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

[Madman198237]

I don't know if you guys are picturing this differently from me, but I'm seeing this as a design that must not fail. If we don't reclaim air advantage we're losing the desert no questions asked, and it's a painful ride to total defeat from there. Hence why the Hayat is based heavily on the VVF---it should reduce the difficulty as well as making it easier to end up a Cheap fighter. Similar reasoning lies behind the relative lack of features---it needs to be simple to be Cheap.

The Galileo, though, it has lots of features and is a new design entirely. This is neither good for difficulty nor is it conducive to ending up Cheap, and if we fail either check (successful and Cheap, and the more difficult the design is the less likely it is to be either) we're probably going to lose in the desert, which is nothing more or less than game over for us.

[Zanzetkuken The Great]

UFAF-F-45 'Hayat': (5) Madman, Kashyyk, TheRedwolf, McHuman, Zanzetkuken
UFAF-AAM-45 'Guillotine': (0)
UFAF-F-45 'Galileo' Multi-Role Fighter: (3) ConscriptFive, Powder Miner, Happerry

You know what?  Looking back over it, I like the Hayat a dash more.

[Kot]

I don't know if you guys are picturing this differently from me, but I'm seeing this as a design that must not fail. If we don't reclaim air advantage we're losing the desert no questions asked, and it's a painful ride to total defeat from there. Hence why the Hayat is based heavily on the VVF---it should reduce the difficulty as well as making it easier to end up a Cheap fighter. Similar reasoning lies behind the relative lack of features---it needs to be simple to be Cheap.

No matter how you argue about it, there's no fucking way you could get usable advantage by changing a twin engine aircraft into single engine one apart from what you'd get as regular air experience anyway.
Not to mention, it's "based" off an expensive aircraft, so...

[NAV]

UFAF-F-45 'Hayat': (6) Madman, Kashyyk, TheRedwolf, McHuman, Zanzetkuken, NAV
UFAF-AAM-45 'Guillotine': (0)
UFAF-F-45 'Galileo' Multi-Role Fighter: (3) ConscriptFive, Powder Miner, Happerry

[Madman198237]

I don't know if you guys are picturing this differently from me, but I'm seeing this as a design that must not fail. If we don't reclaim air advantage we're losing the desert no questions asked, and it's a painful ride to total defeat from there. Hence why the Hayat is based heavily on the VVF---it should reduce the difficulty as well as making it easier to end up a Cheap fighter. Similar reasoning lies behind the relative lack of features---it needs to be simple to be Cheap.

No matter how you argue about it, there's no fucking way you could get usable advantage by changing a twin engine aircraft into single engine one apart from what you'd get as regular air experience anyway.
Not to mention, it's "based" off an expensive aircraft, so...

Meh, see Sensei's post in Discord about fifty messages up. It's based off of and losing an engine compared to such a plane, that's worth at LEAST one Ore and a couple Oil.

[Kot]

I don't know if you guys are picturing this differently from me, but I'm seeing this as a design that must not fail. If we don't reclaim air advantage we're losing the desert no questions asked, and it's a painful ride to total defeat from there. Hence why the Hayat is based heavily on the VVF---it should reduce the difficulty as well as making it easier to end up a Cheap fighter. Similar reasoning lies behind the relative lack of features---it needs to be simple to be Cheap.

No matter how you argue about it, there's no fucking way you could get usable advantage by changing a twin engine aircraft into single engine one apart from what you'd get as regular air experience anyway.
Not to mention, it's "based" off an expensive aircraft, so...

Meh, see Sensei's post in Discord about fifty messages up. It's based off of and losing an engine compared to such a plane, that's worth at LEAST one Ore and a couple Oil.

I am aware of that message and I still maintain that either misunderstanding on your part, or pretty un-logical ruling.
Also, sure, less engines probably means cheaper, but if you're literally trying to make the same plane but with one engine is probably not going to really make that much difference in terms of difficulty benefit.

[Cnidaros]

I don't know if you guys are picturing this differently from me, but I'm seeing this as a design that must not fail. If we don't reclaim air advantage we're losing the desert no questions asked, and it's a painful ride to total defeat from there. Hence why the Hayat is based heavily on the VVF---it should reduce the difficulty as well as making it easier to end up a Cheap fighter. Similar reasoning lies behind the relative lack of features---it needs to be simple to be Cheap.

