Print

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

Glorious Arstotzka

17 (16%)

Glorious Moskurg

13 (12.3%)

Ingloriously Didn't Play

76 (71.7%)

Total Members Voted: 106

[Powder Miner]

We should go for the Tundra this turn. We get no immediate value out of the center lane fighting, but if we can disrupt their titanium we can prevent them from ever getting any use out of it.

[Hibou]

That and a landing craft would be a first step towards taking the archipelago, should that become one of our priorities.

[piratejoe]

We need a landing craft, I advise a Submarine lander here just like I did on discord

[VoidSlayer]

Do you think we can design a bomber that can either fit on our aircraft carrier or fly far enough to be useful at sea, supported by our aircraft carrier fighters?

A landing craft sounds like a revision, but if we want one with lots of armor and some kind of gun we would need a design.

We can probably make a better fighter that would only be expensive at this point.

I will just leave this for now:

Super Heavy Fire Tiger Armor:Combining our two most devastating infantry weapons, this armored suit fully protects the hands and legs with plates while each arm has a built in flamethrowers fed from integrated, and armored, tank pack on the back.  Aluminum is used in certain joints to try and keep the suit below 45 pounds.

[helmacon]

Lander design and radar revision.

That's my opinion.

[Powder Miner]

We should wait til/if we have the tundra before considering messing with the tiger armor much.

[VoidSlayer]

I actually do not like a submarine lander, the landers should be escorted to the shore, the only place they really need to be in the fight is while landing.  AT that point both ships would be exposed anyway.  Rather then submersible capacity why not go for more armor, defensive guns and/or the ability to roll out heavy tanks.

What if every lander has a tank or artillery in it in addition to troops, which has a vehicle firing port so the transported machine can attack while landing.

We should wait til/if we have the tundra before considering messing with the tiger armor much.

Most of my designs will be in the mad scientist variety, if you like them enough for a real vote I can work them into a more... complete proposal.  Not that I do not think they are good but...

[Strongpoint]

We should build a better bomber.  1000 kg load for multiple torps, folding wings, pilot armor.  Then we should either upgrade our paratroopers or throw the revision into the radar systems.

Either a new multi-role torpedo/dive bomber, or a level-flight carpet bomber.  Landing ship can wait a turn, because unless we go after the tundra we wont have a use for it now.

Also, I feel for poor Raafat.

Problem with the better bomber that it can be countered by their fighter. Secret project + going jet enginish race car screams that they try to get a jet fighter. We can't risk losing air superiority and, IMO, fighter is a top priority.

Recapturing tundra is unlikely without landing craft. We can design one but... It can be a dead for other fronts and not enough for Tundra should they improve air force or navy.

[andrea]

Lander design and radar revision.

That's my opinion.

if we got for those 2, I suggest design radar and revise lander. Remember that in this game, revision can be used to design new stuff, it is just harder. But a landing ship seems an easy enough project, which shouldn't suffer from being a revision. While at this stage, a good radar would benefit much from having a design spent on it.

@Voidslayer, you missed the discord chat. The submarine would not actually surface to deploy troops. It would deploy tanks with snorkels directly on the sea floor.

[VoidSlayer]

Lander design and radar revision.

That's my opinion.

if we got for those 2, I suggest design radar and revise lander. Remember that in this game, revision can be used to design new stuff, it is just harder. But a landing ship seems an easy enough project, which shouldn't suffer from being a revision. While at this stage, a good radar would benefit much from having a design spent on it.

@Voidslayer, you missed the discord chat. The submarine would not actually surface to deploy troops. It would deploy tanks with snorkels directly on the sea floor.

That is insane.  I therefor withdraw my objections and support the effort wholeheartedly.  It will take a thousand designs and revisions but we will emerge from the ocean depths as the souls of those the pirates have killed coming back on land for revenge.

And yes I really should get back on the discord channel.

[evictedSaint]

If we design a lander, it should have the option to open from the sides or the front.  The front for armor, the sides for infantry. 

Deep Wading may also be worth considering.

Also, I will say that after the lack of ambition cost us the Grand Prix, I'm up for something insane this turn.

[Baffler]

We definitely don't need another plane. If we want to get the tundra back we need to address what caused us to lose the tundra in the first place. I think we should bring back our cruiser design this turn, then spend our revision on either fixing the Archer or using our cargo ship as a base for a heavy landing craft to imitate their Walrus. Or maybe fitting the Archer with LCVP knockoffs. Next turn we should design an APC to match their Marauder, and revise the T2 into an assault gun.

[VoidSlayer]

We could make super cheap disposable landing craft that just flood our forces onto a whole front at once.

Do we need to design a new naval gun before we make a new cruiser or whatever?

[Azzuro]

Design: UFS-LVT-40 "Tiger Shark"
A cross between a traditional tank and landing ship, the Tiger Shark is an amphibious tracked vehicle designed for beach assaults and landing troops. Launched from a CV-22 cargo ship, it crosses the distance to shore via twin screws powered by its fourteen-cylinder diesel engine, switching to tracks once ashore. It is capable of carrying half a platoon of troops and landing them via a rear ramp. Armour is Light on the sides and Heavy on the front, as befits a vehicle intended to drive straight into and survive enemy fire from fixed positions. Over the armour is a thin layer of aluminium to address issues of rust arising from the seawater. Atop, an AS-AC18 provides the firepower needed to eliminate enemy emplacements while an additional two M3 Sorraia GPMGs lay down suppressive fire allowing the troops within to disembark.


Based on the LVT concept raised in the Discord, before submarine lander chat took over. Something to consider as the more sane option, although Andrea has raised the point that this could be a revision.

And I am strongly strongly against cruisers rather than revised carriers or dive/torpedo bombers or torpedoes or whatever else relating to our advantage first. Seriously, we shouldn't even try to compete with the Cannalans in the conventional navy.

[andrea]

UF-SUB-1939 "Jonah" Since the dawn of Forenian navy, many of our ship came to rest in davy jones locker, despite our best efforts. If we can't make things that float, lets embrace the depth.
This design is a submarine, a ship meant to submerge intentionally instead of accidentally. It is not an attack vehicle, however. it is not built for speed or ease of manoeuvre, but for sheer size. Its goal is to carry many vehicles and equipment to the shores of other islands, stealthily. Its shallow draft allows to get up to relatively shallow waters. The main feature is a large cargo bay which ends in a frontal ramp, able to carry up to 10 vehicles, even tanks. Mysteriously, the cargo bay seems to be entirely waterproof and has many pumps on the walls to remove water. It is like it was meant to be flooded...

After this, we revise tanks to have snorkels ( ask kot, tank snorkels are really used) and then we don't even need to surface to launch an invasion.