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

[10ebbor10]

How do you people feel about this for the future.

UFAF-HAT-4X 'Ice Gaint'

After years of work, Forenian Aeroengineers have finally made a breakthrough. This marvel of Artotzkan engineering and Moskurgian labor reprents the culmination of years of work of the countries best and brightest. The First airplane big enough to have it's name written on the hull in full. The United Forenian Airforce Heavy Air Transport Version 1941 ' Ice Giant' is a true behemoth, even if they had to cheat by writing that last word on the tail.

It's enormous wings are fitted with contrarotating prop engines on either side, but even so it still requires rocket boosters to take of on most airfields. A similar procedure can be used to land the plane on a dime in a remarkably short distance. Loading can happen through front and rear. The nose splits open underneath the cockpit allowing rapid loading, while the rear cargo hatch can be used to deploy cargo even in flight.

What do you guys think?

I think it's a net loss.

We give up several turns where Cannalla goes uncountered, which we can't afford.

Then we don't give them the chance to do so. We build ships to outclass theirs, we force them to get parity with us rather than the other way around. Their carriers lack dedicated bombers and they will suffer for it.

We rolled a 6 and a 5 on Hard/Very Hard designs. We can't do better.

You know what? If they can design a carrier in one turn we can design a submarine in one too

They get to build a good Carrier in a turn because they know boats.

We do not know boats, so we don't.

[somemildmanneredidiot]

0 "Caviar Soup" support ship:
0 "Paralytic Sneeze" bombardment ship:
0 'Compensator' 300mm Coastal Gun: 
0 "Caviar Soup Again?" support ship:
2 Ray of Deadlier Death: Madman198237, RAM
12 UF-ASA-40 "Overcompensator" Anti-Ship Artillery: Sheb, 10ebbor10, evictedSaint, Khan Boyzitbig, NAV, Andrea, Kashyyk, Powder Miner, Azzuro, Taricus, Piratejoe, SMMI
1 F-Boat: GUNINANRUNIN

For this turn the Overcompensator is exactly what we need as it'll help us hold ground as well as several other long term advancements that other people have expanded upon better than I have.

Powder Miner's arguments for Cruisers as an escort for our Carriers have swayed me as compared to battleships and I plan on voting for them when the time is right. We cannot let despair overwhelm us and forsake one of the most important theatres of conflict in this war, as it is mechanically infeasible to get enough TC to acquire all of the resources we need. Some resources yes, but not all of them.

Our first carrier was nerfed because it was too ambitious (The 16 cannons were never included in the difficulty of the design).

I explictly remember the cannons being mentioned in the original design roll, thougg I also remember reading the nerf.

[Taricus]

We can indeed do better, if we have ships that are just as capable as a cannalan ship but cheaper then we do have a decisive advantage.

[10ebbor10]

We can't.

We rolled better on the designs than they did, yet they got better ships.Any ship we can design, they can design better.

If we have the land and air locked down, then we can return to Sea.

[RAM]

Or we can just design ship-killing radar-seeking(rather than radar-guided...) missiles to turn off their radar and rule the oceanic skies...

[10ebbor10]

By turn 24, sure.

[somemildmanneredidiot]

My understanding of physics says that we are unable to design any flight capable vehicle that would be able to transport all of the supplies/men/vehicles we would need them to, and as such surrendering the sea even temporarily would be a swifter death.

I think we need exactly two things to set Naval battles to a more even set up. Cruisers and Torpedo Boats. Or respectively, a heavier fighting ship that actually has armor and and swings worth a damn, and a small cheap ship that can actually do some damage (what the Archer should have been). We get those two things and the Naval battles will be signficantly less one-sided, even if they invest an equal number of designs to account for the Naval changes. From there we can continue to focus on Air Superiority tactics like was the original plan.

[10ebbor10]

By Turn 13 (turn after next), half their ships will be 1 Tier cheaper, meaning we'll be screwed.

We're already losing, and the enemy fleet is going to becoma lot stronger.

[evictedSaint]

We can indeed do better, if we have ships that are just as capable as a cannalan ship but cheaper then we do have a decisive advantage.

You're absolutely right.  If we have equal ships that are cheaper, we'd win.  We can't reach that point, though, because any time we take a step in that direction Cannala takes one as well.

And it's not despair, it is an analysis of what has happened three times in a row. Any time we make an advancement, be it carriers, jets, or radar, Cannala follows right behind.  The gap doesn't change.  Why do you expect it to?

If we build subs and gain a small advantage, Cannala will build a better sub next turn.  Ignoring the theatre isn't as detrimental as continuing to focus on it.  If we spend all our time trying to catch up in an area the enemy has an overwhelming advantage in, we will lose.  We should focus on what we are good at and stop wasting turn after turn trying to gain an advantage we literally.

LITERALLY.

cannot gain.

It's like trying to win a spacebattle against aliens with flying saucers. That's the lead they have.

[Taricus]

ES please stop sounding like a peace party member, we'd have to shoot you if you go on like that. The Cannalans cannot meet us for cost; we simply have more resources than they do. We press that particular advantage we will surely push them back; aluminium does little to help ships.

[evictedSaint]

At least until more resources pop up on the map, yeah. We have two more resource than they do (if you don't count the titanium, aluminum, and our TC issues)

[10ebbor10]

An interesting argument, of which I hadn't thought.

But will 2 Resources be enough?

[NUKE9.13]

Ah, come on, folks. Let's all calm down a little. eS, you're starting to sound a little hyperbolic.

We can all agree that coast guns, to keep their navy away from our shores, are a good idea this turn, yes?
And I think most will agree to de-[Complex] jet engines?

Let's leave the arguing for now. We're just going in circles.

[somemildmanneredidiot]

It will be if we make sure to make use of them. Part of the problem across our fronts is that newly made technology doesn't always take advantage of our full resource allotment, which leads to less effective things. Our resource advantage and likely future acquisition of resources is why I've been pushing for more ambitious projects. We can afford to field more advanced things than the Cannala can.

Ah, come on, folks. Let's all calm down a little. eS, you're starting to sound a little hyperbolic.

We can all agree that coast guns, to keep their navy away from our shores, are a good idea this turn, yes?
And I think most will agree to de-[Complex] jet engines?

Let's leave the arguing for now. We're just going in circles.

Agreed.

[Taricus]

Presuming the aluminium and titanium on the map requires TC to shift, the cannalans would have to invest in getting more TC to ship those resources, which buys us a turn. Two resource points makes out Z class merely expensive. We build a light, or even a heavy, cruiser of that cost category we'll have a ship that as well armed as the Khorne that outnumber it significantly more.