Print

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

[Kot]

Their design is faster, more maneuverable and can fly higher than our fighter.

I am not saying our fighter flies higher, as it lacks enclosed cabin and is generally outdated as shit, but they proably can't even reach half the maximum altitude of our bomber.

[Kashyyk]

That is both conjecture and exaggeration. Even though your bomber has a higher altitude, it only has a dorsal gun (I assume it was meant to be ventral?) we can just fly underneath it and shoot up.

[Devastator]

Their design is faster, more maneuverable and can fly higher than our fighter.

I am not saying our fighter flies higher, as it lacks enclosed cabin and is generally outdated as shit, but they proably can't even reach half the maximum altitude of our bomber.

The thing is, it didn't even win the skies before the bomber existed.  New fighter that outclasses opponents fighters with equal numbers?  Air-to-air back to even.

[Andres]

Christ this argument is off-putting.

[Ukrainian Ranger]

Christ this argument is off-putting.

BIG +1

It is only the game with a random chance and GM's subjectivism. Focus on the great story not on "winnining"

[Kot]

That is both conjecture and exaggeration. Even though your bomber has a higher altitude, it only has a dorsal gun (I assume it was meant to be ventral?) we can just fly underneath it and shoot up.

Sure. The problem is that even if your plane is theoretically capable (as Airacobra was) of getting to the same alttitude as our bomber, it will simply be unable to catch up with it. And flying underneath and shooting something requires you to raise your nose, which will slow it down even more (of course, that is implying it will be able to get to that level and close enough, firing from few km away isin't something that's practically possible).

Christ this argument is off-putting.

BIG +1

It is only the game with a random chance and GM's subjectivism. Focus on the great story not on "winnining"

Hey, it's not like it's Arstotzkans who suddenly said they will stop playing because Moskurg is winning.

[evilcherry]

Well if the game compensates complexity in a more useful way we would opt for turbos anyway. Sadly it looks like that a turbocharger is equivalent to 2 extra resources, which means for every weapon Moskurg will field Arstotzka can field something slightly better with one more shiny tech.

This is not a good recipe for story. Rather its a recipe for salt production.

Also aren't superchargers used in aircraft engines instead of turbos? You tune the supercharger for a particular range of RPM, at lower mechanical loss.

Their design is faster, more maneuverable and can fly higher than our fighter.

I am not saying our fighter flies higher, as it lacks enclosed cabin and is generally outdated as shit, but they proably can't even reach half the maximum altitude of our bomber.

The thing is, it didn't even win the skies before the bomber existed.  New fighter that outclasses opponents fighters with equal numbers?  Air-to-air back to even.

The Dive fighter thingy is basically BS. One revise action, you suddenly get a shiny, usable fighter, and we exhausted 2 designs and 2+ revisions to catch up.

[10ebbor10]

We got a shiny, useable fighter which is both more expensive and less capable.

But yeah, the point where technologically more advanced designs tend to cost more resources is quite problematic.

[Devastator]

We got a shiny, useable fighter which is both more expensive and less capable.

Err.. which one would that be?  I don't think you've been behind in the air race since you made your fighter-bomber eight years ago.  Right now you have a fighter of equal cost that's less capable, but winning anyway.

[andrea]

actually, air to air engagements are stated to be to your advantage. However, flak shells help stopping you from dominating completely and our dive bombers are more capable of hitting stuff than your bombers, so he considers the effects on the ground the same ( even with flak, less of our planes can safely fly. However when they do, they work better than your so it ends even).
That was before the bomber however.  But I think the general picture is the same, except that our bomber can escape your fighters. ( your fighter likely has a better service ceiling than our, but without any kind of compressor ( supercharger, turbocharger) at high altitude it is going to lose a LOT of power.)

[Sensei]

I'm a little concerned by the quantity of salt in the air from both sides. I would like to say that Turbo chargers do not cost 2 ore. Aside from that, I'll leave you to figuring things out, for the most part.

For now, hurry up designs. Both threads look like an unending argument still, and this game's going to slow to a crawl if it's still going in three weeks. We need to keep it moving in case Moskurg turns it around and has to fight all the way back across Forenia.

[10ebbor10]

For that matter, can we get a final word on the nuke?

[evilcherry]

There is no new arguments from Moskurg.

[Sensei]

For that matter, can we get a final word on the nuke?

No.

[Sheb]

I must say I was surprised that you didn't get air superiority from the Yellowjacket, and that we progressed so much over the last turn.