Should The Savage get a Buff in the next update?

[Fraizer]

I got scared and accidentally voted no...

Edited December 21, 2015 by Fraizer

[Urustay Gordov Matt D.]

 

 

 

 

I'm just glad most people agree with my view.

I think we can all see how important that is to you. I'm glad for you

 

 

 

When it comes to something like this, yes, it's very important to me.

 

The situation helicopters are in now/their lack of armour is perhaps the single largest injustice in the entire game. It's an insult not only to the helicopters themselves, but to game balance, game design, and common sense.

 

If the helicopters don't get buffed, I'll still be disappointed in this game the day I die.

The savage doesnt need any buff. If you are already good then you wouldnt be complaining here...

People shouldnt get rekt.

[Hunter]

 

 

data-author="Icantthinkofonew">contentEditable="false">Icantthinkofonew, on 21 Dec 2015 - 4:08 PM, said:

 

 

data-author="Furry_Monkey">contentEditable="false">Furry_Monkey, on 21 Dec 2015 - 4:03 PM, said:

 

 

 

data-author="Icantthinkofonew">contentEditable="false">Icantthinkofonew, on 21 Dec 2015 - 3:57 PM, said:

 

I'm just glad most people agree with my view.

I

think we can all see how important that is to you. I'm glad for you class="bbc_emoticon" title=":)" src="http://gtaforums.com/public/style_emoticons/default/smile.gif"

data-cke-saved-src="http://gtaforums.com/public/style_emoticons/default/smile.gif">

 

 

 

When

it comes to something like this, yes, it's very important to

me.

 

The situation helicopters are in now/their lack of armour is

perhaps the single largest injustice in the entire game. It's an insult not only

to the helicopters themselves, but to game balance, game design, and common

sense.

 

If the helicopters don't get buffed, I'll still be

disappointed in this game the day I die.

The savage doesnt need any

buff. If you are already good then you wouldnt be complaining here...

People

shouldnt get rekt.

 

Wow - a jet pilot questioning how "good" a helicopter pilot is. Jets are very easy to use and completely ovepowered, yet you still get shot down in them all the time. Go and get "rekt" yourself.

 

Obvious troll is obvious.

 

Oh by the way, earlier I tricked some jet into flying near my yacht. That defense systm carved him up nicely haha.

Edited December 22, 2015 by Icantthinkofonew

[EkaSwede]

I'd suggest making the co-pilot man the cannon instead of missiles, although there' sprobably a reason why we can't already do that...

 

I like the fragility and clunkiness of the Savage in a weird way since it encourages me to fly more carefully with helicopters instead of a crazy b!tch who slams it into everything.

[EvilPickle12]

Yes, and fix the lampost flip

[MeisterJazz]

I think the Savage shouldve been the jet killer when it came out. Its supposed to enter and leave the battlefield unscathed. I might sound crazy for this but if it were up to me personally, imo id make it be able to take 7-8 rockets. The rockets would be able to chase down jets way faster and would be way more agile than the lazer. Regular guns wouldn't do sh*t. Nothing short of rockets and miniguns would be able to destroy it. Id put a bulletproof canopy to it and lastly i would stop it from blowing up everytime it f*ckin fell or hit a goddamn lamp...

[Hunter]

At the end of a Kill List event, I remember an AI Savage appearing. Either my game lagged a ton, or it took 3 missiles to shoot down. I'm no expert, but if they could adjust the armour so dramatically for that, surely it wouldn't be hard to give it a bit of an armour buff in general?

[cipher656]

4 questions and 3 of them are the same

[Urustay Gordov Matt D.]

 

 

 

 

 

data-author="Icantthinkofonew">contentEditable="false">Icantthinkofonew, on 21 Dec 2015 - 4:08 PM, said:

 

 

 

data-author="Furry_Monkey">contentEditable="false">Furry_Monkey, on 21 Dec 2015 - 4:03 PM, said:

 

 

 

 

data-author="Icantthinkofonew">contentEditable="false">Icantthinkofonew, on 21 Dec 2015 - 3:57 PM, said:

 

I'm just glad most people agree with my view.

