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

[Taricus]

We'll only lose that war if we can prevent the enemy from sinking our carriers. And to do that we need better screens. We only need to make our Overcompensator batteries more accurate to prevent their landing attempts. Again, unless they can counter the tiger armour, snipers and flamethrowers they aren't pushing.

[10ebbor10]

We don't need to try and win navally, we just need to not give it to them on a silver platter. Once we fill a gap they will never have as much of advantage over us in that section of naval warfare ever again, because we are actually offering token resistance.

Yes, and in desperately trying to fill those gaps, you're ignoring the looming issues that will loose us the war.

We used to have an armored advantage, but not anymore because we ignored that in favor of naval matters.
We used to have complete aerial domination, but now we only hang on because of  a superior general

By the time you'll be satisfied, we lose in infantry, lose in armor, and lose in the air.

We'll only lose that war if we can prevent the enemy from sinking our carriers. And to do that we need better screens. We only need to make our Overcompensator batteries more accurate to prevent their landing attempts. Again, unless they can counter the tiger armour, snipers and flamethrowers they aren't pushing.

They've pushed us back in the Jungle in the past. Our infantry advantage is nowhere near as strong as you believe.

[Taricus]

It's the one thing stopping them from pushing: Our tiger armour performs better when defending. As those troops aren't moving too far, it's definitely an edge the cannalans can't exactly counter conventionally.

[10ebbor10]

Yes, it's just one thing, and you want to ignore that.

Besides, your design is going to fail spectacularly.

You're combining a warship design (which always goes worse than expected) with a torpedo revision.

[andrea]

If we go navy, I believe we should put a focus on torpedo. Torpedoes are extremely well suited for dealing with big ships and they are the one field in which we have a large advantage in tech.
if we revise the archer to be a torpedo ship and get a new shiny powerful torpedo, I firmly believe the effective will be higher than that of a gun cruiser.

about missiles, I will reiterate my position: even on a good roll, first iteration guidance on a fast, flying object will be terrible.
it will be a 2 turn project, which is fine. will be powerful when completed.
However, instead of spending the first turn doing missiles that will achieve nothing but flailing around with bad guidance, why not spend the first turn doing something which has a bigger chance of working, like a guided torpedo or glide bomb of some kind, then design missiles in the following turn? exact same time taken for working missiles, but we have 2 useful designs instead of one.

(but, I guess this is not working because you consider guided missiles MUCH easier than I think they are)

[Taricus]

Yep. IF we don't roll well, the torpedo would be dropped off; it's a secondary concern. If we get it though we've got a much more powerful weapon to dump under the keels of their ships.

As for failing? That depends on the difficulty and the roll. The guns are basically set so the issue is more just the hull.

@Andrea the cruiser's main role is absorbing fire from their lighter ships; if it can do that the Z class can deal with the ships it won't survive like the Victoria.

[10ebbor10]

IF we don't roll well, the torpedo would be dropped off; it's a secondary concern.

1 ton bombload flashback.

If you don't roll well, we'll get a cruiser with Torpedo's stacked on deck that tend to blow up the moment an enemy glances in their direction.

@Andrea the cruiser's main role is absorbing fire from their lighter ships; if it can do that the Z class can deal with the ships it won't survive like the Victoria.

The enemy carrier is lowering it's expense level. We will not be able to hold the air at sea to do the concentrated torpedo bombardement that's needed to stop a Victoria.

[Taricus]

We still do have cheap wasp's nests to launch stingers. They'll definitely help against the cannalan naval aviation. More to the point if we get a TC next turn we'll have all the pieces sent to make the Z-class cheap.

But the Z-class being cheap isn't going to help if we don't have adequate escort vessels.

[10ebbor10]

We still do have cheap wasp's nests to launch stingers. They'll definitely help against the cannalan naval aviation. More to the point if we get a TC next turn we'll have all the pieces sent to make the Z-class cheap.

But the Z-class being cheap isn't going to help if we don't have adequate escort vessels.

Extra TC only helps if we don't loose the Jungle, for example because we ignored any land or air developments.

Your design only works if everything goes exactly to plan, which it won't.

[andrea]

by the way, note about TC: we don't get it the turn we design it.
If we designed it now, we wouldn't get it next turn, but in the turn after it.
Just saying so people plan accordingly.

[Light forger]

UF-RDN-1941-S 'Virgil'
A update of our sub-par radar system the virgil is barely anymore powerful but, makes up for it with it's small size. The entire array(sans power which is normal supplied by the vehicle that towed it after it's set up) comes in at just under 4 tons and is compact enough to be towed by a single tiger truck thanks to it's new cavity magnetron. While not really longer range the virgil makes use of a phased-array improving it's ability to accurate detect distance. Thanks to it's size it can be easily mounted on our ships without the need to remove armaments. The crowning glory of the system is it's ability to be mounted on to the reckless effect to provide mobile radar coverage. The entire cargo hold of the reckless is altered to mount the virgil and in order to power it an alternator need to be hooked up to one of the reckless engine preventing it from being used during takeoff or near the reckless's max altitude.

Here is the way I see it we need some from of ASM to shake-up naval combat but, we a quite awhile away from doing that. I may hate long term planning but, we are on the back foot so go for it.
1: Radar/revising the 300mm with radar gun laying
2: Muti-part radar guided missile(aka the painter and the missile are separate)
3: Proximity fuzes
4: AA missiles
5: ASM missiles

The nice thing is we get a useful design during each turn on the lead up to the ASM missile however, chances are we will need six turns unless we somehow get proximity fuzes as part of a design. In case no one noticed they are going for gun-laying radar soonish so a light cruiser is just going to die horribly.

[Taricus]

A gunlaying radar is going to be huge in order to be accurate enough to provide data for gunlaying. And certainly not something that's truck-movable. (But we do have trains where they don't for that)

[Kashyyk]

We used to have an armored advantage, but not anymore because we ignored that in favor of naval matters.

We still have a medium and light armour advantage. We're only flagging in heavy armour.

We used to have complete aerial domination, but now we only hang on because of  a superior general

If the Cannalans did this to us in the air, why is it so hard to believe we can do it to them at sea?

By the time you'll be satisfied, we lose in infantry, lose in armor, and lose in the air.

All we need is one design on a large ship such as a battleship or cruiser, then we can revise it to different sizes. That still leaves plenty of actions to ensure our advantage elsewhere.

[andrea]

@Ebbor

We never had complete air domination. They always had the better planes, us getting the upper hand only through general.
edit: barring that one jet plane turn.

[Olith McHuman]

Random idea, but would we be able to reverse engineer that Victoria of theirs? The turn mentions that we disabled a few at sea, but maybe there are a few where they failed to take ground? Or does that rule strictly only apply to taking ground?