Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[RAM]

Alexi
Frigate
Weight: 1134tons
Length: 80m
Propulsion: 4mw diesel
Crew: 120
Speed: 43km/h
Armor: 70mm band up to 4.4m tall
Armament:
2 double 80mm turrets
4 double 40mm turrets
4 hydra turrets
4 torpedo tubes (31 total torpedo's)

Tonnage Allocations:
200 tons diesel
400 tons armor
300 tons frigate parts
100 tons primary cannons
40 tons secondary cannons
20 tons machine gun turrets
12 tons torpedo systems
62 tons torpedo's

Battleship: Heavily-armoured bombardment.

Its main guns are really pretty light, and I can't imagine that a battleship would have that much speed when more armour could be added.

Cruiser: Swift-travelling bombardment.

It could be, but its main guns really are very light and don't really have enough range.

Carrier: Primary armament= subsidiaries.

Maybe, if those torpedoes have a really really really long range. But even then it would have too many guns.

Destroyer: Fleet protection.

Just about anything will protect a fleet, but there is nothing to dedicate it to this purpose.

Frigate: Independent.

It is fast enough to avoid most things that it couldn't handle, I could see one of these or a small fleet of them working independently of a traditional fleet structure.

Corvette: Scout, surveillance, express transport, primarily built for speed.

Not really purpose-built for speed, so no.

Boat: Shallow-water operation.

You couldn't really get it off of a sand-bar, it wouldn't be a good idea to take it up an unfamiliar river, It isn't really going to effectively suppress shore-attackers and it is a big target. and loading or unloading it without proper shipping facilities would be a massive chore. I don't really see any reason that you would want to be operating in shallow water with these.

 It seems pretty clear that it is a frigate, most jack-of-all-tradey things and dedicated naval-superiority(Although it may be an idea to give this purpose to cruisers, shich are kind of redundant right now. I could live with the Alexi being a cruiser. This is an initial draft after all.) fighters would be. I must admit that I had already decided that it was a frigate, so I may be a little biased in my assessment. It should be noted that these classifications would be mostly about intent. As always, if the troops decide to misuse our babies then that is a different issue.

 Real-world ratings have not historically been particularly consistent and immersion is going to have to break somewhere. Besides, it is not particularly uncommon for revolutions to overhaul established systems.

P.S.
I am opposed to limiting votes, people shouldn't be holding in their votes waiting in case something better comes along.
As the main user of engineer allocations I want to keep allocating. It seems like a handy way to dictate a small or large project and can be useful for giving a project better odds of exceptional results. I could certainly live without them though...

[Ukrainian Ranger]

Its main guns are really pretty light, and I can't imagine that a battleship would have that much speed when more armour could be added.

So what? Your definition is  heravy-armored bombardment. It has armor? Yep. It can bombard? Yep. Does it has a lot of armour? Yep, 1\3 of allocation
Would it be a battleship under your twisted system had we placed a single 320mm gun on it?

and I can't imagine that a battleship would have that much speed when more armour could be added.

43 km\h is a quite low speed for battleships.

Maybe, if those torpedoes have a really really really long range. But even then it would have too many guns.

Torpedo carrier? Funny name

Just about anything will protect a fleet, but there is nothing to dedicate it to this purpose.

Wut? Alexi was designed to act as AA ship to protect larger ones against aircrafts. Also it's armaments are suited for small ship hunting.  And yep anything with any kind of weapons can protect fleet, so everything is destroyer. That's a flaw of your system

It is fast enough to avoid most things that it couldn't handle, I could see one of these or a small fleet of them working independently of a traditional fleet structure.

Nope, it is not fast enough. Especially after addition of anti-sub armor.
Not that ship need to be able to outrun threats to act independently

Not really purpose-built for speed, so no.

But if it is not purpose build for speed how can it fill the independent role?
And purpose built for speed = racing ship, not combat ship
Also, will you send 3 500 ton ship with 70km\h or 500 ton with 50 km\h to scout?
Besides, scouting by ship in the era of aircrafts... not the best idea.

Please, not reinvent the wheel. Size and role are linked because role is dictated by size and size is dictated by role except special ships like minesweepers, icebreakers  landing crafts, tankers, aircraft carriers that do have special names

As the main user of engineer allocations I want to keep allocating. It seems like a handy way to dictate a small or large project and can be useful for giving a project better odds of exceptional results.

