Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[NUKE9.13]

Guys. We can't protect our artillery. We need something that can make the enemy stay in the firing zone instead of overrunning the guns.

I mean, the enemy will have as hard a time as we would designing a workable tank.
And even if your worst fears are realised, we design a tank next turn, and turn the tide. A tank which is almost guaranteed to be better than theirs, thanks to us having more walker experience when we design it.

[BBBence1111]

According to the analisis, legs aren't hard to make. Adding more should make the extra weight a nonissue.

[Kot]

Why do you even assume more legs is harder. It makes no sense. More legs is easier, you don't have to worry about the balance so much. Four-legged walker is a shot in the leg, pretty much.

[stabbymcstabstab]

That's assuming the legs are easily destroyed. hell with track vehicles a good enough hit disables one of the two tracks on those.

[BBBence1111]

But with tracks that doesn't cause the whole thing to fall over.

[stabbymcstabstab]

Still can't move, and besides, how tall are you think this thing is if it's just going to go belly if a leg gets shot off? it would probably still be able to move, maybe like a retarded three legged dog, but they could probably still limp away.

[Kot]

But with tracks that doesn't cause the whole thing to fall over.

Also, I would say it's much easier to re-link a broken tank track or even replace wheels on it than it would be to replace a leg in a walker, at least in the field. You'd probably have to make a crane capable of lifting the whole thing up, and then deal with a fuckton of very complicated things.

Still can't move, and besides, how tall are you think this thing is if it's just going to go belly if a leg gets shot off? it would probably still be able to move, maybe like a retarded three legged dog, but they could probably still limp away.

It's a heavy war machine. It can't reasonably limp on only three legs because it's not balanced to do that. Meanwhile if you lose few legs on a decapod you could probably still try to achieve something.

[stabbymcstabstab]

I fail to see how a heavier tank could limp better missing some of it's smaller weaker legs, compared to a lighter artillery piece with larger strong legs.

[Kot]

I fail to see how a heavier tank could limp better missing some of it's smaller weaker legs, compared to a lighter artillery piece with larger strong legs.

Balance. It's not about "smaller, weaker legs" and "larger, strong legs". That is not the main technical problem with walkers, never was. The main problem is balancing the thing out so it's capable of movement. A tank with more legs will have more legs to take over the legs that were shoot out, creating at least some basics of redundancy, meanwhile a tank with four legs can't afford to lose even one, for it will then become unbalanced and tip over to where the damaged leg was.

[BBBence1111]

1.) Why would it have weaker legs?
2.) 1/4 legs is a lot missing and a fucked up balance. 1/10 is comperatively small.

[stabbymcstabstab]

1) smaller legs would have less room for armor in general
2) your forgetting one is a behind the lines SPA and the other is a tank, the chances the former is going to lose one of its 4 legs is much smaller then the one actively fighting on the lines. Where the chances are it's loses more the 1/10 of it's legs relatively quickly.

[BBBence1111]

1) smaller legs would have less room for armor in general
2) your forgetting one is a behind the lines SPA and the other is a tank, the chances the former is going to lose one of its 4 legs is much smaller then the one actively fighting on the lines. Where the chances are it's loses more the 1/10 of it's legs relatively quickly.

If we don't make something that can keep them from overrunning us, that SPA will be fighting on the frontlines.

[Kot]

1) smaller legs would have less room for armor in general

Bullshit. If anything, smaller, stouter legs make it easier to armour it reasonably.

2) your forgetting one is a behind the lines SPA and the other is a tank, the chances the former is going to lose one of its 4 legs is much smaller then the one actively fighting on the lines. Where the chances are it's loses more the 1/10 of it's legs relatively quickly.

But we need the latter, not the former.

EDIT: Also, very important thing - the four legged mech doesn't include NMGs. I wanted a tank for frontline duty, and wanted it to have NMG mounts so we can bring the NMGs to enemy and take them by suprise, as they will not be expecting to get raked by NMG fire. Pretty much comboing the design and revision.

[evictedSaint]

Design: NAF-SPAT-51 "Paradigm"
The Paradigm is more-or-less a modernization of the SPAT-35 using experimental new technologies. The light armor and cramped interior of the SPAT-35 Thatcher was deemed perfect for this purpose.

Its innovation are four two-jointed "legs" replacing the treads. Via (manual) switching of the transmission, the legs can do amazing things like "move forward", "move backward", or "move sideways". They can't actually turn the vehicle, though they don't need to due to the rotation of the turret (still an Ironcaster). The legs can also "crouch", lowering the vehicle closer to the ground and making it less of a target. The legs take the appearance veeerry vaguely of those of a generic 4-legged animal. The crew stays the same.
The armor is completely removed - meaning the crew and the like are largely exposed. A thin-armored cover shield is attached to the barrel, allowing cover from wherever the turret's facing.

The Paradigm is intended for use as mobile artillery (close-ish to the front-lines) and not as a front-line combatant. So we can actually use our artillery offensively (and work towards more competent walkers). It's much more "artillery on legs" rather than "light tank".

Normal Difficulty: 6

The NAF-SPAT-51 "Paradigm" represents Nogrania's first military innovation since the Geneva Conventions were put into place.  Essentially an artillery piece mounted on a flat platform, the Paradigm uses four stumpy mechanical legs for locomotion.  Each leg uses a number of hydraulic piston attached to a hardened mount and terminates in a flat, wide foot.

The gearing for the "walk" cycle is two different movements per leg, both of which can be run in reverse.  The first is a "push" movement, moving the leg radially away from the center of the craft.  The second is a lateral "sliding" movement for shifting the center of gravity.  When the walk cycle activates the craft will move in a vague zig-zag towards the direction indicated by the driver.  After a bit of tinkering we were also able to include a "rotate" function by using the lateral sliding movements.  The Paradigm does not rotate or move particularly quickly, and soldiers on foot can easily keep up with it.

The Ironcaster is mounted on a swivel in the center of the platform and requires a gunner and loader to operate.  A driver, radio operater, and commander complete the Paradigms crew.  The engine is mounted in the open on the rear, preventing the cannon from firing backwards horizontally. The cannon must be locked into place during travel to maintain an appropriate center of balance.  The rather bulky gearing is mounted on the underside of the Paradigm, giving it low ground clearance.  The underside is sturdy enough that when all legs are in the "push" position it can rest on its belly.  It is entirely unarmored save for a modest shield mounted to the cannon barrel.   
5 Ore, 3 Oil.

(Note: You have 2 Ore and 1 Oil by default.  The U.N. provides 1 Ore and 1 Oil, but you have only 1 TC at the moment and can only utilize one of these additional resources.)

Faction Color: Green
Unique Resource: Cobalt

[Kot]

NAF-SAR-51 "Kotow" (give me a better name and I'll use it) - It's a semi-auto version of the old Enfield, with external gas piston. Includes offset sights and changed stock, to ensue that the bolt doesn't hit the shooter. The rifle features an enlarged magazine of 20 rounds, pistol grip, a bipod doubling as forward grip and a bayonet.

Revision
NAF-SAR-51 "Kotow" (1): Kot