Bay 12 Games Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  
Pages: 1 ... 13 14 [15] 16 17 ... 35

Author Topic: Arms Race: 1780 - Atterton Monarchy -1782 Revision Phase  (Read 36559 times)

flazeo25

  • Bay Watcher
  • Nightmare Eater
    • View Profile
Re: Arms Race: 1780 - Atterton Monarchy -1781 Design Phase
« Reply #210 on: November 23, 2015, 09:38:33 pm »

Lets just wait until Someone else comes to vote, or we could start voting now, If we do, i would get a list of all the proposals for us.
Should we discuss what to do for rest of phases aswell?
Logged

Snake1229

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: Arms Race: 1780 - Atterton Monarchy -1781 Design Phase
« Reply #211 on: November 23, 2015, 09:40:21 pm »

Lets just wait until Someone else comes to vote, or we could start voting now, If we do, i would get a list of all the proposals for us.
Should we discuss what to do for rest of phases aswell?
Sure, I was thinking wait to see what happens with the cannon for the design phase
Logged

Graknorke

  • Bay Watcher
  • A bomb's a bad choice for close-range combat.
    • View Profile
Re: Arms Race: 1780 - Atterton Monarchy -1781 Design Phase
« Reply #212 on: November 23, 2015, 09:41:27 pm »

I think we should cut out any intention of them firing inert cannonballs, since it's going to be much easier to have a weapon that fires projectiles of a similar mass using similar charges. Shells are lighter and also have to be fired with less propellant due to the relative fragility of them.
Logged
Cultural status:
Depleted          ☐
Enriched          ☑

Snake1229

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: Arms Race: 1780 - Atterton Monarchy -1781 Design Phase
« Reply #213 on: November 23, 2015, 09:42:20 pm »

So do you guys want to start voting, If so I will get a list
Logged

flazeo25

  • Bay Watcher
  • Nightmare Eater
    • View Profile
Re: Arms Race: 1780 - Atterton Monarchy -1781 Design Phase
« Reply #214 on: November 23, 2015, 09:43:25 pm »

I think we should cut out any intention of them firing inert cannonballs, since it's going to be much easier to have a weapon that fires projectiles of a similar mass using similar charges. Shells are lighter and also have to be fired with less propellant due to the relative fragility of them.

Well the cannons are designed to fire varity of different types since 12 pounders were good at that.
Logged

Graknorke

  • Bay Watcher
  • A bomb's a bad choice for close-range combat.
    • View Profile
Re: Arms Race: 1780 - Atterton Monarchy -1781 Design Phase
« Reply #215 on: November 23, 2015, 09:52:22 pm »

I was just thinking that if we limit it to lower force firing, there would be less need for reinforcing the structure and so less metal used. It's still probably going to end up at least as bad as the current cannons though so maybe it's not worth it.
And is there really a need for a vote? The two designs are near-identical, barring that the AM-R has a much smaller bore. Unrealistically small, actually.
Logged
Cultural status:
Depleted          ☐
Enriched          ☑

flazeo25

  • Bay Watcher
  • Nightmare Eater
    • View Profile
Re: Arms Race: 1780 - Atterton Monarchy -1781 Design Phase
« Reply #216 on: November 23, 2015, 09:53:22 pm »

Also since American revolution ends in 1783, we might have problems if British come back to the island since French Revolution wont start till 1789 which would keep them busy so if they do come we have 6 years of having to fight them then.
Logged

Snake1229

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: Arms Race: 1780 - Atterton Monarchy -1781 Design Phase
« Reply #217 on: November 23, 2015, 09:54:37 pm »

Spoiler: AM-R 1781 Howitzer (click to show/hide)
I changed the bore size
Is that more realistic?
« Last Edit: November 23, 2015, 10:10:44 pm by Snake1229 »
Logged

evilcherry

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: Arms Race: 1780 - Atterton Monarchy -1781 Design Phase
« Reply #218 on: November 24, 2015, 12:53:07 am »

I feel this might go NE.

Would it be better to design a carronade or even a Coehorn mortar instead?

flazeo25

  • Bay Watcher
  • Nightmare Eater
    • View Profile
Re: Arms Race: 1780 - Atterton Monarchy -1781 Design Phase
« Reply #219 on: November 24, 2015, 06:46:07 am »

I feel this might go NE.

Would it be better to design a carronade or even a Coehorn mortar instead?

They might be but, they will get cheaper next turn and we can use production and revison to cheapen them as well.
Logged

Snake1229

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: Arms Race: 1780 - Atterton Monarchy -1781 Design Phas
« Reply #220 on: November 24, 2015, 08:36:54 am »

I feel this might go NE.

Would it be better to design a carronade or even a Coehorn mortar instead?
Carronades are pretty short range, because they where designed for ship combat, and designed for damage
« Last Edit: November 24, 2015, 08:52:48 am by Snake1229 »
Logged

flazeo25

  • Bay Watcher
  • Nightmare Eater
    • View Profile
Re: Arms Race: 1780 - Atterton Monarchy -1781 Design Phase
« Reply #221 on: November 24, 2015, 11:01:42 am »

So shall we all vote on designs now?
Logged

Snake1229

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: Arms Race: 1780 - Atterton Monarchy -1781 Design Phase
« Reply #222 on: November 24, 2015, 11:01:59 am »

Sure
Logged

flazeo25

  • Bay Watcher
  • Nightmare Eater
    • View Profile
Re: Arms Race: 1780 - Atterton Monarchy -1781 Design Phase
« Reply #223 on: November 24, 2015, 11:08:40 am »

Sure

Any thoughts on getting russian naval mine in 1783, since its a early verison of depth charge and if British show up were gonna be dealing with lots of boats?
Logged

Snake1229

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: Arms Race: 1780 - Atterton Monarchy -1781 Design Phase
« Reply #224 on: November 24, 2015, 11:11:51 am »

Sure

Any thoughts on getting russian naval mine in 1783, since its a early verison of depth charge and if British show up were gonna be dealing with lots of boats?
Meh, We could try
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 13 14 [15] 16 17 ... 35