Voted proposal A - put 40% of engineers to project A
Voted proposal B - put 40% of engineers to project B
Voted proposal C - put 40% of engineers to project C
and 5-10 proposal with unspecified number

I suspect it's not gonna work nicely. If you'll keep putting engenieer allocations I'll do that to all my projects\subprojects creating situations like the one above

[RAM]

Bombardment is not its purpose and it is not particularly good at it.

Oh, right, my mistake, I was getting caught up in knots...

Well you could have something similar to a V-2 launcher but to bombard naval sights, but it wouldn't really apply because it would still be a stretch to call it a staging area. Nut I could imagine some sort of mobile submarine dock. Or even a mobile dry dock if you wanted to get really crazy. And it would seem a valid moniker for a craft that is designed for hit-and-run ground landings.

Hrmm, yes, if it is slow and those 40mm guns are AA, then yes, destroyer would be appropriate. The flaw in the system here is that the system is not precise, the advantage is that it actually reflects the ship's function in any way besides docking requirements.

Yes, I was comparing its speed to things rated in knots, my bad. And speed is just the measure I was using in this instance. Although if you can be caught easily it does make it difficult run without your fleet...

This is corvettes, they would perform speed-specific roles. Independence is not the idea here. Wait, you are saying... What you are saying about speed here is contradictory... Corvettes would be expected to outrun anything else, possibly they would harass fleeing opponents or be a rapid-response thing against submarines or to support merchants or something, but generally they would not be intended to get into a fight with other military vessels.
... I do not understand the 3 500ton question. I would send the better ship for the task.
Aircraft still have very limited range and require a lot of support, and will continue to. A ship in that role could operate in all manner of places that would be impossible or impractical for planes to do so. And given that speed could make them nearly invulnerable to torpedoes and bombs, aircraft attacking them would be reduced to strafing runs, probably using 8mm rounds. A few well-placed bits of light armour could probably give it a very high tolerance to strafing runs too. Give it an observation balloon and a radio and you have something that is quite well suited for patrolling shipping lanes and searching for merchants, and about the only thing with the range to scout enemy shores.

Being forced to link function to size is exactly the reason to drop that system.

When one project finishes another takes its place, assuming all those get voted. I would assume that the people playing this game are intelligent enough to revise projects until they are compatible. If you do proposals like that just to mess with the system then I will just do subproposals that are lacking them and people will be free to vote for them instead. This is all why subproposals shouldn't have the same restrictions and main proposals, it gives folk a chance to adapt and compromise. And why voting limits are a problem, people need to believe that they can vote for a subproposal if a good one comes up after they have voted...

[Nadaka]

in order to get through this large number of proposals, I am doing something different this time only. I am rolling until things are complete instead of all at once, it reduces waste of engineers... it also increased my time, wont be doing it again.

7 supporting
8: Finish the diesel engine, consider using it for new popular devotion ships

your 4 engine specialists are assigned to finishing up the diesel engine design and evaluate its use in the Popular Devotion support ship.

The final disign is a compact powerful plant well suited for use in tanks and other heavy vehicles.

Weight: 500kg
Power: 400kw
Select a feature (low mantainance, fuel efficient)

Much of the Popular Devotions 50 tons of engine space is devoted to fuel, oil, tools and gaskets, misc parts necessary for moderate length deployments. 5 of these engines can double the ships rated power and increase its speed up to 48km/h at the same displacement. Or you could opt for 3 engines at 1200kw for a speed of 42km/h and free up 20 tons of displacement for weapons, possibly easy to install weapons like roller racks for depth charges. Or you could split the difference. for 45km/h and 10 tons of ordinance. Fuel efficiency can allow you to shave a few more tons, or alternatively extend the range of the ship. Low Mantainance does as the name implies and all but eliminates failures in the field, but won't affect your tonnage or range. You might even be able to add a bit more displacement without cutting speed.

4 to 7 supporting
1, 1.1, 1.2: Fix the bomb release of our new Wolverine bomber, as well as fixing that surface detonation problem for the depth charges so they can be airdropped. Start producing both as fast as we can. Petition the govornment to switch the factory to produce Wolverines.

