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

[RAM]

...

How many rockets would it take to get a 40 tonne tank to skip over the water? Could we add initial acceleration from a rocket catapult? Could we do the Thunderbolt II think where a whole plane is built around a gattling gun, except instead of a plan it is a transport ship, and instead of a gattling gun it is a gattling heavy-tank catapult...

[Zanzetkuken The Great]

I'll back a tank if it's made amphibious.

Fording equipment is the best we can do.  Better route would be to make a Landing Craft - Tank.

We'd still need to get them onto the beach via lander in the first place. And in order to do that we need cruisers to escort them there in the first place.

Correction, we are reaching the beaches, though we are having a problem with numbers able to reach the beaches.  Quote from the previous turn:

Forenia's naval forces are weathered by Cannala's attacks heavily before reaching the shore, and an entire Sea Lift is lost to Cannala's mines. When they do arrive, the Forenian aircraft have driven back enemy ships for a short time and, though now fewer in number, moved to support the ground assault. Salamanders are dropped into the water in massive numbers, carrying the majority of the Forenian infantry. Raiders being used for shore defense are quickly overwhelmed by the Salamander's superior armor (although the turret-mounted RPG's help, they can't easily be reloaded under fire and have a short range). The Forenians make a heroic effort but ultimately their losses at sea were too much.

Honestly, wondering why the ship crowd hasn't brought up the fact that while the aircraft do gain superiority, it is taking too long to do so to prevent major losses.  As well, it is noted that while many Canallan ships do get hurt by the air, the survivors are still able to fire upon us while we land.  Kinda points out we need a support ship to, while not gaining total, at least for gaining localized naval parity/advantage.

[Taricus]

A landing craft - tank would still need to get onto the beach in appreciable numbers as well. Hence the cruiser. We manage to get a relatively cheap cruiser which can capably take on... basically anything outside of the victoria, and we're going to have a very good fighting chance on the waves; we'll be able to dedicate our carrier air groups to target the more dangerous enemy vessels while the cruisers pick off the rest. And after that maybe design a new destroyer at a later date with better armament to more adequately deal with torpedo boats.

[Zanzetkuken The Great]

A landing craft - tank would still need to get onto the beach in appreciable numbers as well. Hence the cruiser. We manage to get a relatively cheap cruiser which can capably take on... basically anything outside of the victoria, and we're going to have a very good fighting chance on the waves; we'll be able to dedicate our carrier air groups to target the more dangerous enemy vessels while the cruisers pick off the rest. And after that maybe design a new destroyer at a later date with better armament to more adequately deal with torpedo boats.

If we make the Apocalypse, we could use a revision to Armor up the Archer, then put the Apocalypse's cannon on the thing.

[Sheb]

Any idea of when the turn will be up?

[Taricus]

If we make the Apocalypse, we could use a revision to Armor up the Archer, then put the Apocalypse's cannon on the thing.

Again Zan we don't need to design another thing for a destroyer cannon. More to the point the entire destroyer design, not just the guns, needs to be rebuilt from the ground up.

[NUKE9.13]

More to the point the entire destroyer design, not just the guns, needs to be rebuilt from the ground up.

Okay, so, you keep saying this. Why do you keep saying this? Is there something wrong with the basic hull shape? Why couldn't we use a revision to slap on some armour, bigger guns, and better engines?

[Taricus]

Because all of those added together would be a design in it's own right; the hull itself needs to be rebuilt with armour and protection in mind for any method of keeping it afloat after a shot is to have any effect on the destroyer losses.

[Zanzetkuken The Great]

Because all of those added together would be a design in it's own right; the hull itself needs to be rebuilt with armour and protection in mind for any method of keeping it afloat after a shot is to have any effect on the destroyer losses.

Using existing guns and tuning up the engine doesn't sound like it would add too much in all honesty.  As for armor, we might be able to get away with light armor, maybe medium.  May not be much, but it would be better than a torpedo boat.

[Taricus]

The destroyer is going to need more than a mere tune-up in regards to the engines and the guns to stay viable.

[Devastator]

Don't forget the nonfunctional torpedo launchers.

[andrea]

if torpedoes aren't mentioned, it is because they are aerial torpedoes, with a range that is probably 1 or 2 kilometers. The launcher is pretty horrible, but it should be able to actually launch torpedoes.

[Zanzetkuken The Great]

The destroyer is going to need more than a mere tune-up in regards to the engines and the guns to stay viable.

What if we turn it into a Minelayer/Minesweeper?

[Zanzetkuken The Great]

Okay, fun little point of hilarity.  With our resources if we keep the Jungle, their Victoria class would merely be 'Expensive' for us.  Sure, we may need a bit of experience for precisely it's loadout, but we could build a ship somewhat close armed with Overcompensators and it would only be in the expensive range...

[Taricus]

Capital ships later; first we need screens.