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]

Anyway, thinking about things from another direction.

TPD 'DOLPHIN' 38b: This is an aerial torpedo, weighing in a bit more than half a ton. It is powered by a wet heater motor, and stabilized by a gyroscope. The revised 'b' version includes a magnetic detonator to explode beneath ships, and can be dropped from considerable height and speed without failure. [2 Ore, 1 Oil]

We have a torpedo with a functional magnetic detonator. These things are absolute murder on ships.

If we make it larger, we can obliterate their entire fleet in a field where they do not exceed us.

[andrea]

Indeed. We need a deploying mechanism, however.
small torpedo boat?

edit: ground effect jet plane!

[VoidSlayer]

Submarine?

[10ebbor10]

Our current plane has 1 ton deployement capacity.

Making a submarine defeats the point of trying to svoid shipbuilding.

[Powder Miner]

Ignoring the navy won't make it go away, and pretending that it will is just going to get us walloped on all fronts due to defeatism. The fact of the matter is that this game has a heavy naval element, not only in the bottom lanes in general but in going between islands, both for them landing on Forenia and is landing on Turbados. Decision that addressing that area of the game isn't worthwhile will lose us the game as we fail to take their mainland and they take ours.

[evictedSaint]

I think he was meaning more of a paradigm shift.  If we're not resolute on giving up the naval theatre, a decent sub would be a significant paradigm shift.

...actually, when we give Germany our jet this turn, we could ask for their U-boat design in return.  That could give us a decent jump-start towards sub building, and represent a solid shift in combat doctrine.  The most pronounced effects of a design are when they change the nature of war.

I am wary though, because sonar and depth charges would be a hard 1-turn counter to the design.

Ignoring the navy won't make it go away, and pretending that it will is just going to get us walloped on all fronts due to defeatism. The fact of the matter is that this game has a heavy naval element, not only in the bottom lanes in general but in going between islands, both for them landing on Forenia and is landing on Turbados. Decision that addressing that area of the game isn't worthwhile will lose us the game as we fail to take their mainland and they take ours.

How can we compete in the naval theatre, then? We're VERY far behind, have little experience, and each time we make an advancement Cannala matches us the next turn. 

Just because they have a major naval advantage doesnt mean we can't land on enemy shores - we did it last turn, and suffered mostly from a just the lack of a cheap lander.

[Powder Miner]

We've been able to lower their naval advantage in the past, but the reason it's never stocked is the exact same reason that they never overturn our air superiority completely -- we never carry through. The more designs they need to spend to keep us from overtaking them navally, the less they have to deal with our mostly superior land and air anyhow.

[10ebbor10]

Actually, ignoring the naval theater will make it go away. It's already in the worst state it can get, and it won't ever get better.

Anyway, designing naval stuff simply does not work.

They can do more with a single naval design than we can.

[NUKE9.13]

There was a thing ebbor said a while ago that is valid. The more catching up you do, the better. We can easily create a ship that is far better than our current ones, but it will be harder for them to design a ship that is far better than theirs. Sure, we won't ever beat them in Naval matters (unless they let us by not designing anything to counter our stuff), but we can definitely reduce it considerably, and perhaps with a few other bonuses, like air superiority or fortunate weather, we can reduce them to No Naval Advantage.

[Powder Miner]

Actually, ignoring the naval theater will make it go away. It's already in the worst state it can get, and it won't ever get better.

Anyway, designing naval stuff simply does not work.

They can do more with a single naval design than we can.

But that's wrong! Cortez does not provide any sort of design bonus, and you're more or less making that one up. They can build from a better base than us, but the rates of advancement are not tilted in their favor like you seem to want to claim they are. Designing naval stuff has worked in the past, but because people with your mindset stubbornly refuse to learn any lessons from the naval front we are losing there.

[Madman198237]

If we pop out with a submarine due to a trade with Germany (I don't think so, otherwise Cannala would just ask for the design of the United States' fleet carriers and we'd be screwed entirely) then make antisubmarine warfare ourselves, we could revamp our subs to stay one or two steps ahead of ASW.

[10ebbor10]

Since Game start :

Designs spend (Forenia)

Hard: 2 TPD 'DOLPHIN' 38-1
Hard: 6 UFS-CV 'Wasp Nest' 38, Pattern A:
Hard: 3 UFS-DD-38 Pattern E 'Archer
Very Hard: 5 UFS-CV-40 Zheleznogorod

Revisions

Hard: 6 TPD 'DOLPHIN' 38b
Easy: 4 UFS-CV-50b 'Sea Lift':
 
Designs

Santos-Class Naval Aircraft Support Vessel   

Revisions

Santos-Class Naval Aircraft Support Vessel  (Original design had crippling flaw, ie, rolled a 1)
Santos-Class Naval Aircraft Support Vessel

4 Times more designs, equal revisions. 2 6's versus an enemy who rolled a 1 at least once. And we're no better of now than we were before.

[andrea]

Actually, the only naval stuff that worked was the carrier, because it allowed us to bring air at sea. It worked not because it was a navy design, but because it was a paradigm shift navy design. It should be ntoed that they designed on a 1 (and a couple of revisions) a better carrier than we did on our second attempt, with a 6 and a 5 in our carrier tech. A new paradigm shift may give benefits, but they showed that they can and will outdo us in whatever new thing we introduce.

So, if we get some very cool idea, maybe it is better to time it with a time where it is important to bring down their advantage for a turn?

[evictedSaint]

You're ignoring the fact that they match us consistently with each naval advancement.  They have more navy experience, and they will always have more naval experience.  The only time we pushed them down to minor was when we had the fog bonus and a new carrier.  We had both of those things last turn, and they STILL have the Major Advantage.

My concern is that both Forenia and Cannala will consistently "+1" their navies each turn, which means they will always be ahead.  Any design we put out can be beaten thoroughly next turn because they have a more solid base.  We should be focusing on our strength and save our dwindling armor and air advantages rather than trying to win a race where the opponent has a ten-turn head start.

[10ebbor10]

There was a thing ebbor said a while ago that is valid. The more catching up you do, the better. We can easily create a ship that is far better than our current ones, but it will be harder for them to design a ship that is far better than theirs. Sure, we won't ever beat them in Naval matters (unless they let us by not designing anything to counter our stuff), but we can definitely reduce it considerably, and perhaps with a few other bonuses, like air superiority or fortunate weather, we can reduce them to No Naval Advantage.

Well, I said it then, and I concluded since then that it's not valid.

Because we can't create a ship that's far better than their current ones due to technological advantage. The previous experience modifier is too great.

Look at the Archer. It looses to a ship Cannala designed in 1917 (equiped with 1925 guns).

But that's wrong! Cortez does not provide any sort of design bonus, and you're more or less making that one up. They can build from a better base than us, but the rates of advancement are not tilted in their favor like you seem to want to claim they are. Designing naval stuff has worked in the past, but because people with your mindset stubbornly refuse to learn any lessons from the naval front we are losing there.

Don't put words in my mouth.

I never said Cortez gave a design bonus.

However, Cannalla does have 2 decades of shipbuilding experience. That means that till 1960's, they'll have a naval design advantage over us. That definitively tilts the rates of advancement in their favor. They did more with a design that rolled 1 than we did with a design that rolled 6.