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

[evictedSaint]

Based on previous applications, 3 boilers to 2 turbines would likely be underpowered.  Doing two 2-to-1 boiler/turbine designs would also give us redundancy for power generation and let her move as fast as a destroyer should.

Guns are placed as such to allow firing during both advance and retreat, since her goal is to be able to dictate the range engagements occur at.

AA would be put in nests around the command tower, stern, and bow.  She is supposed to eventually serve as a CV bodyguard, so putting in AA nests now means we don't have to retrofit later.

[Light forger]

To continue my pointless whining and nitpicks with others designs.
Unity: Under gunned, not a hundred percent sure even with being under gunned we can get it to be cheap.
Wasp Nest: We have nothing to escort it, leaving it incredibly weak to surprise attacks and normal attacks.
Archer: Under gunned again, it's main stated goal of out ranging them is unlikely. As their 150mm maybe low-velocity but it's still a 150mm and, their 130mm is a high velocity flak cannon.

[andrea]

I agree on the boiler, but keep in mind we have rocket assisted shells which give us a 50% boost in range. Lets not get ahead of ourselves and make huge guns. we should not increase cost and complexity of this design, it is our first ship.

[Zanzetkuken The Great]

Based on previous applications, 3 boilers to 2 turbines would likely be underpowered.  Doing two 2-to-1 boiler/turbine designs would also give us redundancy for power generation and let her move as fast as a destroyer should.

Guns are placed as such to allow firing during both advance and retreat, since her goal is to be able to dictate the range engagements occur at.

AA would be put in nests around the command tower, stern, and bow.  She is supposed to eventually serve as a CV bodyguard, so putting in AA nests now means we don't have to retrofit later.

Added the fourth boiler, though does the tonnage need to be increased?

As I said, misunderstood what you meant due to term confusion.  That's where the guns currently are.

We have a Bumblebee at both ends of the ship, the conning tower flanked by AS-AC18s, and I've added four Sorrorias, one placed in each gap between a Bumblebee and an AS-AC18.  It's not much, but we should have a number of these ships able to provide overlapping AA.

[evictedSaint]

I'm unsure about the tonnage, because it's getting outside my field of knowledge.  Perhaps...?

That should be enough AA to make her a decent escort, yeah.  I'm happy with that design.

[Light forger]

'Interdictor':
'Sniper': (1) Happerry
'Unity': (2) 3_14159, Azzuro
'Duo':
'Tripoint':
'Wasp Nest': (3) evictedSaint, GUNINANRUNIN, Kashyyk
'Archer': (8) Kot, Powder Miner, NUKE9.13, Stabby, Taricus, Zanzetkuken, Andrea, Lightforger

[Zanzetkuken The Great]

I'm unsure about the tonnage, because it's getting outside my field of knowledge.  Perhaps...?

That should be enough AA to make her a decent escort, yeah.  I'm happy with that design.

Dropping tonnage since none of us have an idea on how to give it the correct number.

One question though it if we should shorten the boat down, perhaps to 80 meters.  Is close enough to existing ships they could be mistaken by enemy pilots.  Plus, it makes it likelier the ship would only cost 4, due to only being 30% bigger than our previous, and it's 3 ore cost times 30% is (approximately) an additional 1 ore.  At worst, it might be 5 ore due to the guns, but it still isn't much.

[evictedSaint]

It seems very similar to the HMS Loyal, an 80 m long 4-boiler 3-gunned early british destroyer.

It had a displacement of about 1000 tons, which seems appropriate.  It's a three-decade-old ship at this point and seems like the best analogy to our current Archer destroyer.

Also, I petition to have the first destroyer we build to be named the "UFS Stronger Together" and have a mixed crew of both Arstotzkans and Moskurgs.

[andrea]

wow, that is very close indeed.

[Zanzetkuken The Great]

It seems very similar to the HMS Loyal, an 80 m long 4-boiler 3-gunned early british destroyer.

It had a displacement of about 1000 tons, which seems appropriate.  It's a three-decade-old ship at this point and seems like the best analogy to our current Archer destroyer.

Also, I petition to have the first destroyer we build to be named the "UFS Stronger Together" and have a mixed crew of both Arstotzkans and Moskurgs.

What about 'United We Stand'?  And we may want to have it phrased as 'Forenians from all over Forenia.'  The more we use of 'Forenian' rather than Arstotzkan or Mokurg, the sooner people will think of themselves as Forenians first and their old nation second.

[evictedSaint]

Yes, we bill it as "Forenians from Forenia", but make no mistake; it's purposefully a mix of both ethnicities and is our posterchild of a United Forenia.

The particular name doesn't matter so long as it's some similar "Campfire-Get-Along-Kumbaya" bullshit name.  It'll be a small step to stopping our infighting.

[Kot]

Let's not give it stupid names that sound like they have been forced by bueraucrats that have no idea what they're doing.

[Taricus]

So basically not naming it in an arstotzkan fashion?

[Devastator]

Did the Yellowjacket roll a 1 behind the scenes?  Because it wasn't mentioned once in the combat report, and I seem to remember it inexplicably doing nothing in the previous game.

[andrea]

it is right now same expense as the HF-32 but worse, so I guess not deployed.
It will be useful next turn.