3 experienced engineers work day and night to correct these problems. At the end of the year, the defective bomb release is corrected, in fact the bomb mount has been improved enough that a Wolverine could carry a single 250kg depth charge under its fuselage instead of 2 or 3 smaller depth charges. But the depth charges may still detonate prematurely when air dropped, your engineers are certain that they should be safe when launched from ships. The govornment agrees to your petition.

Aside from your novice workers, all your workers produce Wolverine bombers, 174 roll of your factory floor.

3 to 5 supporting
2: See if we can get a crash recruiting/training of electronics and/or acoustic engineers/scientists so we can develop hydrophones

Your new 2 new electronic and 2 new accoustic scientists/engineers arrive and get to work dilligently with the assistance of 2 engineers and 4 green engineers. The research goes very well and you have a basic prototype.

It produces a directional accoustic signal pulse capable of detecting submerged vessels in a straight line in front of the mounted ship along with a range reading up to 2 kilometers. The device weighs 20 tons.
Select 2:
depth finding: depth of sub can be accurately determined.
half weight: weighs half as much. Can be taken twice.
scanning: can rotate somewhat for detection in a 45 degree angle
long range: can detect out to 4km

4 to 5 supporting
5: Finally, finish the 14mm heavy MG provisionally designated ?GVS-14?.

1 engineer and 3 green engineers finish up design work on the 14mm heavy MG to great success, even managing to improve it:

Caliber: 14mm
Action: full auto
Weight: 50kg
Barrel: 1300mm air cooled
Length: 1700mm
Magazine: belt fed
RoF: 300 rounds / minute
Effective range 2000m
Select 1:
high RoF (600 rounds / minute)
extremely accurate
recoil reduced

4 supporting
6.1: Instead of a Biplane fighter construct a monoplane fighter with similar armament. Assign at least the aviation engineer and as many as possible to get it finished. Try adding a small mount for bombs or drop tanks on the wings.

1 experienced aviation engineer, 4 engineers, 1 novice engineer work on this project.

Compared to your most recent bomber, this plane sacrifices armor and lift in exchange for greatly reduced drag, fewer fabric surfaces and a punishing set of guns attached to an interupter gear with 2 bomb points under its wings.

Wingspan: 10m
Weight 1300kg
Engine: 260kw
Armament: 1 14mm HMG, 2 Patriot Mk3, up to 2 bombs
Crew: 1
Speed:
unburdened 400km/h
125kg of ordinance 331km/h
250kg of ordinance 282km/h
500kg of ordinance 218km/h

3 to 5 support
18.4, 18.5 Design "Worker" class destroyer  *Note, i counted Ukrainian Rangers vote for the "not at this time" option instead of for his proposal as that was the order of his preference.

1 experienced engineer is assigned to this task. E has already been accomplished, at least for sonar. This is likely a 175 to 200 point project, taking over half of your engineering for 1 year. You are 3 points into this task.

5 supporting
4: Much as I'd like to simply scrap it, we've put too much effort into the K-1 to do that so I propose to fix the transmission issues and make them more reliable, as well as finish the tank engine. On the other hand I DO propose we scrap the SPIA as a boondoggle that doesn't need anymore funding

2 experience engineers, 3 engineers and 3 novice engineers are assigned to and complete this task. The kinks in the drive train are finally worked out, and capable of supporting up to aproximately 40 tons without issue. This tank includes a fast powered turret like the Hydra. Unlike the deeply flawed SPIA before it, and gets by with only 15 tons of steel for its armor. Unlike the badger before it, this tank uses sloped armor on all its faces. The turret itself is larger as well, weighing an additional 8 tons including an 80mm cannon, a coaxial Patriot MG and a GVS-14 above the commanders hatch. This tank is roughly 12 times more difficult to build than a Badger at this point in time. This also resolves the drive train issue with the battle bus.

Weight: 38 tons
Width: 4m
Length: 7m
Height:: 2.2m
Engines: 2x170kw
Front armor: 35mm 42 degrees
Side armor: 30mm, 62 degrees
Rear armor: 25mm, 62 degrees
Crew: 4
Speed: 39km/h

4 supporting
13: Design a small rocket of about 50kg with a small warhead.
1 experience engineer, 3 engineers, 2 novice  and 3 green engineers are put on this task.
This roughly 1.5 meter long rocket delivers a warhead of 10kg of explosives to a range of about 1k.