I

think we can all see how important that is to you. I'm glad for you class="bbc_emoticon" title=":)" src="http://gtaforums.com/public/style_emoticons/default/smile.gif"

data-cke-saved-src="http://gtaforums.com/public/style_emoticons/default/smile.gif">

 

 

 

When

it comes to something like this, yes, it's very important to

me.

 

The situation helicopters are in now/their lack of armour is

perhaps the single largest injustice in the entire game. It's an insult not only

to the helicopters themselves, but to game balance, game design, and common

sense.

 

If the helicopters don't get buffed, I'll still be

disappointed in this game the day I die.

The savage doesnt need any

buff. If you are already good then you wouldnt be complaining here...

People

shouldnt get rekt.

 

Wow - a jet pilot questioning how "good" a helicopter pilot is. Jets are very easy to use and completely ovepowered, yet you still get shot down in them all the time. Go and get "rekt" yourself.

 

Obvious troll is obvious.

 

Oh by the way, earlier I tricked some jet into flying near my yacht. That defense systm carved him up nicely haha.

Da fu*k?Where tf i said that i get owned by other players in my jet?Never said anything like that.I said that i got blown out of the sky by the yachts defense system, an unavoidable COMPUTER controlled fantomatic gun, and that was only 2 times i got rekt by it.In the video you posted it is not clear if the choppers pilot was a random player and not the yachts owner itself, so i may say its useless as proof of your statement that the yachts guns (fantomatic) are dodgable.

About the choppers being weaker than jets, GET OVER IT, nothing is fair in this game:Auto shotguns are a lot stronger than sawed of shotguns, the zentornos are more nimble and faster than bullet gts, the marksman rifle is OP against the heavy sniper. See it that way, the choppers are the weakest aircrafts in the game, like the bullet GT is the slowest supercar to race with, or like the sawed off shotgun in the shotguns category. Choppers arent absolutely any high priority at all, there are other things that should be buffed first than the savage, and seeing that unlikely to happen, neither the savage and choppers in general should get a buff.

Edited December 22, 2015 by Urustay Gordov

[undertakerfreak1127]

I bought the Savage for the low cooldown time for the rockets; a mission grinder. I don't care much for PVP, so I don't care much for the armor. Besides guys, you all know Rockstar would rather make you pay for a totally new helo that has all the sh*t you want than update the one you already own.

[A Maned Wolf]

I think the Savage shouldve been the jet killer when it came out. Its supposed to enter and leave the battlefield unscathed. I might sound crazy for this but if it were up to me personally, imo id make it be able to take 7-8 rockets. The rockets would be able to chase down jets way faster and would be way more agile than the lazer. Regular guns wouldn't do sh*t. Nothing short of rockets and miniguns would be able to destroy it. Id put a bulletproof canopy to it and lastly i would stop it from blowing up everytime it f*ckin fell or hit a goddamn lamp...

....This is a retarded idea

[Semaj 2JZ♢]

Take away your infini missile fire ability and be my guest with added armor. Otherwise, cry a damn river, build a focking bridge (or cheat/glitch it in, for you sad cheaters) and get dafuq over it. Peace.

[Hunter]

Take away your infini missile fire ability and be my guest with added armor. Otherwise, cry a damn river, build a focking bridge (or cheat/glitch it in, for you sad cheaters) and get dafuq over it. Peace.

We are crying a river. A river that roughly 80% are all crying into. We'll send the river to Rockstar and hopefully it'll change things.

[Urustay Gordov Matt D.]

 

Take away your infini missile fire ability and be my guest with added armor. Otherwise, cry a damn river, build a focking bridge (or cheat/glitch it in, for you sad cheaters) and get dafuq over it. Peace.

We are crying a river. A river that roughly 80% are all crying into. We'll send the river to Rockstar and hopefully it'll change things.Hopefully unlikely to happen

[GhostlySentinel]

I own one, and I don't think it should be buffed. Every jackass going "It's supposed to be a flying tank!" seems to have forgotten how much the rolling tank sucked for everybody, and now wants it back, but with wings and homing rockets. No thanks to another griefing tool, and this isn't Battlefield. You shouldn't even be able to fly these things without a wanted level.

