|
This wiki is closed in favour of the new wiki. Information shown is likely to be very out of date. |
Difference between revisions of "Talk:VHF Combat"
Tumble-Weed (talk | contribs) m (Added opinion.) |
|||
| Line 7: | Line 7: | ||
Well, if the statement in itself is subjective then it should be removed, or rephrased to sound general. For instance, "many pilots believe that a VHF is a bomber's worst nightmare", or something along those lines. [[User:Tumble-Weed|Tumble-Weed]]'' <sup>([[User talk: Tumble-Weed|ComLink]]) ([[Special:Contributions/Tumble-Weed|Holocron]])</sup> 18:09, 15 February 2009 (MST) | Well, if the statement in itself is subjective then it should be removed, or rephrased to sound general. For instance, "many pilots believe that a VHF is a bomber's worst nightmare", or something along those lines. [[User:Tumble-Weed|Tumble-Weed]]'' <sup>([[User talk: Tumble-Weed|ComLink]]) ([[Special:Contributions/Tumble-Weed|Holocron]])</sup> 18:09, 15 February 2009 (MST) | ||
| + | |||
| + | Looks alright to me now! Great job! --[[User:Eyvind|Eyvind]] 04:36, 16 February 2009 (MST) | ||
Revision as of 11:36, 16 February 2009
"A VHF is a bomber's worst nightmare"
This is debatable. In my experience, VHFs are easier than LFs for a bomber to handle. Granted, a poorly flown LF will blow up more or less immediately against a bomber's weaponry, but a well-flown LF won't have to look down those SNACk barrals.
I would say it's safer to say that VHFs are generally more all-purpose than most other classes. They can carry heavy weaponry, not as many as bombers, but equally heavy and enough to take on large targets while still being able to carry anti-fighter juice. --Eyvind 16:51, 14 February 2009 (MST)
Well, if the statement in itself is subjective then it should be removed, or rephrased to sound general. For instance, "many pilots believe that a VHF is a bomber's worst nightmare", or something along those lines. Tumble-Weed (ComLink) (Holocron) 18:09, 15 February 2009 (MST)
Looks alright to me now! Great job! --Eyvind 04:36, 16 February 2009 (MST)
