Print

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

[Brood]

Uhm does anybody have any idea what cheeses rifle is meant to be? It makes no sense to me.

I know what the basic principle is but why propose a gun that went out of service when full auto rifles came in, after we have full auto rifles?

[Taricus]

Well, it's either he wants to use an extremly impractical rifle, or he wants to design a semi-auto rifle (Which we already have in the form of the SVA-10).

[Funk]

i think hes after a rifle with 12 round in built magazine, chambered in .30-06 Springfield.     

[Brood]

... Uhm, Why?

The full auto assault rifile while not fantastic easily tops that, which reminds me. I need to get said assault rifle into production after a final attempt at upgrading it.
The infantry could use a replacement for the SVA-10, our enemy will be building a version of it themselves or a better one now so I think I'll try to get us a bigger lead.

If it and the RPG uprade go well our infantry will be able to take down enemy armor head on as well as seriously out match any enemy infantry.

[Brood]

Wow, so after all the complaining from people about pilling to many things into 1 project it's still going on.

3 completely different projects under 1 number UR really?

[Ukrainian Ranger]

3 completely different? How?


How  suggestion to upgrade the rifle by trying to adapt different rounds (making a version for different caliber is a quite trivial thing  ) and by stealing successful ideas from captured firearms can be viewed as three completely different suggestions?

[Brood]

Becuase testing different bullets is different from upgrades to the gun itself.
So is studying all different guns after you decided what upgrades to make.

Study it first then do it by all means but studying it after the upgrade is done then means it's not for that project and so is not part of that proposal since it's for a future one.

[Ukrainian Ranger]

Pffff....
Are you joking?

I am suggesting to upgrade the gun and nothing more

Do you want

Proposal 1) - upgrade the gun
Proposal 2) - upgrade the very same gun by experimenting with different caliber using existing bullets
proposal 3) - upgrade the very same gun by trying to steal some successful ideas from captured designs

That's an absurd way to make proposals
__________-
by that logic

Proposal 18, Again attempt to upgrade the assault rifle, focussing on accuracy, velocity and ROF in that order.

Should be

18. Attempt to upgrade accuracy of the assault rifle
19. Attempt to upgrade velocity of the assault rifle
20. Attempt to upgrade ROF of the assault rifle

[Brood]

But the way you've designed it your getting results from 2 sets of testing in that proposal that will have 0 impact on that proposal because you've already decided on what to upgrade and did not make any reference at all about using those results for anything.

[Ukrainian Ranger]

What? Do you think that different round used can't change size of magazine. weight or reliability?
Maybe you think that minor ideas from enemy firearms can't improve the very same things? Minor part can change the gun dramatically Besides you know what focus means? It means try to improve everything, but work more on that, that and that

+ see my edit, by your logic your proposal should be separated to three parts

experiment with all rounds we have, including captured ones trying to get the most effective round for the task.

If that isn't reference, than I don't know what is

[Brood]

For the task of what? You made no mention of changing the round in the proposal at all.

But I doubt either of the proposals will pass.

[Ukrainian Ranger]

For the task of what?

Task of upgrading the rifle, isn't that obvious?

You made no mention of changing the round in the proposal at all.

.... Changing caliber alone may improve the rifle ....

[Brood]

That says you think changing it could help, not that you are going to change it. The 2 are different.

Now I'm done with another pointless arguement with you to wait and see how the voting goes.

[Nadaka]

After I get to look over the designs I will try to settle this little argument.

In general, ideas that are extremely close can work in a single design. Now that projects are carrying over from 1 year to the next if unfinished, I am uncertain if a "continue all unfinished projects" should remain a valid proposal, but at least for now, it is.

Work has been... workful. I am hoping to do an update sometime midweek, but not 100% if I can manage one before Friday night.

Also note: I will most likely be ignoring most suggestions for how many engineers to assign to a project. The 240mm gun carriage project from last turn used a lot of engineers, and I could have probably gotten 3 or 4 smaller projects completed instead to lighten the load.

[Brood]

Ahhh thats why I just limited mine to specific ranks and not numbers, if that means less engineers I'm good with that. But the only major bit is the explosive engineer on the RPG.