3 to 4 supporting
12: Finish the high velocity 40mm gun provisionally designated ?HVG-40? as well as any project over 75%.
 1 experience engineer, 2 engineers and 2 green engineers are put on this task.

The 40mm high velocity cannon is finished at last. It boasts 3 times the penetration of the low velocity gun and is capable of piercing 40+mm armor on a perfect hit. It will almost always penetrate the rear armor of your K-1 tanks, and almost never penetrate the front unless firing down from above. It will always penetrate the side/back of a Badger and penetrate the front more than 80% of the time.

*I think the rest is redundant. In any case I could not find the other uncompleted projects.

3 support
19, Complete the BattleBus, Look for a way to make the best use of the available space

2 experienced engineers, 7 engineers, 8 novice and 4 green engineers are assigned this task.
The transmission issue having been resolved, there is nothing standing in the way of the completion of this task than a rather large amount of work.  Fortunately your engineers see the error of their ways. The previous design had two heavy tank chassis end to end, with their bulky mult- engine systems taking up most of the center of the vehicle. Switched around with engines at the far end not only allows the bus to be shortened, but to have more internal space. All around armor at 20mm angled at about 75 degrees weights in at a hair under 30 tons.
 
Length: 13m
Width: 4m
Height: 3m
Weight: 70 tons
Speed: 30km/h
Crew: 1 driver, 1 commander, 2 mechanics
20 something infantry.
Armamant: 4 patriotism MG iirc?

3 supporting
14: Hedgehog: Design a mortar-launched round with contact detonation to be used against dived submarines.

2 experienced engineer, 4 engineers and 2 novice are assigned to this task.

This task is complete without flaws or benefits. I'll add text later.

3 supporting
9: Develop ship recovery equipment and try to raise sunken Morovian subs for analyzing should it be possible to raise them

6 engineers and 3 novice engineers are assigned to this task. It is about 2/3 of the way done with 1 flaw. 14

3 supporting
3: Develop reliable cameras usable by planes so we can scout out the enemy submarine pens for destruction.

2 to 3 support
24. Develop Q-ships...
you have no more engineers for these task.



4 supporting
16: Build a military academy for experienced soldiers to refine our tactics and teach recruits. For now it shall be a horrible mess of naval, aeronautical, infantry, and vehicular training for everyone from grunts to office staff.
105 novice workers assigned to this task, and complete it.

I'll add text later.

***************************

***************************
At your disposal:
1 experienced electronic engineer
1 electronic engineers
2 accoustic engineers
1 experienced aviation engineer (1d10*)
1 experienced engine engineer (1d10*)
3 engine engineers (1d8*)

19 experienced engineers (1d10)
20 engineers (1d8)
20 novice engineers (1d6)
9 green engineers (1d4)

1 veteran+ worker
13 veteran worker
68 experienced workers
122 workers
95 novice workers


An aging brick office
A large flat field, suitable for use as a runway.
An old partially bombed out wharf with:
1 operational dockyard up to a displacement of 2300 tons (large enough for frigates)
3 warehouses converted to a small factory/machine shop.
1 College of Engineering (produces 4 engineer specialists/year)

Your nations military manufacturing:
1 factory producing Mosin Nagants with upgraded ring sights (lots/year)
1 factory producing 170kw gas engines (mostly supplying the Wolverine factory)
1 factory producing 80mm low velocity guns (~60/year)
1 factories producing Patriotism Mk1 water cooled machine guns (~400/year)
1 factory producing Wolvarine biplanes (~100/year)
1 factory producing air cooled Patriotism Mk2 air cooled machine guns (~300/year)
1 factory producing 320mm coastal defense guns (12/year)
800 ton boat yard to the production of Popular Devotion support ships(34/year)
800 ton boat yard producing Righteous PT boats (3/year)
1200 ton boat yard to the production of Alexi class frigates. (1/year)
1 small factory producing misc small arms (500 SVA-10 + 500 other / year)
1 factory producing Hydra's(100/year)
Expansion of Alexi boat yard to 1400 tons displacement.

