Print

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

[Taricus]

Hmm... there's one other thing I'm comfused about: The armoured fuell cell. What is that for exactly?

[tryrar]

I already said I edited in the smoothbore, so we can stick with HEAT.

Reposting for clarity.

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

Badger
Badger
- Diesel Engine
     + 1400-1500 Horsepower
- Armoured Ammo Compartment
- AP Weapons
     + 14.5mm Calibre Remote Operated Weapon
     + 7.62x51mm Calibre Turret Coaxial
- Smoke Dispensers
- 1500mm RHA Equivalent Armour
     + Composite
     + Sloped
     + Track Skirts
     + Internal (Armored) Fuel Cells
- Low Profile (less than 3m tall)
- 120mm Main Gun
     + HEAT and APFSDS Payload
     + Smoothbore
     + Fire Control Computer
     + Auto-Loader
- Crew of 3 (commander, gunner, driver)
     + Crew must be able to perform all mechanical and digital maintenance in the field

+1 from me, this is just what I envisioned for a modern Badger but was unable to articulate. Heh, I think it's a tradition that every design game that pops up has a badger tank suggested by me

[Playergamer]

fuel cell is armored so if it doesn't explode/set the tank on fire if hit.

+1 to badger and ripped off kalashnikov, although I'd like a note from ebbor as to how much one of those tanks would cost with scarce resources.

[Aseaheru]

Hangon, we are fueling the tank with hydrogen?

[Parsely]

^^If the fuel gets hit with a high-explosive shell, yes it will explode.

Hmm... there's one other thing I'm comfused about: The armoured fuell cell. What is that for exactly?

I just mean that I don't want any exterior fuel tanks. Armored (that is, they're located inside the tank) self-sealing fuel cells are what I'm seeking, for this vehicle.

E: Also ebbor, I think we should stick with my original values for armor, HP and gun size to make the tank slightly smaller, slightly cheaper, and just as advanced.

[tryrar]

Well, hit a tank with a big enough HE shell and it doesn't matter how armored it is, you're going to have a bad day(fun fact, su-152s, while designed for taking out bunkers and other fortifications for infantry support and thus carrying little to no AP rounds, were feared ersatz tankhunters do to the 152mm ML-20's ability to blow off the turrets of Tigers through sheer blast effect)

[Taricus]

@Gunin: If it's only going to be slightly cheaper, then there's no point scaling it back to cut costs when it's ability to perform what it's meant to is affected more.

[Parsely]

Right, cheaper tanks just mean more units..

[Taricus]

But it's only really worth it if we can get say... an extra tank per ten or so? Right now it only looks like we'll get an extra tank per fifty so... :/

[Stirk]

Right, cheaper tanks just mean more units..

And more guns. If we can afford more expensive tanks, I am sure we can make more than one rifle.

[adwarf]

Right, cheaper tanks just mean more units..

And more guns. If we can afford more expensive tanks, I am sure we can make more than one rifle.

We can worry about more guns later when we have the basics covered. The very basic things we need to cover before we start branching out really are a standardized assault rifle, a standard sidearm, a main battle tank, a transport (which we have already in the form of the BTR-80 though it'd be nice to have a non-amphibious version), an anti-tank gun, and an anti-air gun. All of these should be filled before we move to other projects because those are what is necessary to defend a country, and considering we've pissed off most other countries we're going to be defending a lot.

[Taricus]

To be fair though, I have a feeling everyone hates everyone in this setting so

[Parsely]

BTR-80 is a state of the art APC, I don't see any reason to replace it..

Mobile artillery is definitely something we want though!

[adwarf]

BTR-80 is a state of the art APC, I don't see any reason to replace it..

Mobile artillery is definitely something we want though!

Yeah there's no need to replace it, we can probably use it and the BMP-3 as bases for other vehicles as well since that will speed up the design process, but for now let us see where everything we have so far goes

[Aseaheru]

it'd be nice to have a non-amphibious version

Wat.

No, really, what? You want to shoot our commanders in the foot by taking away one of their assets, in an island nation with (I assume) many rivers?
My god man, if you take away every vehicles amphibious ability we would need alot more engineering units, bridge layers and similar, and do you KNOW what that looks like to a foe who DOES have amphibious units? Heres a hint: A TARGET.