Edited December 22, 2015 by GhostlySentinel

[Re-Dragon-Cro]

It needs a buff, plain and simple, it has 2 disadvantages which combined make it even worse.Its slow and its armour is weak making it a flying target.And no you may be able to avoid a homming missile but chances of that happening is low, almost like winning the jackpot.

 

Considering its based on a Mi-24 its armour needs to be able to withstand a minimum of 2 rockets.

[Hunter]

 

I own one, and I don't think it should be buffed. Every jackass going "It's supposed to be a flying tank!" seems to have forgotten how much the rolling tank sucked for everybody, and now wants it back, but with wings and homing rockets. No thanks to another griefing tool, and this isn't Battlefield. You shouldn't even be able to fly these things without a wanted level.

 

I'm sure everyone asking for it to be buffed owns one too, and we all want it buffed. It doesn't need to be as strong as the tank, but it should be strong enough to not have engine failure after 1 bullet from a revolver.

[pycnotic]

 

 

I own one, and I don't think it should be buffed. Every jackass going "It's supposed to be a flying tank!" seems to have forgotten how much the rolling tank sucked for everybody, and now wants it back, but with wings and homing rockets. No thanks to another griefing tool, and this isn't Battlefield. You shouldn't even be able to fly these things without a wanted level.

 

I'm sure everyone asking for it to be buffed owns one too, and we all want it buffed. It doesn't need to be as strong as the tank, but it should be strong enough to not have engine failure after 1 bullet from a revolver.

I don't own one but am shocked how easily destroyed they are, if they were to get a buff I would definetly buy one though.

Edited December 22, 2015 by pycnotic

[DBrasco]

Absolutely. It should withstand at least 2 missiles.

[fear_the_nut70]

I would up its armor significantly. Would make for an interesting contrast with the Hydra if it could withstand significant fire (and actually worth getting).

[JohnDoe7125539271]

Without question yes. Absolutely. Definitely. 100%.

 

Even with stronger armour, the Savage would have a lot of other short comings to keep it balanced. The cannon has a short range (unlike a Hind), the cannon can't be aimed (unlike a Hind), it has no flares (unlike a Hind), most important of all - it has almost no chance of dodging a homing launcher (unlike a Hind).

 

There are already so many downsides to this helicopter that I think Rockstar can afford to give it just one strength. The armour it has right now is just crazy anyway - I tested and four bullets of the new revolver literally made it explode.

 

From 1980 to 1989, 74 Hinds were lost in Afghanistan, and atleast 29 were shot down by MANPADS, delivered & used in 1986. 195 other soviet aircraft had been lost to the Stinger alone. Even countermeasures didn't help completely, and newer MANPADS are almost immune to them. Hind dodging a homing launcher? You have to be kidding.

[Hunter]

 

 

 

Without question yes. Absolutely. Definitely. 100%.

 

Even with stronger armour, the Savage would have a lot of other short comings to keep it balanced. The cannon has a short range (unlike a Hind), the cannon can't be aimed (unlike a Hind), it has no flares (unlike a Hind), most important of all - it has almost no chance of dodging a homing launcher (unlike a Hind).

 

There are already so many downsides to this helicopter that I think Rockstar can afford to give it just one strength. The armour it has right now is just crazy anyway - I tested and four bullets of the new revolver literally made it explode.

 

From 1980 to 1989, 74 Hinds were lost in Afghanistan, and atleast 29 were shot down by MANPADS, delivered & used in 1986. 195 other soviet aircraft had been lost to the Stinger alone. Even countermeasures didn't help completely, and newer MANPADS are almost immune to them. Hind dodging a homing launcher? You have to be kidding.

 

 

 

A real Hind can avoid a stinger - since, unlike a homing launcher, I've yet to see any real life heat - seeking missiles that can make a U - turn.

 

There were most likely thousands of Hinds in Afghanistan - 74 might have been lost, but what about all the others that weren't?

 

The Soviet Union was a powerful country, so they wouldn't have used the Hinds if they stood no chance against missiles. Besides, didn't about 1,000,000 Afghans die in that war? 74 helicopters for 1,000,000 people's not bad.

