Print

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

[andrea]

Spoiler: votes (click to show/hide)

Redesign the tank from scratch: Andres, quake (exactly what it says)
AS-SU26: 10ebbor10, tryrar(?), VoidSlayer       (mobile artillery)
AS-MAT26-50: UR, andrea, Aseaheru              (tank destroyer: cheap, made for ambushes and defense. As simple as a mobile anti tank gun gets)                             
AS-ATRG26: Funk                                        (rocket rifle)   

The tank destroyer is basically a backup in case our revision fails. cheap as it should be, it would still be able to fight the enemy efficiently in our worst case scenarios. and even after a successful revision, cheapness means it retains a battlefield use.

my opinion on the mobile artillery is that it is a mediocre solution to a problem we don't really have

the rocket rifle, I have no idea

redesign of the tank, I just said why I think that is a waste.

[10ebbor10]

I'm willing to vote for that TD, but the almost complete lack of armor worries me. Infantry and light vehicles will tear through it like it's nothing.

Vote for the AS-MAT26-50

We do need to update our long range artillery in the future though.

[andrea]

infantry and light vehicles, we can deal with. It can act with an escort of armored cars. Plus, it is more meant for defense and ambush, where only frontal armor matters.

[tryrar]

Eh, I'll switch to the Mat26, just so we don't have ties. Even after we get our tank functioning correctly, it'll be a good way to move at guns into position for cheap

[Ukrainian Ranger]

Yes, it is not meant to be used in mobile battles. It is an expendable mobile AT with a slightly better protection than a towed AT would have. There are many better vehicles to create but we need an emergency design that is very unlikely to fail.

Reposted to make it easier to find for sensei and clarified that we want a variant of 50mm gun not a new one

Spoiler: AS-MAT26-50 (click to show/hide)

Light tracked, low silhouette vehicle armed with the same gun as our tank (50mm, but no turret) uses light armor (3 ore) and relatively weak, cheap, simple, reliable engine. (2 oil). Do not try to create a high performance engine for it, use proved solutions. Should have level 2(or 1) forward armor  and level 0 side\top\rear armor.  Target price of the vehicle is cheap or at least expensive
While we are here try design a variant of  50mm gun with a longer barrel and advanced AP shells (tungsten, sabot, heat, whatever), failing that revert to standard 50mm gun. don't forget to add AA machingun

[andrea]

seems good. while I agree that we should specify we want a cheap and reliable engine, is it really needed to then order the engineers to not attempt anything? I assume they don't hear cheap,simple and reliable and then go design an engine suitable to tow a city. however, if we leave the 'Do not try to create a high performance engine for it' , on a 6 we might stop an engineer from getting us some cheap improvement.
Then again, that engineer might be stupid and take the chance to do something hugely complex, so maybe it is better to leave it as it is.

[Sensei]

AS-MAT26-50
 Light tracked, low silhouette vehicle armed with the same gun as our tank (50mm, but no turret) uses light armor (3 ore) and relatively weak, cheap, simple, reliable engine. (2 oil). Do not try to create a high performance engine for it, use proved solutions. Should have level 2(or 1) forward armor  and level 0 side\top\rear armor.  Target price of the vehicle is cheap or at least expensive
While we are here try design a better 50mm gun with a longer barrel and advanced AP shells (tungsten, sabot, heat, whatever), failing that revert to standard 50mm gun. don't forget to add AA machingun

AS-MAT26-50: A light tracked platform for the DT-50 gun originally designed for the AS-T25 tank. Moves on a simply 8-cylinder motor and treads. It has thin RHA armor in the front only, with the rest open to the air. The DT-25 gun has an extended barrel with a muzzle brake, and is mounted on a front-facing armature with good side-to-side and vertical angling, for direct fire. It's bigger than the original, but outside of a turret this is fine. It include an AS-1924 for good measure against aircraft. Costs 4 ore, 2 oil.

You gained Muzzle Brakes.

[Ukrainian Ranger]

Even lighter than I wanted but should work against their tanks

Revise engine of the tank. Try to make fuel injection cheaper, try to make turbocharging cheaper, try to reduce fuel consumption to 2. Pray that one thing from the list will work

[VoidSlayer]

Revise engine of the tank. Try to make fuel injection cheaper, try to make turbocharging cheaper, try to reduce fuel consumption to 2. Pray that one thing from the list will work

Use expense credit on the Medium Tank.

Do not run booze, respect American laws, offer to help prevent Moskurg booze running with our superior ship technology.

[tryrar]

Revise engine of the tank. Try to make fuel injection cheaper, try to make turbocharging cheaper, try to reduce fuel consumption to 2. Pray that one thing from the list will work

Use expense credit on the Medium Tank.

Do not run booze, respect American laws, offer to help prevent Moskurg booze running with our superior ship technology.

+1

[andrea]

so, we got muzzle brakes and longer barrel, but no dedicated rounds. not bad.
Still, when we said it had no armor on the sides, I imagined it would at least be covered somehow, rather than entirely exposed. Ah, well. it is a gun, it moves AND it is cheap.

UR, changing the oil cost of the tank to 2 actually changes nothing. expensive it is and expensive it stays. Same if we lose plains. Not that the tech involved wouldn't be useful in many other cases, mind you.

get that monster engine cheap! fuel injectors first, turbocharger later. Improving fuel efficiency last.


and help US with prohibition, offer the help of our navy and such.

[Ukrainian Ranger]

wait for result of revision before spending our expense credit

+1 to contacting and assisting Americans with our navy. Furthermore consider bomb booze carrying ships with our airforce

Don't forget to mine everything we can using our landmine in the plains front  Combine several of them to have explosion large enough to hurt enemy vehicles.

If the plains front will start to collapse, promote self-sacrificing kamikadze attacks among made by our triplane pilots to destroy enemy armor by colliding with them

[andrea]

point taken about the expense credit. If our revision is a great success, expense credit will be futile on tanks.
have our tank destroyers helping to hold the ground ( lots of tank destroyers)
Still, I do't think we should promote kamikaze attacks right now... that is a desperate move for when you are cornered and have literally nothing else. As it is now, we have lots of tank destroyers in the ground, which will only get expensive if we lose plains. And if our revision is even just a partial success, we likely get to keep parity in the skies even without the plains, if nothing else.

I would save the morale crushing, likely not that effective self destroying tactic for when we literally have nothing else left.

[Ukrainian Ranger]

I said "if the plains front will start to collapse"

[andrea]

my point is, even losing control of plains isn't enough to resort such tactics. Do it when they are crossing our home taiga, but right now there is no need. and if words get out of such orders, even if conditional, morale will fall to the bottom quickly. our defeat might turn into a self fulfilling profecy.
when we can see their tanks from our homes, that is the time for suicide tactics. We have nothing to lose then. But while they are miles away? not the right time.