Recently completed:
2 factory producing HVG-40 for refits (~300/year)

Recently suspended pending supply of 40mm guns:
1 factories producing Badger Mk2 (~100/year)


Infantry:
~25000 veteran infantry
~10000 infantry (minimal combat experience)
~20000 novice infantry (no  combat experience)
Standard Issue Equipment
Armor: woolen winter long coat + open steel helmet
Primary Weapon: Mosin Nagant with improved ring sights
Secondary Weapon: bayonet

~4200 Patriotism mk1 water cooled machine guns
~3500 Patriotism mk2 air cooled machine guns

~300 special forces
Armor: woolen winter long coat + open steel helmet
Primary weapon: varies
Secondary weapon: varies
110 14mm sniper rifles
230 9mm pistols
230 shotguns
530 SVA-10
~2000 captured 6mm carbines


Armor & Artillery:
733 40mm towable cannons
160 Badger Tanks (diesel)
532 Badger Mk2 Tanks (gas)
343 80mm medium cannons
48 Hydra AA badger variant
25 320mm coastal defense cannon
293 Armored Cars

Air Force:
20 recon balloons
730 Feather biplanes
274 Wolvarine biplanes

Naval:
2 Glorious Cruisers
5 Popular Devotion Support ships
2 Alexi class frigate
1 Alexi 1337 frigate
83 Righteous PT boats


New Rule
No more than 2 proposals per person per year.

The after action report for this year will come in a day or two.

1: fight the defensive fight for now?
2: violate the territorial waters of Unnamed so our pt boats can reach Morovia?
3: attempt a risky deep water crossing with our PT boats.
4: march overland through Unnamed?
5: strike at Morovian naval assets with our limited deep water navy.

[kahn1234]

All i can think of to perfect the K-1 is:

1) Develop high velocity 80mm cannon, plus compatible High Explosive and Armour piercing shells.

2) Replace 2x 170kw engines with 2x400kw engines. The infrastructure for two engines is already there. Shouldn't be too much of a problem installing them, especially if they are compact.

I'm not quite sure what we should do, strategically, but i would say lets not anger our other neighbor.

Also, i will continue to focus on land warfare, as i dont know enough about aircraft or ships to bring anything decent to the table in those arguments.

These aren't proposals, but i would suggest:

For navy:
a) A heavy Destroyer/Light cruiser for ship-to-ship warfare
b) A light destroyer with decent all round weapons and armour, with very good AA and Anti-Sub weapon systems to support the ship-to-ship warcraft.
c) An Attack submarine that can support surface ships as well as act alone (or in groups) to target enemy shipping and warships.
d) An average weight cruiser for heavy ship-to-ship warfare and shore bombardment. If we ever try to do an amphibious assault, we'll need this to bombard the enemies shore defenses before we land.

For Aircraft:
a) A nimble mono-wing fighter that is decently armoured, well armed, fast and maneuverable that can also double as a close air support craft with wing hardpoints for rockets and/or bombs.
b) A Heavy twin engined fighter (either mono-wing or bi-wing) that doubles as a light/tactical bomber with heavy armour, lots of weaponry and good range and bomb capacity.
c) A tough bomber aircraft (again, either mono-wing or bi-wing) with multiple engines (maybe up to 4?) that has heavy armour, extravagant amounts of weapons for defence, very long range and a high bomb capacity for strategic bombing.
d) A nimble mono-wing torpedo bomber that can help defend our shores and navy (if close enough to friendly airspace).

We can look into choppers, jet engines and computers when we are not at war. I have a feeling as soon as we are done with the Morovians, there will be an (at least two way) arms race.

[Ukrainian Ranger]

Being forced to link function to size is exactly the reason to drop that system.

Huh? I am confused. How calling a ship in one way or another will change it's function?


As for strategic choice... GM,  Are proposals for strategy count toward the overall limit of proposals? Or combat phase are separate turns now? I have one ambitious plan to suggest to our generals...

[tryrar]

I'd say 1 until at least we can refit ships with the new sonar, then go for 5.