[Hunter]

I couldn't find an appreciation thread for the Savage, so I went ahead and made one:

 

http://gtaforums.com/topic/834359-savage-appreciation-thread/

[JohnDoe7125539271]

 

 

 

 

Without question yes. Absolutely. Definitely. 100%.

 

Even with stronger armour, the Savage would have a lot of other short comings to keep it balanced. The cannon has a short range (unlike a Hind), the cannon can't be aimed (unlike a Hind), it has no flares (unlike a Hind), most important of all - it has almost no chance of dodging a homing launcher (unlike a Hind).

 

There are already so many downsides to this helicopter that I think Rockstar can afford to give it just one strength. The armour it has right now is just crazy anyway - I tested and four bullets of the new revolver literally made it explode.

 

From 1980 to 1989, 74 Hinds were lost in Afghanistan, and atleast 29 were shot down by MANPADS, delivered & used in 1986. 195 other soviet aircraft had been lost to the Stinger alone. Even countermeasures didn't help completely, and newer MANPADS are almost immune to them. Hind dodging a homing launcher? You have to be kidding.

 

 

 

A real Hind can avoid a stinger - since, unlike a homing launcher, I've yet to see any real life heat - seeking missiles that can make a U - turn.

 

There were most likely thousands of Hinds in Afghanistan - 74 might have been lost, but what about all the others that weren't?

 

The Soviet Union was a powerful country, so they wouldn't have used the Hinds if they stood no chance against missiles. Besides, didn't about 1,000,000 Afghans die in that war? 74 helicopters for 1,000,000 people's not bad.

 

 

The F-22 or other jets with thrust vectoring may outmaneuver a Stinger, but certainly not a Hind. Stinger can hit targets 90° away from their direction, and there are versions with passive radar seeker aswell. No idea about the number of Hinds back then, but they kept around 700 after USSR collapse, and nowadays they're just 620 left. I doubt they had more than 1000 units in Afghanistan. 74 of 700 lost in just three years is pretty heavy, especially if you consider that only 250 Stingers were delivered. (and also shot down 195 other aircraft, not named Hind)

 

How does the number of dead afghans have anything to do with Hinds & Stingers? The leader of Operation Cyclone said, "before Sept 26, 1986 we've never won a battle, then Stingers were delivered & we've won every one afterwards" - many experts say, this weapon turned the tides & ended the war.

 

BTT: Its GTA not Battlefield, if all, the Savage needs stronger armor, but thats it. But then i want the homing launcher to have a range of 5 miles...

[Hunter]

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Without question yes. Absolutely. Definitely. 100%.

 

Even with stronger armour, the Savage would have a lot of other short comings to keep it balanced. The cannon has a short range (unlike a Hind), the cannon can't be aimed (unlike a Hind), it has no flares (unlike a Hind), most important of all - it has almost no chance of dodging a homing launcher (unlike a Hind).

 

There are already so many downsides to this helicopter that I think Rockstar can afford to give it just one strength. The armour it has right now is just crazy anyway - I tested and four bullets of the new revolver literally made it explode.

 

From 1980 to 1989, 74 Hinds were lost in Afghanistan, and atleast 29 were shot down by MANPADS, delivered & used in 1986. 195 other soviet aircraft had been lost to the Stinger alone. Even countermeasures didn't help completely, and newer MANPADS are almost immune to them. Hind dodging a homing launcher? You have to be kidding.

 

 

 

A real Hind can avoid a stinger - since, unlike a homing launcher, I've yet to see any real life heat - seeking missiles that can make a U - turn.

 

There were most likely thousands of Hinds in Afghanistan - 74 might have been lost, but what about all the others that weren't?

 

The Soviet Union was a powerful country, so they wouldn't have used the Hinds if they stood no chance against missiles. Besides, didn't about 1,000,000 Afghans die in that war? 74 helicopters for 1,000,000 people's not bad.

