Print

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

[TopHat]

C: Europe
Designs:
1. Eurofighter Typhoon
2. Type 45 Destroyer
3. Leopard 2

[10ebbor10]

Actually, that raises a good question. GM, how much existing military infrastructure do we have use of? It won't matter if the F-35 doesn't have good onboard radar if we can just use the existing ground-based installations.

The military of the country which finds itself under attack will generally aid you, unless they already joined the other side or you're running black-ops for some reason.

10ebbo10, what bonus can we get from Israel?

What bonus would you expect? Elite soldiers, Samson Option, and such seem reasonable.

[Ukrainian Ranger]

I actually expected elite soldiers\high morale or occasional design credit.


So far we have two basic setups - Fighter\ship\MBT and Ballistic missile\ship\MBT.

While fighter is a good force projector, I want ballistic missiles experience to get to the space sooner. Also, destroyer is plain worse than smaller vessel because it is more expensive and easier to destroy by large laser\railgun\whatever weapon they will use. Chances are that our early weapons will have a chance to survive if they will avoid being hit.

[Baffler]

Eh, I can't really think of anything useful. I'll change my vote to G) China, because production credits are nice and we would have a nuclear arsenal as well.

Designs:
1) HQ-9 SAM and variants, particularly the SC-19
2) Shenyang J-11 Fighter
3) Type 99 Main Battle Tank

Air power is going to be our most important asset here, I think, and the HQ-9 is particularly nice because it can be produced in large numbers and already has a variant designed specifically to target satellites. It wouldn't be too much of a stretch to adapt it to hit enemy ships in space.

[evilcherry]

Eh, I can't really think of anything useful. I'll change my vote to G) China, because production credits are nice and we would have a nuclear arsenal as well.

Designs:
1) HQ-9 SAM and variants, particularly the SC-19
2) Shenyang J-11 Fighter
3) Type 99 Main Battle Tank

Air power is going to be our most important asset here, I think, and the HQ-9 is particularly nice because it can be produced in large numbers and already has a variant designed specifically to target satellites. It wouldn't be too much of a stretch to adapt it to hit enemy ships in space.

But the Chinese Flanker isn't that impressive, and the Type 99 MBT is... meh.

Also, unless they are opting for a daylight robbery-type of invasion, more troops doesn't mean anything.

[Ukrainian Ranger]

Ancient stuff.... Your idea will look better with this
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Main_Battle_Tank_3000
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shenyang_J-31
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HQ-9

Is an interesting setup but we will have no navy. It is a problem. It is a large problem.

I propose to consider this tankless setup, allowing other armies to do land based fighting while we will try to control the skies and seas

China
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shenyang_J-31
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HQ-9
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Type_095_submarine



Why nuclear submarine? Because it is a nice force projector, gives us reactor experience, allows to conduct some hidden operations and it is a first step toward underwater bases we may need. HQ-9 is our best bet to shoot down their crafts, J-31 is our stepping stone towards better flying fighting vehicles.

[Baffler]

China
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shenyang_J-31
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HQ-9
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Type_095_submarine

I can get behind this, +1.

[evilcherry]

But this combination is really unfun. The only reasonable way to develop our forces is to spam SAM and outbuild given our advantages.

Why should we drop the more !!fun!! aspects like Japanese robotics or European brainhacks?

[TopHat]

It's a bit late but I might as well put in the reasoning behind my proposal.
1. I went for the eurofighter simply because I consider it to be far more important than ballistic missile capability. Ballistic Missiles can destroy ground targets. A good multi-role fighter can also destroy ground targets as well as (try to) intercept UFOs and carry out other tasks (reconnaissance etc). In any case, we can draw upon the European Space Agency for spacecraft design experience and launch capability.
2. I chose the Type 45 because it is designed mainly for Anti-air and -missile use and as such has excellent tracking systems as well as the ability to shoot down said tracked objects, which I consider to more than compensate for the larger target size compared to the corvette. The submarine will also probably be pretty much useless in the beginning stages of the invasion.
3. The Leopard 2 is one of the best MBTs in the world. Not much to say here.

[Ukrainian Ranger]

Eurofighter is old, Leopard 2 is old, Type 45 is a larger version of what I offered with Israel.

Submarine is hard to detect firepower that can unload cruise missiles when we need it. It allows us to fight if they go terror from the deep route. It can be revised to AA role should we want.

But this combination is really unfun. The only reasonable way to develop our forces is to spam SAM and outbuild given our advantages.

Why should we drop the more !!fun!! aspects like Japanese robotics or European brainhacks?

What stops us from going robotics or anything as any other country? As I said, suggestion games are never good at focusing and I don't want any country that requires focused design strategy.

[TopHat]

Age is misleading. Both the Eurofighter and the Leopard 2 have been continuously upgraded since their introduction and remain among the best of their classes. (the Eurofighter is also arguably superior or equivalent to the yet-to-be-introduced F-35 Lightning.
Subs will be far, far less effective (almost useless) should the aliens not, in fact, go the TFTD / the Kraken Wakes route. Surface ships are more versatile (ASW equipment if TFTD, mobile RADAR coverage & AA if not), as well as being able to help protect merchant shipping from air attack. We can always develop submarines later if we really need them (or steal some from the Royal Navy; other nations will be fighting the aliens too)

[evilcherry]

Age is misleading. Both the Eurofighter and the Leopard 2 have been continuously upgraded since their introduction and remain among the best of their classes. (the Eurofighter is also arguably superior or equivalent to the yet-to-be-introduced F-35 Lightning.
Subs will be far, far less effective (almost useless) should the aliens not, in fact, go the TFTD / the Kraken Wakes route. Surface ships are more versatile (ASW equipment if TFTD, mobile RADAR coverage & AA if not), as well as being able to help protect merchant shipping from air attack. We can always develop submarines later if we really need them (or steal some from the Royal Navy; other nations will be fighting the aliens too)

To be fair, Chinese doctrine has a very unhealthy obsession with subs and their ICBM carrying power. Though you can argue in such a world ICBMs will have questionable utility.

[Ukrainian Ranger]

We need to agree on something... My third Bid: This one has two potential weapons

USA! Go USA plan!
1) F-40: The first full-sized long ranged multirole drone jet fighter.  Remote controlled by operator but has basic first ever automatic combat system that can keep fighting if signal is jammed.
2) Railgun: Large, shipmounted, power hungry, not refined, but it is effective!
3)  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zumwalt-class_destroyer but armed with additional railgun. Remove 155mm gun to free the space if needed. + Aegis system + Make it  powered by fusion reactor


This setup gives us an advanced fighter, railgun to develop it further, and very capable ship.

[10ebbor10]

Nope, too late.

Ze update is already in progress;

[Ukrainian Ranger]

Heh, OK) is it based on China bid?