I vote fuel efficient for the diesel

Speaking of sonar, I vote for depth-finding and scanning

With the Popular Devotions, I vote we put 3 engines on them, definitely put depth-charge racks and/or hedgehogs on them as well as the sonar(maybe adding a little displacement) and have them be our subhunters for now(until we get a dedicated ASW ship)

Flipped a coin and it came up a vote for extremely accurate for the GVS-14

I vote 1&2

Ok, as for proposals:

3)Begin refitting the new diesel into anything that'll fit it(excluding aircraft of course). This includes, but is not limited to; the PT boats, cars, trucks, the Armored Car, and the Badger. I'm aiming to streamline supply lines by having everything ground-based run on diesel.
4)Continue work on the new Worker destroyer class, this time as a full scale effort, with the following modification: if the high-velocity 80mm is completed design and mount two double 80mm turrets instead of the double and single 160mm. As an addendum, any ship currently armed with the low-velocity 80mm is to have the high-velocity 80mm refitted to it

[kahn1234]

I'd say 1 until at least we can refit ships with the new sonar, then go for 5.

Speaking of sonar, I vote for depth-finding and scanning

With the Popular Devotions, I vote we put 3 engines on them, definitely put depth-charge racks and/or hedgehogs on them as well as the sonar(maybe adding a little displacement) and have them be our subhunters for now(until we get a dedicated ASW ship)

Flipped a coin and it came up a vote for extremely accurate for the GVS-14

Ok, as for proposals:

3)Begin refitting the new diesel into anything that'll fit it(excluding aircraft of course). This includes, but is not limited to; the PT boats, cars, trucks, the Armored Car, and the Badger. I'm aiming to streamline supply lines by having everything ground-based run on diesel.
4)Continue work on the new Worker destroyer class, this time as a full scale effort, with the following modification: if the high-velocity 80mm is completed design and mount two double 80mm turrets instead of the double and single 160mm. As an addendum, any ship currently armed with the low-velocity 80mm is to have the high-velocity 80mm refitted to it

+1 to all parts here.

Although, I'd go for low maintenance for the diesel engine.

[Ukrainian Ranger]

Aren't 80mm  too small for any serious ship to ship fight?

[tryrar]

Maybe, but the Buckley class destroyer escorts had 3x open mount 3'(76mm) guns as it's main armament, so there's that. If you're worried about firepower, we COULD go triple-mount 80mms...

[RAM]

Do subproposals count against the 2 proposal limit?

Spoiler: voting template (click to show/hide)

Code: [Select]

[b]Diesel engine: low mantainance, fuel efficient[/b]
[b]Submarine detector(2 of): depth finding, half weight, scanning, long range[/b]
[b]14mm machine gun: high RoF, extremely accurate, recoil reduced[/b]
[b]1: fight the defensive fight for now?[/b]
[b]2: violate the territorial waters of Unnamed so our pt boats can reach Morovia?[/b]
[b]3: attempt a risky deep water crossing with our PT boats.[/b]
[b]4: march overland through Unnamed?[/b]
[b]5: strike at Morovian naval assets with our limited deep water navy.[/b]
[b]We get 4 engineers, make up specialities for them:[/b]


Spoiler: proposal tracker (click to show/hide)

Code: [Select]

kah,try-1) Develop [for the K-1] high velocity 80mm cannon, plus compatible High Explosive and Armour piercing shells.
kah,try-2) Replace [on the K-1] 2x 170kw engines with 2x400kw engines. The infrastructure for two engines is already there. Shouldn't be too much of a problem installing them, especially if they are compact.
try,kah-3)Begin refitting the new diesel into anything that'll fit it(excluding aircraft of course). This includes, but is not limited to; the PT boats, cars, trucks, the Armored Car, and the Badger. I'm aiming to streamline supply lines by having everything ground-based run on diesel.
try,kah-4)Continue work on the new Worker destroyer class, this time as a full scale effort, with the following modification: if the high-velocity 80mm [from proposal 1] is completed design and mount two double 80mm turrets instead of the double and single 160mm. As an addendum, any ship currently armed with the low-velocity 80mm is to have the high-velocity 80mm refitted to it


[Ukrainian Ranger]

Destroyer escort is a problem   (they were called frigates in British Navy, BTW)

I'd rather have something that can defend itself in a proper naval combat because we'll have to fight surface ships sometimes and we have only 2 crappy "cruisers" for that role.