 

 

The F-22 or other jets with thrust vectoring may outmaneuver a Stinger, but certainly not a Hind. Stinger can hit targets 90° away from their direction, and there are versions with passive radar seeker aswell. No idea about the number of Hinds back then, but they kept around 700 after USSR collapse, and nowadays they're just 620 left. I doubt they had more than 1000 units in Afghanistan. 74 of 700 lost in just three years is pretty heavy, especially if you consider that only 250 Stingers were delivered. (and also shot down 195 other aircraft, not named Hind)

 

How does the number of dead afghans have anything to do with Hinds & Stingers? The leader of Operation Cyclone said, "before Sept 26, 1986 we've never won a battle, then Stingers were delivered & we've won every one afterwards" - many experts say, this weapon turned the tides & ended the war.

 

BTT: Its GTA not Battlefield, if all, the Savage needs stronger armor, but thats it. But then i want the homing launcher to have a range of 5 miles...

 

 

 

The number of dead Afghans shows they must have been killing a lot, so the Hinds couldn't have been that helpless against the Stingers.

 

As for Hinds being unable to dodge Stingers, I'm still not convinced. Maybe they couldn't outrun them, but I don't see why they couldn't just turn out of the way. When I see a Stinger missile making 180 degree turns on a dime, then I'll believe it can actually do that - until then, it's a missile travelling at a very high speed, so I assume they can't make turns that sharply, not without losing all their speed. Also, I think the Hind is still being used in parts of the world today, so there must be something good about it.

 

As for the homing launcher having a 5 mile range, then you'd also have to stick to reality's other rules. You'd actually have to aim it at the helicopter, instead of somewhere vaguely close by. You'd have to maintain the lock on, and, presumably, the homing launcher's magical U - turns would be gone.

 

Meanwhile the Savage would have flares, massively stronger armour, and a cannon that can not only be aimed, but has a range much much larger than it is right now.

 

I don't want it to be like that though; that's not the point I was trying to make. The point I was making is that the Savage barely has any strengths right now. All it has is strong firepower, and even that is hindered by its tiny range.

[zecanelao]

It's also ridiculous how it flips upside down when you hit a pole.

[JohnDoe7125539271]

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Without question yes. Absolutely. Definitely. 100%.

 

Even with stronger armour, the Savage would have a lot of other short comings to keep it balanced. The cannon has a short range (unlike a Hind), the cannon can't be aimed (unlike a Hind), it has no flares (unlike a Hind), most important of all - it has almost no chance of dodging a homing launcher (unlike a Hind).

 

There are already so many downsides to this helicopter that I think Rockstar can afford to give it just one strength. The armour it has right now is just crazy anyway - I tested and four bullets of the new revolver literally made it explode.

 

From 1980 to 1989, 74 Hinds were lost in Afghanistan, and atleast 29 were shot down by MANPADS, delivered & used in 1986. 195 other soviet aircraft had been lost to the Stinger alone. Even countermeasures didn't help completely, and newer MANPADS are almost immune to them. Hind dodging a homing launcher? You have to be kidding.

 

 

 

A real Hind can avoid a stinger - since, unlike a homing launcher, I've yet to see any real life heat - seeking missiles that can make a U - turn.

 

There were most likely thousands of Hinds in Afghanistan - 74 might have been lost, but what about all the others that weren't?

 

The Soviet Union was a powerful country, so they wouldn't have used the Hinds if they stood no chance against missiles. Besides, didn't about 1,000,000 Afghans die in that war? 74 helicopters for 1,000,000 people's not bad.

 

 

The F-22 or other jets with thrust vectoring may outmaneuver a Stinger, but certainly not a Hind. Stinger can hit targets 90° away from their direction, and there are versions with passive radar seeker aswell. No idea about the number of Hinds back then, but they kept around 700 after USSR collapse, and nowadays they're just 620 left. I doubt they had more than 1000 units in Afghanistan. 74 of 700 lost in just three years is pretty heavy, especially if you consider that only 250 Stingers were delivered. (and also shot down 195 other aircraft, not named Hind)

 

How does the number of dead afghans have anything to do with Hinds & Stingers? The leader of Operation Cyclone said, "before Sept 26, 1986 we've never won a battle, then Stingers were delivered & we've won every one afterwards" - many experts say, this weapon turned the tides & ended the war.

 

BTT: Its GTA not Battlefield, if all, the Savage needs stronger armor, but thats it. But then i want the homing launcher to have a range of 5 miles...

