AP rounds sound like a good idea. Toobad we cant design both AP rounds and scopes for our mosins...
Who says we can't?
One more possible petrol vehicle to design - light artillery tractor to pull our 80mms, belt machineguns and future designs. Ideally it should work in jungles.
Gives experience for a proper tank later and boosts our artillery advantage.
Should be nice. Especially if that means Jungle artillery.
Oh, and can we go straight to diesel engine? This route leaves us without aviation but otherwise it is better.
___________
Diesel aviation is not impossible, though it is problematic.
If we will need a more power to stop their armored cars... I suggest revision to design AP 7.62 bullets. Tungsten tips and stuff like this. Easier than new weapons.
Early experience with that will be nice.
Ok, it seems the Struunk is not Expensive at all. This means that it is very much able to kill any trucks we develop easily. If our artillery doesn't do a good enough stopping them, we'll have to go with heavy small arms or motorcycles. Cars - especially armoured cars - are slower than motorbikes and motorbikes can be used in the mountains.
Pretty sure it is. It should be, considering we have ore 3.
I would rather we skip 50cal and head straight to cannons. Perhaps a 20mm to start with? There where sniper rifles using it, although they where a tad heavy, but then again, so are 50cal snipers. Use 20mm for anti-material, and use modded mosins for normal ones...
A 20mm to deal with some armoured cars is overkill. If we develop a .50 cal sniper, we have .50 Cal technology. This'll help us develop other .50 cal weapons such as the machine guns or pistols I mentioned. Developing a sniper that fires 20mm bullets will only give us the technology to build a 20mm sniper rifle. Nothing else. Besides, .50 cal is large but still sensible as opposed to Moskurg's .60 cal which is just ridiculous.
Imperial Traitor.
I don't see why 20 mm tech doesn't give us the tech to develop 20 mm machine guns and or pistols. Ok, probably a bit overkill for a pistol, but 20 mm makes for an excellent small autocannon.
1) Sniper rifle. I would prefer this out of the other methods. Arstotzka is great at marksmanship and this would play to our advantage. It would have usage in the trenches and especially in the Mountains. We may be able to develop a scope at the same time, further increasing its usefulness.
2) Machine gun. A heavier machine gun would allow our defensive positions in the Mountains to be stronger and they'll be able to compete with the Stallions at range in the trenches. It'll also let our tanks fight back against the armoured cars easily. The problem is that we already have two machine gun variants and making another could just be an inefficient use of our time. Moreover, Moskurg is probably developing their own tank or tank-killer which this tank-mounted machine gun won't be able to stop. In the end, a useless endeavour in the case of tank-protection.
A heavy machine gun might be usefull later in ground to air/ air to air.
Glory to Arstotzka.
If we're going for a long-term decision, a vehicle that uses more than 1 Oil is certainly a bad idea. Also, I'm not entirely ruling out the biplane, I'm just saying we should pick up more technology before we try. A smaller, more efficient steam engine would make our trains run better, allow our tank crews to exist in more reasonable temperatures (as well as go faster), and allow us to have a plane. If you can think of other technologies that would help in its development, feel free to share.
I don't think a steampowered plane is going to work.
20mm autocannons. For aircraft, mostly.
Seems kinda limited. When we actually get an aircraft out onto the field, then we can design an autocannon. An aircraft-mounted autocannon won't be useful due to having no aircraft to fight against and an autocannon would serve less on the ground than a .50 cal sniper rifle.
Strafing the enemy supply lines can be quite devastating, depending on the range of the craft.
I just looked at the date and realised we have a major problem. The Oil will last us to 2020. If we design something that uses 2 Oil - in 1917 at the earliest - we'd have 2 years to use it before we can't any more. 2 years is far too short a time to get a decent advantage with trucks or artillery tractors. It's just not worth designing them. Yes, we waste the Oil we're getting but the long-term problems of using a Design phase for this outweigh the short-term advantages.
I don't think it'll be that bad. Besides, you know what you're saying with that. That's holding of motorization till the 1920's.
Besides, there's nothing wrong with artillery tractors being expensive. Same with our artillery, going from expensive to normal didn't do anything.
Besides, motorcycles can get our men to the front lines faster than trucks can (assuming we have enough (we will)) and the latest artillery revision already makes our artillery pretty mobile.
It didn't improve mobility. It improved accuracy and traversability in fixed positions.
If we will need a more power to stop their armored cars... I suggest revision to design AP 7.62 bullets. Tungsten tips and stuff like this. Easier than new weapons.
Definitely a good idea, but then we can't make our SMG non-Expensive. Let's see how well our SMGs and new artillery do. If either one does well, we should focus on the SMG. (If the artillery does well we don't have to worry about ACs, and if the SMG does well it would do really well if we deployed more of them.)
Next turn, if we design cheap motorcycles and revise our SMGs, our assault capabilities would be next to none.
Glory to Arstotzka.
I assume an AP SMG round is pointless, so yeah.
Author
Topic: Arms Race, Arstotzka: 1935 Production (Read 159017 times)