Print

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

[LordSlowpoke]

well, certainly the planes would be of some effectiveness

i expect they're reading our thread and therefore for them to be throwing everything into the desert to counter just how much ass we're going to kick there, so doing something counterintuitive may help us gain a ton of ground

but what counterintuitive thing are we going to do

[Devastator]

I'm a little worried myself, we kinda whiffed this turn.  A good arty cannon, an attempt at something 20 years ahead of time that naturally whiffed, and an imprecise revision of our fighter that also whiffed, with a refit intended to be cheap that didn't allow for the possibility of it being cheap on a good roll.

Counterintuitive is interesting, but it isn't very far from "wrong".  I don't want to do the wrong thing just because it's out of the expected route.

[LordSlowpoke]

eh, barring any special circumstances we can design the humpback in 26 and give the mk47 another revision

[evilcherry]

I'm a little worried myself, we kinda whiffed this turn.  A good arty cannon, an attempt at something 20 years ahead of time that naturally whiffed, and an imprecise revision of our fighter that also whiffed, with a refit intended to be cheap that didn't allow for the possibility of it being cheap on a good roll.

Counterintuitive is interesting, but it isn't very far from "wrong".  I don't want to do the wrong thing just because it's out of the expected route.

Not really.

- The Howitzer is as good as one can get. Unless we go for the long, naval/aa/tank gun route.
- The MK-47 is a bit meh and probably well covered by other weapons (and that's why I wanted a HMG upgrade), but its still a functional battle rifle. Not to function we can equip columns of infantry with these rifles, not unlike the Soviet PPSh-41 squads in WW2.
- The Wasp got a crit fail. An air superiority fighters relies on being too hard to hit, not sturdy, so the direction isn't wrong. I had thought of putting a pair of MK-47 in the wings or to make it twin Stallion, but well it might make it too slow for Zoom and Boom.

[Devastator]

Yeah, I'm not that worried, things are okay and it's some good experience.  The experience with the rifle will help for the next machine gun, semi-auto rifle, or new cartridge we create, and the plane should be good enough.  We got a lot of stuff to do, that's all.


..which is the sign of a very fun game.  ;-)

[LordSlowpoke]

alright everyone, let's do this

AC1 Humpback: A diesel powered aircraft carrier, sporting stupidly huge, redundant engines, Stallion emplacements all across the bow, long range artillery and nice, long runways and hangars to support fighters and bombers.  Approximate crew 500.  Expense:  HAHA!  National Effort at the very least, sunshine.

+1

[Happerry]

If we're going to make a boat, I'd prefer an attack boat. But neither of them are going to effect the main fight very much, we just don't have the air superiority to make a National Effort carrier useful. All making it is going to get us is our expensive carrier bombed to bits by their better airpower.

What I'd really prefer is that we design a new, modernized, version of the SPAT that mounts the B2 Destroyer. That should majorly help in the Plains and the Jungle. And then for revision we can either finally get around to getting explosive bullets and flack shells, which should help turn the air war in our favor, or do a uniform revision of our own and get some camo to counter their camo. (Or maybe revise the mortars we just stole so we can mass produce them more easily.)

Or we could design our own motorcycles to counter their motorcycles.

Edit : Or given the note we just got about our lack of a good trench fighting weapon given the cascade is a bit costy, we might want to get around to revising our shotgun into a pump action shotgun. That should have interesting effects both in the trenches and in the jungle...

[Devastator]

Considering they need logistics boats for one of their resource points, an attack boat could matter.  Since we have a very good artillery cannon, we could make a gunboat with a couple of AA mounted stallions on it.  We could then do pseudo-carrier by having a recon plane and an aircraft catapult.  One of our bombers might be nice..

[LordSlowpoke]

we could finish the flamethrower, or revise the mk-47 further, but we're doing the carrier as was agreed so

[Devastator]

I'm not against a carrier, very much not so, but to get it functioning it might need a doze or so rolls, and if it then gets sunk by their land based bombers, we're outta luck.  If we do a boat, let's do a boat using our very good arty cannon.

-1 to carrier while we haven't even fielded a watercraft.

[Happerry]

we could finish the flamethrower, or revise the mk-47 further, but we're doing the carrier as was agreed so

You mean you agreed. I never agreed to that, and see no reason to agree to something that'll basically be useless.

I'm not against a carrier, very much not so, but to get it functioning it might need a doze or so rolls, and if it then gets sunk by their land based bombers, we're outta luck.  If we do a boat, let's do a boat using our very good arty cannon.

This.

[LordSlowpoke]

the carrier has a ton of stallions? i'd be surprised if they could counter that, considering their bombers had trouble beating three stallions on a train car

besides, it also has long-range arty in it, meaning the howitzer's gonna come preinstalled

[evilcherry]

I'm pretty sure that we can revise our SMG to be inexpensive, given that we have tons of experience with breech and bolt actions with the MK-47. We might have the advantage of foreshadowing, as their MBT is obviously no longer national effort next turn.

We are also losing badly in the mines and this shows that we need a Heavy Machine Gun NOW.

[Devastator]

I'm pretty sure that we can revise our SMG to be inexpensive, given that we have tons of experience with breech and bolt actions with the MK-47. We might have the advantage of foreshadowing, as their MBT is obviously no longer national effort next turn.

We are also losing badly in the mines and this shows that we need a Heavy Machine Gun NOW.

Non man (or horse) portable weapons don't work in the mountains.  We could do a mountain gun...

[Happerry]

the carrier has a ton of stallions? i'd be surprised if they could counter that, considering their bombers had trouble beating three stallions on a train car

besides, it also has long-range arty in it, meaning the howitzer's gonna come preinstalled

A Train is a lot smaller target, is probably faster moving, and isn't going to be targeted by every dive-bomber in range. And even so, we lost some. We can't 'loose some' for a national effort vehicle, and it'll take only a single successful bomb on the runway to make the carrier unable to actually serve as a carrier for more then long enough for all the rest of the bombs to make it sink. And that's assuming we actually get a working carrier when we've never designed a boat before. IE, not bloody likely. All designing a carrier will do is waste at least one turn and sacrifice our now regained lead when they roll out a counter to our tank this turn.

I'm pretty sure that we can revise our SMG to be inexpensive, given that we have tons of experience with breech and bolt actions with the MK-47. We might have the advantage of foreshadowing, as their MBT is obviously no longer national effort next turn.

We are also losing badly in the mines and this shows that we need a Heavy Machine Gun NOW.

We already have a Heavy Machine Gun, remember? That's what the Stallion is. Our issue in the mountains is that they now have a Light Machine Gun to counter our own, and they have a Mortar and we didn't. But we stole their Mortar last turn, so we should at least be able to hold there this turn, even if a Revision to make it fit into Imperial measurements might be called for. It should also help in the jungle.