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]

If no Magic Air General, our planes would be relatively even with different strengths and weakness.

Not the point I wanted, but I'll accept it. I'll adjust my argument accordingly.

In a single turn, they designed a jet fighter which is equal to ours, while we rolled a 6 on jet fighter design and used a revision.

Meanwhile, the situation is reversed for us at Sea. We rolled a 6 on a carrier, and get a tiny pre-World War 1 design. They roll a 1 on a carrier, and get a much better carrier, with a few flaws.

Anyway, getting back to the point.

Q: Do we have a major disadvantage at Sea?
A: Yes

Q : Is the average Cannalan ship design betters than ours
A : Yes

Q : Do we have the tactical reverses to spend designs and revisions to solve that issue.
A : Not in my Opinion

[Khan Boyzitbig]

We could just go "Fuck this we're building helicarriers" And just ignore naval assault in total. What good is a battleship if the enemy just flies their landing ships overhead?

Then It becomes an airwar and we can take the advantage because equal grade craft will favour us instead.

[Sheb]

We could just go "Fuck this we're building helicarriers" And just ignore naval assault in total. What good is a battleship if the enemy just flies their landing ships overhead?

Then It becomes an airwar and we can take the advantage because equal grade craft will favour us instead.

What, we give up the sea and hunker down until we can take the air?

[10ebbor10]

It's a fairly sensible argument.

They're unlikely to advance the Sea as long as we keep their attention focused on land and air.

[Sheb]

I'm not comfortable with what is essentially a strategy of waiting on the defensive until we can take them over. We're not even sure we can beat them in the air overwhelmingly

[somemildmanneredidiot]

The primary issue with our sea designs is that we have only ever made designs that were reasonably within our limit. Our first carriers were only Hard because we had 16 artillery pieces on them. Our Archers were designed to act as a stop gap to begin with. Our second carriers are only a step or two ahead of our original carriers. Yes, Cannala has had more investments into their ships, but if we push ourselves further and take some risks then we have a chance to bring them down. What's the worst that happens, we lose the war? Surrendering the Sea to Cannala will already do that due to giving them the resource advantage.

Making a battleship will accomplish nothing the Cannallan's can't overcome in a single design, while we'll need to spend two.

It will render most of their ships moot and help protect our carriers which will help preserve our air advantage. Then if they make a comparable ship, their smaller ships will still be moot and allow us to have narrowed the gap signficantly.

Making a national effort carrier will accomplish nothing.

Then you aren't thinking ambitiously enough. To design something with the intention of it being a National Effort means that it will be a terror in the hearts of the Cannala Armed Forces. It will make or break battles and help define entire theatres of war, especially as the heart of its function will benefit from our General bonus.

The Carrier will provide such an Air Advantage that it'll force them to focus several designs on air combat as well as guarantee number advantages wherever it fields.

[Madman198237]

A NE carrier is, in fact, perfectly reasonable for a nation of our size. Remember, the industrial giants of the second World War made do with handfuls of the latest carriers and battleships, if even more than one or two.

[10ebbor10]

Our first carrier was nerfed because it was too ambitious (The 16 cannons were never included in the difficulty of the design). Our second carrier was Very Hard, and sufferred from it. Our First carrier was supposed to carry just as much planes as the Cannalan carrier, but the GM did not allow that.

I get what you're saying. You want more results per design action. But it's not the fault of the proposals. It's not fault of the rolls.

Our proposals were more than ambitious enough and our rolls were excellent.

[andrea]

Cannalan, not Moskurgian. We are fighting Cannalans, remember.

[10ebbor10]

You saw nothing.

Hides plans for the Third Solution.

[NUKE9.13]

Our current navy is very unbalanced. It should come as no surprise that its performance is lacking. Even just revising the Archer would boost our naval performance more than a Cannalan revision would boost theirs.