Modified popular devotions are way better for ASW role because we aren't facing U-boats but light coastal subs. No need for 2300 ton ship for that
And AA role is covered by Alexi

And you'll not fix AP and range problems by tripling 80mms

[tryrar]

Destroyer escort is a problem   (they were called frigates in British Navy, BTW)

I'd rather have something that can defend itself in a proper naval combat because we'll have to fight surface ships sometimes and we have only 2 crappy "cruisers" for that role.

Modified popular devotions are way better for ASW role because we aren't facing U-boats but light coastal subs. No need for 2300 ton ship for that
And AA role is covered by Alexi

And you'll not fix AP and range problems by tripling 80mms

The 76mm I referenced had a max range of around 13.4 kilometers(which translates to about 8 miles), so that's pretty good(not probably it's EFFECTIVE range tho ). an 80mm will still probably wreck a ship, especially if we aren't facing battleships 

Plus, we can refit those cruisers so they aren't crappy. If I hadn't used up my two proposals, I'd propose we replace the 4 160mm turrets with two twin-160mm turrets, and in place of the other two 160mms, put in two triple high-velocity 80mm turrets, keep the same number of 40mms but put them in double turrets and upgrade them to HVG-40s, add 4 hydra turrets, and some rail-mounted GVS-14's. I've already proposed we upgrade the diesel plant for it

[RAM]

Diesel engine: low mantainance This is a crazy tough choice. Extra operating time or extra range... I decided to go with maintaining our people's history of quality...
Submarine detector(2 of): depth finding, scanning Tough call again, range would be lovely, and a 5-ton model could probably be squeezed into the righteous, but need the depth for the charges and scanning so that our ships don't constantly lose their targets...
14mm machine gun: extremely accurate Vehicles should handle the recoil and I'd rather save the ammunition.
3: attempt a risky deep water crossing with our PT boats. Charge!
Rifle engineer, Aviation engineer, Nautical engineer, Heavy Metal Engineer We can get someone else to do aluminium armour for aircraft...

5: Finish the airship-bomber-subhunter thing that we got a good start on.
6: Design a simple, low-cost half-automatic rifle to replace the Mosin Nagant. Have it fire sixteen of the standard 8mm rounds between reloads. Name it the Comrade's Repeater-29 (C.R.-29)

suggestion: Badger II- new diesel engine, high-velocity 40mm, and enough front-armour to withstand our 40mm high-velocity. Oh, and a powered turret, and see if the loading process can be automated to make the turret smaller...

Vote 3

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

Code: [Select]

kah,try-1) Develop [for the K-1] high velocity 80mm cannon, plus compatible High Explosive and Armour piercing shells.
kah,try-2) Replace [on the K-1] 2x 170kw engines with 2x400kw engines. The infrastructure for two engines is already there. Shouldn't be too much of a problem installing them, especially if they are compact.
try,kah,RAM-3)Begin refitting the new diesel into anything that'll fit it(excluding aircraft of course). This includes, but is not limited to; the PT boats, cars, trucks, the Armored Car, and the Badger. I'm aiming to streamline supply lines by having everything ground-based run on diesel.
try,kah-4)Continue work on the new Worker destroyer class, this time as a full scale effort, with the following modification: if the high-velocity 80mm [from proposal 1] is completed design and mount two double 80mm turrets instead of the double and single 160mm. As an addendum, any ship currently armed with the low-velocity 80mm is to have the high-velocity 80mm refitted to it
RAM-5: Finish the airship-bomber-subhunter thing that we got a good start on.
RAM-6: Design a simple, low-cost half-automatic rifle to replace the Mosin Nagant. Have it fire sixteen of the standard 8mm rounds between reloads. Name it the Comrade's Repeater-29 (C.R.-29)

[Ukrainian Ranger]

tryrar, I do want to face battleships and cruisers. Approach, shell enemy with double turret, launch torpedoes and GTFO.Maybe little too risky against battleships, but that is viable tactic to engage cruisers

Also, no, 80mm shell can't "wreck" any reasonably sized military ship, especially 80mm AP shell.

As for you cruisers refit proposal, that will improve it's power slightly, but still they be our only ships capable for artillery duel
Also, diesel for cruisers... that's risky. I'd prefer to develop better steam engine.
Also how will you fit all that on the cruiser? That's a serious addition in number of weapons, what will you remove?

Finally Why you guys make design suggestions without knowing what will happen during the war phase?