 

 

 

The number of dead Afghans shows they must have been killing a lot, so the Hinds couldn't have been that helpless against the Stingers.

 

As for Hinds being unable to dodge Stingers, I'm still not convinced. Maybe they couldn't outrun them, but I don't see why they couldn't just turn out of the way. When I see a Stinger missile making 180 degree turns on a dime, then I'll believe it can actually do that - until then, it's a missile travelling at a very high speed, so I assume they can't make turns that sharply, not without losing all their speed. Also, I think the Hind is still being used in parts of the world today, so there must be something good about it.

 

As for the homing launcher having a 5 mile range, then you'd also have to stick to reality's other rules. You'd actually have to aim it at the helicopter, instead of somewhere vaguely close by. You'd have to maintain the lock on, and, presumably, the homing launcher's magical U - turns would be gone.

 

Meanwhile the Savage would have flares, massively stronger armour, and a cannon that can not only be aimed, but has a range much much larger than it is right now.

 

I don't want it to be like that though; that's not the point I was trying to make. The point I was making is that the Savage barely has any strengths right now. All it has is strong firepower, and even that is hindered by its tiny range.

 

 

Oh, they sure did... however, how many of these deaths are related to Hinds? How does killing thousands of civilians prove a point? The war went from 1979 to 1989, and the Stinger wasn't delivered until 1986. Of course they had plenty of time to wreck havoc with & without Hinds. "Maybe they couldn't outrun them"? Maybe? Pretty sure a 200mph 'fast' Helicopter can't outrun a 1300mph missile, unless its very far away & the boosters run out. It can catch a damn jet, unless they run with afterburners.

 

Just turn out of the way... in reality its just as easy as in GTA, if you get my point. Unless you're very flying low + flares, which the Soviets did, you don't evade sh*t. Actually, the missile turns way faster than the hind & to dodge the missile, you need to know theres one on the way & if you do, you have almost no response time. Less than 5 seconds if the Stinger is away 3500m IF your MAW/RWR works. In case of the Hinds or the russian Su-24 shot down over Syria, it didn't or there hasn't been enough time.

 

The Hind is still used by many countries, its like an old VW Golf, reliable & affordable, but by no means a Ferrari or Bentley. 3 Mi-24 were shot down by MANPADs in 2014 + 1 modernized Mi-35. Of course you need to lock on, which is easier at a distance. Without turns, the missile can exceed 10,000m (6,2mi). Flares are quite effective against IR, depending on range, but not against IR/UV dual seekers.

 

The Savage is fine as it is, you can bust Rhinos with it, thanks to the firepower, if you want to kill people on the ground, there are other ways. If you give it more armor, as bulletproof glass & immune to small arms as the Rhino, then atleast limit the ammo, and let the weapons only be available if there is two pilots.

[Hunter]

 

 

data-author="Icantthinkofonew">contentEditable="false">Icantthinkofonew, on 22 Dec 2015 - 11:13 PM,

said:

 

 

 

data-author="PsychoGamer">PsychoGamer,

on 22 Dec 2015 - 10:49 PM, said:

 

 

 

 

 

 

data-author="Icantthinkofonew">contentEditable="false">Icantthinkofonew, on 22 Dec 2015 - 5:54 PM, said:

 

 

 

data-author="PsychoGamer">PsychoGamer,

on 22 Dec 2015 - 5:20 PM, said:

 

 

 

 

 

 

data-author="Icantthinkofonew">contentEditable="false">Icantthinkofonew, on 21 Dec 2015 - 03:25 AM,

said:

 

 

Without question yes. Absolutely. Definitely. 100%.

 

 

 

Even with stronger armour, the Savage would have a lot of other short comings

to keep it balanced. The cannon has a short range (unlike a Hind), the cannon

can't be aimed (unlike a Hind), it has no flares (unlike a Hind), most important

of all - it has almost no chance of dodging a homing launcher (unlike a

Hind).

 

 

 

There are already so many downsides to this helicopter that I think Rockstar

can afford to give it just one strength. The armour it has right now is just

crazy anyway - I tested and four bullets of the new revolver literally made it

explode.

