy Bowl Man' date='21 April 2010 - 03:59 PM' timestamp='1271890742' post='2269748']
C-130s are used to drop daisy cutters all the time.
[/quote]
lol

Voodoo, please explain how a transport is designed to directly inflict casualties?

[Executive Minister]

[quote name='Subtleknifewielder' date='21 April 2010 - 08:14 PM' timestamp='1271895244' post='2269856']
lol

Voodoo, please explain how a transport is designed to directly inflict casualties?
[/quote]

In Voodoo's example a relatively harmless 'transport' can easily inflict casualties, hence a flaw in yours and other's logic.

[Fizzydog]

[quote name='Fizzydog' date='21 April 2010 - 05:46 PM' timestamp='1271889985' post='2269731']
I'm rerolling on the 28th, can I put my nation under lock when I reroll or do I have to lose it? I don't want to lose my RP nation as I'm going to to reroll for better resources.
[/quote]
Can somone answer my question?

[Executive Minister]

[quote name='Fizzydog' date='21 April 2010 - 08:55 PM' timestamp='1271897700' post='2269913']
Can somone answer my question?
[/quote]

Your stats from the old nation you used for the RP nation will change to your new stats, but the RP would stay the same if you wanted.

Edited April 22, 2010 by Executive Minister

[Voodoo Nova]

[quote name='Fizzydog' date='21 April 2010 - 08:55 PM' timestamp='1271897700' post='2269913']
Can somone answer my question?
[/quote]

You don't lose your nation, but you lose your nation statistics as they are now.


As to IG aircraft, be reasonable when it comes to none-fighter & bomber aircraft. Transports, logistical craft, etc are similar to artillery in that they are not included IG because it is assumed a nation as that as a part of their air force. Don't go hog wild, and I'd say logistical air craft, AWACs, etc should be no more than the fighter/bomber squadron counts. As to helicopters, once again be reasonable. No one should be running around with 2000 Apaches in a single RP.

Edited April 22, 2010 by Voodoo Nova

[Fizzydog]

Thats fine. I was old I was going to get aid to build me back to my current strength, anyway.

[king of cochin]

Thanks everyone, for your answers. This would help in the reorganization of my Air Force, I have not been RPing the entire number of squadrons I can RP because of this confusion, now with this, I think I will be able to organize it better,

[Subtleknifewielder]

[quote name='Executive Minister' date='21 April 2010 - 05:54 PM' timestamp='1271897656' post='2269911']
In Voodoo's example a relatively harmless 'transport' can easily inflict casualties, hence a flaw in yours and other's logic.
[/quote]
What example? I see no example.

And is a transport specifically DESIGNED to inflict casualties? I think we all know the answer to that. What they are designed to do is in the NAME.

In other words, it is first and foremost a transport. Not a fighter, not a bomber, a transport.

Edited April 22, 2010 by Subtleknifewielder

[Voodoo Nova]

[quote name='Subtleknifewielder' date='21 April 2010 - 10:52 PM' timestamp='1271904713' post='2270089']
What example? I see no example.

And is a transport specifically DESIGNED to inflict casualties? I think we all know the answer to that. What they are designed to do is in the NAME.

In other words, it is first and foremost a transport. Not a fighter, not a bomber, a transport.
[/quote]

I can design a transport aircraft to inflict casualties.

[Subtleknifewielder]

[quote name='Voodoo Nova' date='21 April 2010 - 08:01 PM' timestamp='1271905253' post='2270117']
I can design a transport aircraft to inflict casualties.
[/quote]
What, a suicide/kamikaze? You can make ANYTHING into one of those... and that's still not what it was originally designed to do.

[Executive Minister]

[quote name='Subtleknifewielder' date='21 April 2010 - 05:02 PM' timestamp='1271883735' post='2269527']
Any aircraft that has any kind of useable weapon, or is designed specifically to somehow inflict casualties on an enemy at ALL, should be counted as part of the IG count.

Transports do not fit this description.
[/quote]


[quote name='Voodoo Nova' date='21 April 2010 - 06:53 PM' timestamp='1271890408' post='2269737']
You can make a transport designed to specifically inflict casualties.
[/quote]


[quote name='Tidy Bowl Man' date='21 April 2010 - 06:59 PM' timestamp='1271890742' post='2269748']
C-130s are used to drop daisy cutters all the time.
[/quote]


[quote name='Subtleknifewielder' date='21 April 2010 - 10:52 PM' timestamp='1271904713' post='2270089']
What example? I see no example.

And is a transport specifically DESIGNED to inflict casualties? I think we all know the answer to that. What they are designed to do is in the NAME.

In other words, it is first and foremost a transport. Not a fighter, not a bomber, a transport.
[/quote]

My bad, it was TBM's, not Voodoo's example, but the point still holds.

Edit: A transport moves things... what if it moves bombs in addition to cargo?

Edited April 22, 2010 by Executive Minister

[Subtleknifewielder]

[quote name='Executive Minister' date='21 April 2010 - 08:11 PM' timestamp='1271905894' post='2270134']
My bad, it was TBM's, not Voodoo's example, but the point still holds.

Edit: A transport moves things... what if it moves bombs in addition to cargo?
[/quote]
Thet it moves the bombs. Transports are NOT designed to drop things in midflight. It can seriously mess up the day of anyone on them if there's the slightest shift in the cargo.

[Centurius]

[quote name='Executive Minister' date='22 April 2010 - 05:11 AM' timestamp='1271905894' post='2270134']
My bad, it was TBM's, not Voodoo's example, but the point still holds.

Edit: A transport moves things... what if it moves bombs in addition to cargo?
[/quote]

Then I consider them a Bomber.

[Executive Minister]

[quote name='Subtleknifewielder' date='22 April 2010 - 12:22 AM' timestamp='1271910117' post='2270254']
Thet it moves the bombs. [b]Transports are NOT designed to drop things in midflight.[/b] It can seriously mess up the day of anyone on them if there's the slightest shift in the cargo.
[/quote]

You are sadly mistaken.

[quote name='Centurius' date='22 April 2010 - 08:59 AM' timestamp='1271941152' post='2270621']
Then I consider them a Bomber.
[/quote]

Of course you would. Which proves my point that you cannot classify something as an IG bomber or fighter just because it can hurt the enemy. Transports can easily fall into that IG category if we use that classification.

[loannes]

[quote name='Subtleknifewielder' date='22 April 2010 - 05:22 AM' timestamp='1271910117' post='2270254']
Thet it moves the bombs. Transports are NOT designed to drop things in midflight. It can seriously mess up the day of anyone on them if there's the slightest shift in the cargo.
[/quote]

Ever heard of paratroopers?

Edit: Or food drops?

Edited April 22, 2010 by Drakedeath

[Subtleknifewielder]

EM, Drake...I'll admit it might have been a slight exxaggeration on my part...but bombs are considerably heavier than paratroops or food (or any other aid packages).