Print

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

[Taricus]

Or we can start working on weapons to break the fortifications.

[10ebbor10]

Or we can start working on weapons to break the fortifications.

Also known as airbombardement.

[Taricus]

We still need the weapons to break open a bunker regardless.

[10ebbor10]

We still need the weapons to break open a bunker regardless.

Shaped charges? Or just a multitude of  really large bombs

[Brood]

I figured as much, part of why I think larger numbers of faster smaller bombers is better.

They can hit the target then evade enemy fire on the way back out, a heavy bomber hits and then just bulls its way through and hopes to hell it doesn't take to many hits.




On another note.

On the next turn I have 3 projects in mind.

A concentrated caffeine pill for soldiers, something that if they are in a dragged out battle will keep them awake.
A concentrated sugar pill, something that will give a massive energy boost to soldiers when they need it to go with the caffeine pill, since it keeps you awake but does not provide energy.

And a concentrated mineral, vitamin and nutrient pill or series of pills, something that will improve soldiers physical endurance, strength, stamina and so on. Using all natural ingredients only so it has no side effects. It's slower then steroids and such but it will still give our soldiers a boost over time to make them stronger then enemy soldiers.



Our infantry is burning out so I'm going to make these drugs to keep them going if they do burn out and in time make it harder for them to burn out.



I suggest bombs with directional explosives, otherwise known as bunker busters. The full force of an explosion directed straight down to smash a bunker wide open.

[10ebbor10]

The point of the larger bomber is that due to it's high flight altitude, it doesn't ever come in effective range of the enemies AA system.

Pretty sure you can just lump those in one design suggestion. It doesn't need to get to micromanagy.

[Taricus]

Well Ebbor, we could also use flamethrowers to clear the enemy fortifications. Mount it on a tank and it'll be difficult to remove unless they have a heavy gun pointed right at it.

Would only see service within the engineer brigades, but useful nonetheless.

[Funk]

blood, we need a way to deploy paratroopers.
Taricus a good 10,000k will put a hole in anything, with a shaped charge even a small 1000 kilo bomb will do massive damage.
we should use the first batch to mine the harbours of Moldavia.

the biggist patload i can find is the B-32 Dominator, 28,000 kilo
but it is a late war plane.

Spoiler: Plan code name:Gun Whale mk3 (click to show/hide)

2 14mm MGs in staggered waist positions (1500rpg)
2X 14mm MGs nose and tail turrets (3500rpg)
2x 14mm MGs in ,dorsal and ventral turrets(2000rpg)
4 14mm MGs in wings(2 top 2 bottom) turrets (1000rpg)
6 Improved V12 Aviation Engines

Crew: 11-14
Aim for a Bomb load of 10,000 kg or 25 men
Try to focus on range as well.

Too big and too slow to evade it should just smash its way through any fighters, with its guns killing any thing that enters 2000M.
if we get powered turrets then replace the 14mm guns with 25mm and issue Proximity Shells 

edit: bigger plane = bigger bomb

[10ebbor10]

Sadly, a tank flamethrower first needs to come within firing range of the bunker (100 meters?), and well, the fuel reserve is highly explosive.

Pretty sure the enemy fortifications are equipped with guns capable of shooting tanks.

Actually, on the possible existence of Moldavian fortifications. Most likely these predate the war, and thus are focused against the doctrines of that time. (Large forts, holdout area for large amounts of infantery, many large guns to deny acces to a large area). It's unlikely that they've been updated during the war (It's not the expected attack angle). In fact, I assume that the latest updates happened during the start of our war with Capia. This doesn't give them much time, and by far not enough time for the redesign required to make them resilient to airborne attacks.

In fact, we're most likely facing something similar to the Belgian fortifications of WO I and WO II.

[Taricus]

Actually, neither the fuel, nor the propellant is actually explosive, combined with the armour of the tank means it's far safer for the operators. The primary danger from the flamethrower to the operator is target prioritisation: Everyone is going to be gunning for you out of fear of the weapon.

Range is an issue, but we don't have anything towards thermobaric weapons (And unlikely to develop them anytime soon.)

[10ebbor10]

well, there's really no need for them. We just bomb the kazemats, take out their guns and leave the rest of the bunker alone. Nothing they can do.

[Taricus]

OR we bypass the strongpoints in the defensive line. Either way, means we dodge the majority of them.

I guess a spearhead doctrine would work best though, focus our forces upon the weakpoint in the Morovian defenses and smash through, encircling the other parts from behind.

[10ebbor10]

With a bit of luck we could pull of the same trick again. Drop gliders onto the bunkers, and then use shaped charges and other weaponry to disable them.

[Funk]

let go with the spearhead, use paratroopers to slow down the Morovian counter attack.
if they have any good tanks then there probably going to use then to plug holes.

[10ebbor10]

We got very good anti tank rockets though.