 

 

 

From 1980 to 1989, 74 Hinds were lost in Afghanistan, and atleast 29 were

shot down by MANPADS, delivered & used in 1986. 195 other soviet aircraft

had been lost to the Stinger alone. Even countermeasures didn't help

completely, and newer MANPADS are almost immune to them. Hind dodging a homing

launcher? You have to be kidding.

 

 

 

 

 

 

A real Hind can avoid a stinger - since, unlike a homing launcher, I've yet

to see any real life heat - seeking missiles that can make a U - turn.

 

 

 

There were most likely thousands of Hinds in Afghanistan - 74 might have been

lost, but what about all the others that weren't?

 

 

 

The Soviet Union was a powerful country, so they wouldn't have used the Hinds

if they stood no chance against missiles. Besides, didn't about 1,000,000

Afghans die in that war? 74 helicopters for 1,000,000 people's not bad.

 

 

 

 

 

The F-22 or other jets with thrust vectoring may outmaneuver a Stinger, but

certainly not a Hind. Stinger can hit targets 90° away from their direction, and

there are versions with passive radar seeker aswell. No idea about the number of

Hinds back then, but they kept around 700 after USSR collapse, and nowadays

they're just 620 left. I doubt they had more than 1000 units in Afghanistan. 74

of 700 lost in just three years is pretty heavy, especially if you consider that

only 250 Stingers were delivered. (and also shot down 195 other aircraft, not

named Hind)

 

 

 

How does the number of dead afghans have anything to do with Hinds &

Stingers? The leader of Operation Cyclone said, "before Sept 26, 1986 we've

never won a battle, then Stingers were delivered & we've won every one

afterwards" - many experts say, this weapon turned the tides & ended the

war.

 

 

 

BTT: Its GTA not Battlefield, if all, the Savage needs stronger armor, but

thats it. But then i want the homing launcher to have a range of 5 miles...

 

 

 

 

 

 

The number of dead Afghans shows they must have been killing a lot, so the

Hinds couldn't have been that helpless against the Stingers.

 

 

 

As for Hinds being unable to dodge Stingers, I'm still not convinced. Maybe

they couldn't outrun them, but I don't see why they couldn't just turn out of

the way. When I see a Stinger missile making 180 degree turns on a dime, then

I'll believe it can actually do that - until then, it's a missile travelling at

a very high speed, so I assume they can't make turns that sharply, not without

losing all their speed. Also, I think the Hind is still being used in parts of

the world today, so there must be something good about it.

 

 

 

As for the homing launcher having a 5 mile range, then you'd also have to

stick to reality's other rules. You'd actually have to aim it at the helicopter,

instead of somewhere vaguely close by. You'd have to maintain the lock on, and,

presumably, the homing launcher's magical U - turns would be gone.

 

 

 

Meanwhile the Savage would have flares, massively stronger armour, and a

cannon that can not only be aimed, but has a range much much larger than

it is right now.

 

 

 

I don't want it to be like that though; that's not the point I was trying to

make. The point I was making is that the Savage barely has any strengths right

now. All it has is strong firepower, and even that is hindered by its tiny

range.

 

 

 

 

 

Oh, they sure did... however, how many of these deaths are related to Hinds?

How does killing thousands of civilians prove a point? The war went from 1979 to

1989, and the Stinger wasn't delivered until 1986. Of course they had plenty of

time to wreck havoc with & without Hinds. "Maybe they couldn't outrun them"?

Maybe? Pretty sure a 200mph 'fast' Helicopter can't outrun a 1300mph missile,

unless its very far away & the boosters run out. It can catch a damn jet,

unless they run with afterburners.

 

 

 

Just turn out of the way... in reality its just as easy as in GTA, if you get

my point. Unless you're very flying low + flares, which the Soviets did, you

don't evade sh*t. Actually, the missile turns way faster than the hind & to

dodge the missile, you need to know theres one on the way & if you do, you

have almost no response time. Less than 5 seconds if the Stinger is away 3500m

IF your MAW/RWR works. In case of the Hinds or the russian Su-24 shot down over

Syria, it didn't or there hasn't been enough time.

