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

[VoidSlayer]

Why not just make them have really good aerodynamics so they hit where you aim at?  Then it is up to the soldiers on the ground to lead targets to hit moving tanks, we might even get them some kind of assisted aiming system?  I don't know.

[Madman198237]

OR we make better radar, since better radar = better performance at sea = more air support on land = more busted tanks = more success.

Just a thought.


But, completely seriously, next turn should be a good turn to make a serious attempt at landing. Right now, if we design better radar we'll be capable of cutting down Cannala's naval advantage, again, and possibly even making things equal. Followed with a revision for the starshell, we'll be capable of nullifying the two advantages that allowed them to take land on Forenia, and then we'll be right back to square one, which is the square in which we kick the Cannalans off of, well, everywhere.

[evictedSaint]

As mentioned before, I believe pocket radar is the way to go and will vote for that.  We stomped them out of the northern jungle, we can stomp them out of the center jungle too.  Our revision should be spent capitalizing on the radar we make during our design; putting it on the Overcompensators, our planes, our ships, our AAA nests, etc.

[Taricus]

A RADAR isn't going to help kill their tanks: We have no trouble in using Haasts in doing so by getting through their air cover. It's the ground based AA that's stymieing our efforts, and we can't kill those without tanks because we can't get close enough for handheld/man-portable AT to be effective.

[Madman198237]

Radar means success at sea, and extremely accurate ranges for naval gunfire. Which results in heavy shore bombardment. Which will allow us to land vessels MUCH more successfully. Especially with 12-inch guns capable of firing a dozen miles inland, which will allow for limited artillery support to be given to paratroopers.

Once again, let's get the Cannalans off our island (By denying them naval support/supremacy and eliminating nightvision as a factor), THEN worry about taking away their Titanium.

[Taricus]

It's dry season soon, which means we'll be able to drive them off. Besides, their biggest problem that we can't deal with on the ground front is the bull, and we'll need better tanks to deal with them.

[Madman198237]

OK, since we'll be driving them off our island this turn, why don't we do the technological innovation now, and thus surprise them when we hit Titan with a lander and a new tank?

[Taricus]

And where do you propose we get a lander and a tank from in the same turn?

[Madman198237]

A revision to make a lander. It's not rocket science to put armored doors in the front of a ship.

[Taricus]

It is if we want it to get off the beach after getting there

[Madman198237]

It'd be an Archer conversion anyway.

It'd be darn lucky to reach the beach.

Besides, a stuck landing vessel is just more artillery support.

[stabbymcstabstab]

Honestly revising the archer into a lander might be the best since it'll be able to haul tanks and provide direct fire support. That and I think adding some armor wouldn't add that much difficulty to it.

[RAM]

Beaching tends to point the ship at the sky above the landing. You would probably need to do a bit more than just the one revision to get both the door and to work something out so that the guns can shoot forwards while beached... also most ships are designed for broadsides rather than full frontals...

I am really not sure that R.P.G.s will be effective against frontal tank armour or reliable at getting around to the sides. there is a big difference between what a tank or field-gun can throw out compared to what infantry can carry. Does anyone have any references on what R.P.G.s could penetrate?

[Madman198237]

Archer lander revision: Add frontal armor, add frontal doors, replace weapons with mortars.


What could POSSIBLY go wrong?

[evictedSaint]

What is our major concern right now?  Is it their tanks? Their night vision? Their ships?

I think it's their tanks, based on what we've read.  Our own tanks can kill them, but they suffer at range and are considerably squishier than Cannala's.  We could just flat-out design a better tank this turn, since we're still using our WW1-era tank as our MBT.  Hell, anything we design (baring a bad roll) should be better than Cannala's, because we're not going to use a fucking jet engine for a motor instead of a diesel engine.  Give it a better gun, better frontal armor, better turret traverse, maybe even a spotlight to fuck with their night vision.

Or, we could go ahead and knock out Blood Eagle this turn and finally get that over with.  Put it on our Salamanders to make them absolutely superior to Cannala's Raiders and put them on our tanks to give them first-strike suitability.  Since people seemed to have cooled off on RADAR for the time being, I think one of these two is our best option for our design.

Personally, I'm leaning towards developing a non-WW1 tank.  Something modern, with an auto-loader and a low profile.  If there's any interest in this kind of design, I can write up a proposal.  Not sure what all we should include in it, though - should we shoot for turret stabilizers?  Armor thickness? Barrel diameter?  I think the name should be the "UF-MBT-42 'MATADORE'", as a nod to bull-fighting.