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

[Parsely]

Airspace is three dimensional. But you've only got a certain amount of it where you can launch aircraft into and if you launch too fast there is a risk of collision. What having cheap carriers means is that we have more carrier task forces, not larger ones (Which is an advantage). We still need gun equipped ships to escort the carriers.

I'm not comprehending this at all. A carrier group that's all moving in the same direction can happily launch planes without risk of collision because those aircraft can ascend to whatever altitude they please, and unless another group of planes is ascending into them they're going to perceive a collision before it happens and avoid it. Not to mention the they're not going to plan a group sortie without realizing "hey, we plotted these planes to cross each other's courses at the same altitude, maybe we should change this".

Anyway, I think we should try to get proper naval radars up and running soon. Should only be a revision, but it's pretty powerful, allowing night attacks and great use of the superior range of ships (rocket propelled shells FTW).

Absolutely! Not to mention with fire control it would actually make the Archer much more accurate than the Khorne (or any Cannalan vessel), so it would actually have a fighting chance during the day, since they're going to bracket the enemy much more quickly.

[Taricus]

And each of those planes need a certain about of airspace to move in, not just forwards but backwards in order to re-land on the carrier.

[Khan Boyzitbig]

Staggered naval squadrons would deal with low altitude collisions too. Simply have the carriers more than a carriers length behind if in line and the staggered carriers on an equal formation but in the gap and off to the side by 3 or so carriers widths.
Like this: (X is a carrier)

Code: [Select]

      X           X
X           X          X
      X           X


[Taricus]

That'll still lead to collisions, especially with jet aircraft.

[Khan Boyzitbig]

Well maybe a lot more spread out. It will reduce the number though as they won't all be on the same flight path. Alternately a massive wide line with enough room to manoeuvre for every type of plane.

[VoidSlayer]

Oh, the big gap the enemy has right now is their infantry.  It has been clear that our infantry is superior on offense and defense, even able to help mitigate some of their armor advantage.

That is why tiger armor everyone can use, a better flamethrower, maybe an improved anti tank infantry weapon, a better sniper rifle and such would all be good improvements.

[10ebbor10]

Anyway, I propose that we all support the proposal to revise our radar to be more compact.

Reasons :

- Primitive radar allowed us to reduce the Cannalan naval advantage 1 Notch last Winter.
- Our radar synergizes enormously well with our vessels. Our destroyers are faster and longer ranged than the enemy, and our carriers should stay out of enemy. Both can benefit tremendously from radar.
- Carrier + Radar + Winter bonus has decent odds of pushing us all the way back to equal, that should give massive advantages in every terrain.

With better carriers + fog bonus + radar, we should have decent odds at reinvading the Tundra, which causes them to loose their cheap fighters.

[Parsely]

With better carriers + fog bonus + radar, we should have decent odds at reinvading the Tundra, which causes them to loose their cheap fighters.

No we won't, we don't have a landing ship. Last time we tried without one it was an out and out disaster.

[10ebbor10]

(5) aT-J04: Azzuro,Piratejoe, 10ebbor10, Powder Miner, Taricus
(2) UF-AC-40 'Khopesh': Light forger, Funk
(7) UFS-CV-40b 'Sea Lift' Pattern A: evictedSaint, Happerry, Kashyyk, Madman198237, NUKE9.13, Andrea, GUNINANRUNIN
(2) Compact Death Ray: Olith McHuman , 10ebbor10
(1) Archer pattern k NAV

(2) Design doctrine: Slat armour: NAV, Taricus
(2) Design doctrine: Tactical rails: NAV, Taricus

(1) Convert remaining SPATs into civilian farming tractors and bulldozers: NAV

[Khan Boyzitbig]

We are going to have to try a naval assault somewhere this turn or waste an attack.

[andrea]

well, we can kind of land with salamanders. probably not a good idea.

[VoidSlayer]

What are these design doctrines you guys are voting for?

Also there is no reason not to push in two areas rather then one, we literally lose nothing.

[NAV]

Pistol: fine
Shotgun: make pump action. Make full length and sawed off version. Possibly underbarrel.
SMG: move the magazine to bottom so it doesn't block vision
Assault rifle: fix the stiff fire selector knob. Tension spring to reduce length and improve close quarters.
Battle rifle: change action to closed bolt, reduce weight of action. Reduce weight of barrel. This will make it much lighter and more accurate.
Sniper rifle: it's good
LMG: it's good
HMG: reduce calibre, reduce weight, increase rate of fire
Flamethrower: high pressure tank, lighter alloys, better nozzle, better fuel, underbarrel
Mortar: okay
Rocket launcher: okay
Horsekiller: revise into some sort of anti materiel/anti vehicle rifle
Scimitar: relegate to parade weapon

Parachute: higher weight capacity, controllable, cargo chute
Tiger armour: better coverage, lighter, more modular
Scope: wider field of view, longer eye relief

These are several ways I can think of to improve our guns and other infantry gear.
We should be able to cram several minor gun revisions into one action. Not all of them though. Unlike QoL, guns actually are within the scope of this game.

[VoidSlayer]

So what about my tiger armor that has a scimitar built into one hand and a combination flamethrower and battle rifle built into the other.

[10ebbor10]

Besides, we totally have a landing craft.

In fact, we have two.

UF-39-APC "Salamander" Pattern B: [Expensive] The Salamander is a large amphibious APC, with a wide body to keep itself stable on the water. It is covered in medium armor, and the body is in a "hexagonal cross-section" shape, which means that any point on its sides or front is either sloping up or down, with the front being long and narrow while the sides are flatter. It has 8 large wheels, the front and rear axles both drive and steer, while the middle two axles are dummies. Water propulsion is from two small propellers. This was a necessary compromise to keep transmission weight down, but land performance isn't amazing. It holds about fourteen soldiers, or a few less if they're bringing heavy weapons and Tiger Armor. Soldiers exit double file through a watertight rear door/ramp and there's a top front crew hatch. It is armed with an AS-AC18 turret and coaxial Sorraia. [5 Ore 3 Oil]

-AS-CV22: [L] A steam-powered ship, worthy of sea travel. Uses two AS-51 S steam engines, which each power one screw. The vessel is around 60 meters long, and carries cargo enough to provide +1 Transport Capacity. It mounts an AC-18 on the bow for air defense, and an AS-1910 on top of the con tower. Costs 3 ore.

I mean, Cannala has a battleship sized vessel they're using as a landing craft. Our cargo ships will not be able to land tanks, but they should be easily capable of dropping of infantry by running themselves into the beach. They're cheap, we can afford it.