 

 

 

The Hind is still used by many countries, its like an old VW Golf, reliable

& affordable, but by no means a Ferrari or Bentley. 3 Mi-24 were shot down

by MANPADs in 2014 + 1 modernized Mi-35. Of course you need to lock on, which is

easier at a distance. Without turns, the missile can exceed 10,000m (6,2mi).

Flares are quite effective against IR, depending on range, but not against IR/UV

dual seekers.

 

 

 

The Savage is fine as it is, you can bust Rhinos with it, thanks to the

firepower, if you want to kill people on the ground, there are other ways. If

you give it more armor, as bulletproof glass & immune to small arms as the

Rhino, then atleast limit the ammo, and let the weapons only be available if

there is two pilots.

 

 

Am I talking to an ex - Soviet pilot who was in Afghanistan or something? Of course a missile goes much faster than a helicopter, but that doesn't mean it can curve around and do 180s. A helicopter, on the other hand, can actually steer and turn. The Hind is probably not the best helicopter for that (I'd imagine), but it can still move and turn. If a pilot knew he was being shot at, saw the general direction (and it wasn't straight behind the helicopter), I don't really see why it couldn't either turn in a sharper circle than the missile could manage, or fly forwards/maybe up so that the missile simply passes by. Like you said, a missile can go at 1300mph - at that speed, it can't simply make a U - turn. I won't believe that unless I see it, because that seems to deny the rules of physics to me. The gta variant, on the other hand, can.

 

If a missile's shot from behind, then I can see why there wouldn't be much of a chance, but if it's shot from vaguely in front, I don't see why it couldn't be evaded without that much trouble. In gta, whatever angle the missile's shot from gives the pilot very little chance. If you actually had to fire from a good angle, make sneak attacks, etc. then it'd make sense.

 

I'm not saying that stingers are some kind of joke to a Hind (especially if shot from the right angle), or that helicopters don't ever get shot down (obviously they do, everything can fail at some point), but I don't believe a stinger can make the kind of turns the homing launcher missiles make. Think of the missiles on the Buzzard - if those shoot a helicopter from behind, the enemy's basically dead; if shot from in front/a poor angle, it can be dodged without a ridiculous effort. That's how the homing launcher should be, in my opinion.

 

But that's not really what I'm aiming for anyway (I understand a homing launcher nerf divides most of the community pretty badly). What I am aiming for, getting back on topic, is an armour buff - and that's something that people seem to be more united about. I think it should probably be similar to the Cargobob armourwise, with one missile leaving it in need of replacement, but not destroyed. I think it should have a little more bullet resistance than the Cargobob though. An ammo limit (for it and other vehicles) would be fine by me, though I'm not sure what limiting it to two players would do. If anything, lone players would need it more than two people who can back each other up.

[JohnDoe7125539271]

No, you're not. I've never said they're doing 180's, but they're still pretty maneuverable. A 8G turn in a F-22 to outmaneuver it? OK, but doing a loop in a Hind? Or descending quickly? Not a chance. How would you spot a launched Stinger from a few miles? And even if you do, if you don't have superman reaction time, its just two seconds & you're done. The hit propability in combat was around 86%, and if one misses, you're firing another. Its just $40,000, meanwhile modern helicopters/jets cost a dozen of millions each. There are several missiles, being able to U-turn (not on a dime though), if fed with radar data. The Stinger without canards & IR/UV seeker isn't one of them.

 

R* should just decrease the maneuverability of the homing launcher, instead of buffing the Savage. Can the Stinger make turns like in GTA? No, but a few cavemen with a few hundred outdated Stingers (no UV, prone to flares) still shot down over 70 Hinds & 200 other aircraft in just 3yrs. With the right weapon, the flying tank quickly becomes a falling brick, as in GTA.

 

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=0f9_1433433061

 

I don't even need the Savage in GTA. What for? The Buzzard can usually do the job. No buff needed, just decrease the homing launchers capability, OR even better, both... as the Savage would be overpowered with better armor (i agree, its a bad joke)

[jollythecat]

I vote: No

 

The Savage was put in the game as it is, so it should remain as it is.

 

By your logic we should also ask for faster acceleration on the Zentorno, or better traction on the Jester.

Edited December 23, 2015 by jollythecat