That being said, I am all for better air transport to bypass the naval field. It won't be enough on its own- we will still need landers, and those landers will still need protecting- but we can definitely make it so that we are able to land a significant force by air.

[Khan Boyzitbig]

I'm going to propose a "Secret Weapons, Vehicles and Technological advances" project.

Basically we hold back several designs and revisions that we reveal in one cluster later. Cannala cannot counter the unknown so we could use this to gain a major advantage for a few turns at the cost of no new deployments of our own. Well we should field new designs if our survival depends on them (like revising our jets to not be complex) but we can hard counter their designs in ways they won't be able to solve instantly.

This path will not guarantee victory. It will certainly take time and we do risk a lot by following it, however this is also the only way we could hope to equal their navy or even outmatch it. As long as we don't lose ground and let them gain total naval dominance we could use this doctrine of delayed deployment to gain a foothold and that is all we need. One inch could give us the war.

What do you guys think?

[evictedSaint]

Let's say we put out a battleship this turn.  Cannala goes down to minor advantage.

Next turn Cannala puts out a better battleship that outclasses ours by 10 years, because they have more experience.

We preemptively counter it by putting out a sub that turn, keeping them at just a minor advantage.

So next turn they put out sonar and depth charges to hard-counter our subs.  We expect this and put out better fighters, keeping the battle at minor naval advantage.

So next turn they put out a new weapon better than what we have, but we're constantly adding things to keep it at minor advantage.

All the while they're taking islands because they have the bonus in that type of combat and our tanks and planes are inferior to theirs because we let the advantage slip away.

Naval focus is a losing battle.  We can't catch up. Building ships to match theirs wont work, because even if our navies are perfectly even they have the advantage thanks to their naval general.

What we should do is stop sinking designs into ships and try buffing our troops, tanks, planes, and landing forces.  If our troops and armor and planes are better than theirs we can still win despite the naval advantage.  Our ships can't compare to theirs and Cannala will never let them.

[Taricus]

Then we don't give them the chance to do so. We build ships to outclass theirs, we force them to get parity with us rather than the other way around. Their carriers lack dedicated bombers and they will suffer for it.

[Parsely]

You know what? If they can design a carrier in one turn we can design a submarine in one too.

A boat designed to submerge. It has an outer hull designed for efficient movement underwater and an inner "strength hull" for keeping the ship intact at depths of roughly 70m, as well as multiple ballast tanks for precise trim control and emergency diving in case of air attack. Has a diesel-electric powerplant capable of a surface speed of 38km/h, and a submerged speed of 16km/h. The engineers knowing of devices used for listening to submerged boats, the electric engine allows the boat to run underwater in almost complete silence. Its main features are a fire control computer that automates firing solutions when the target and torpedo's characteristics are input, a periscope for observing surface targets while submerged, and a snorkel for replenishing air supply and running the diesel engines to charge batteries safely during the daytime.

Armed with 4 forward and 2 aft torpedo tubes, as well as a B2 Destroyer on the deck.

This design directly contests the enemy's naval advantage next turn, unlike the Overcompensator which will require two designs to influence the enemy's naval advantage. It also isn't easily countered in a single turn, as the enemy has low-range naval bombers that won't be good at loitering to hunt subs, and needs to build both sonar and anti-submarine weapons to have a chance at hunting down a sub that has dived.

We do this and decomplex the jet engine and we'll put a serious dent in their naval advantage.

0 "Caviar Soup" support ship:
0 "Paralytic Sneeze" bombardment ship:
0 'Compensator' 300mm Coastal Gun: 
0 "Caviar Soup Again?" support ship:
2 Ray of Deadlier Death: Madman198237, RAM
11 UF-ASA-40 "Overcompensator" Anti-Ship Artillery: Sheb, 10ebbor10, evictedSaint, Khan Boyzitbig, NAV, Andrea, Kashyyk, Powder Miner, Azzuro, Taricus, Piratejoe
1 F-Boat: GUNINANRUNIN