No matter how you argue about it, there's no fucking way you could get usable advantage by changing a twin engine aircraft into single engine one apart from what you'd get as regular air experience anyway.
Not to mention, it's "based" off an expensive aircraft, so...

Meh, see Sensei's post in Discord about fifty messages up. It's based off of and losing an engine compared to such a plane, that's worth at LEAST one Ore and a couple Oil.

I am aware of that message and I still maintain that either misunderstanding on your part, or pretty un-logical ruling.
Also, sure, less engines probably means cheaper, but if you're literally trying to make the same plane but with one engine is probably not going to really make that much difference in terms of difficulty benefit.

What message is this, for those of us not on Discord?

Anyway, we're very screwed now. The submarines didn't help keep them off our coasts, and this turn we're going to be fighting in two very different environments. I don't quite like the idea of spending yet another design on fighter jets, but it seems pretty unavoidable. No strong opinion yet on which one is better.

For this turn's revision, we should either spend it on cheapening the Noose SAMs (1 less Oil to Cheap) or on a new infantry anti-tank rocket, preferably heat-seeking, which could also see alternate use against Cannalan 'pteros

[Madman198237]

The message I'm referring to is that "You can make a single engine aircraft which is inspired by the general shape/design goals of a two-engine one just fine". Kot insists without actually providing details that you simply cannot make a smaller aircraft (NOTE: The physical size of this aircraft is SMALLER than the VVF, so quit spewing lies about it, Kot) with the same engine as a larger one which uses two of said engine.

In case this is my fault and the design isn't clear (though I tried to make it clear, I'll go put something specific in there shortly):
The Hayat is a 1/2 or 2/3 size version, as small as we can make it, of the VVF, flying on a single engine instead of two. It is, visually and aerodynamically, as close to identical (but smaller) as we can make it. This should retain maneuverability, though if it's any larger than 1/2 we might (logically) lose maximum speed despite the combination of lessened weight and reduced drag.

[helmacon]

UFAF-F-45 'Hayat': (6) Madman, Kashyyk, TheRedwolf, McHuman, Zanzetkuken, NAV
UFAF-AAM-45 'Guillotine': (0)
UFAF-F-45 'Galileo' Multi-Role Fighter: (4) ConscriptFive, Powder Miner, Happerry, helmacon

[Madman198237]

Sensei has already rolled for the design and is thus presumably writing them up/has presumably started writing them up and will finish tomorrow.


We rolled a 5, by the way. Pray that the design was Normal. Or Hard at worst. Or Easy, at best.

[Powder Miner]

5 on a Very Hard is not exactly dogshit either

[Madman198237]

Yeah but the Cannalans have a delta-and-canards version of an F-16, soooooooooooo we kinda need "actually acceptably good" in order to not just instantly lose the desert and die horrible deaths.

We are still going to die horrible deaths if we take even one step backwards into the desert, aren't we?

[evictedSaint]

UF-MBT-45 'King Bjorn'

A modernization of the Bjorn tank.

As weapons become more advanced, armor becomes more of a hindrance.  With enemy tandem charges and off-shore missile strikes, the ability to deflect cannon rounds is a less crucial factor.

The King Bjorn maintains the same design as the Bjorn but reduces all armor down two levels to Medium Mangalloy armor (i.e. Heavy Armor level).  This is to reduce the ore costs to something more reasonable while still keeping the vehicle impervious to 30 mm rounds.  The ERA now makes use of the Salamander Pattern F's "Slats+ERA" armor in order to give survivability against enemy tandem charged warheads, and the Artemis's patented Air Conditioning is introduced to keep the internal spaces cool in hot climates (such as the desert).  Optics are improved with the HKMKII's new 8x Eagle Sight III scopes for long-range targeting.  The external smoke launchers can be supplemented with our UF-APS-44 "Burning Tiger" to provide some defense against enemy radar and infrared guided munitions.

If time is available, the turret is modified to facilitate faster manual loading.

[NAV]

Survivability against the Bull's cannon is the main reason our Bjorn is good. Remove it's armour and its absolute shit. We already have an okay cheap tank, we don't need another okay cheap tank. Because a bjorn with shitty armour isn't much better than an AS-T33. Because Bjorn is a very very flawed for a light tank.

Maybe if we want a cheaper armoured fighting vehicle we can make a a tank destroyer/assault gun based on the Bjorn but without a rotating turret.

[Zanzetkuken The Great]

Maybe we should fix our ERA?  Make it so that one shot doesn't get rid of it all?