Bay 12 Games Forum

Ah, I see. Thank you for the explanation, I think I got it now.

Basically - armoured platform for variable weapons.
Might I suggest taking an armoured car - like the personnel carrier - for now, with then-obsolete tanks modified for that role once they're, well, obsolete?
Basically, as I see it, the APC can mount an MG and transport infantry, too. The light cannon's a bit more difficult, but a tank could be used for that. And, lastly, the anti-air vehicle would suffice with splitter-proof armour (as it usually should not be used directly on the front lines, anyway) for now.
So, to sum up, we need three different classes of vehicles: Tanks, personnel carriers, and 'special vehicles' like anti-air ones or self-propelled artillery. Tank destroyers, possibly.
The personnel carriers will not be obsolete that fast - they cannot survive tanks, anyway, and don't need to be upgraded with them. So, tanks need to be upgraded fairly frequently. Old, obsolete tanks form the new special vehicles by refitting them.

Comparing your proposed vehicle with the APC, it's probably similar to compare the Sdkfz 222 Aseaheru posted with the Sdkfz 251 - similarly armed, similarly armoured and can be used with different weapons - like the standard MG, a mortar, a 75mm cannon or a small anti-aircraft one. (Not all at once, though.)

The Panzer is a very close fit to my initial idea.

I'll try to make it halftrack but thats no big deal if it proves to hard. But the flatbed on the back is perfect to just extend the armored cabin over and mount the guns ontop of to make it more useful for infantry battle.

Flatbed is fine for AA but in an infantry battle it's horrible.

Oh, it's no panzer, it's a Panzerspähwagen - basically armoured recon vehicle. There's a difference there
But yes, that's basically what I meant with my text above.

To make it short, there are several problems I see with this:
- Wheeled: Well, there are advantages to both wheeled, tracked and a combination thereof. Wheeled means better on-road performance, tracked better off-road. Small preference to half-tracked or so, to provide better off-road performance. I think that's more important in combat.
- Open turret: Does it rotate with the gun (and provide protection to the gunner)? It could be a bit too heavy.
- Armour: My main problem. You want ca. 9cm around, with half that bottom and fifteen front. That's... not going to happen. That vehicle would heavier armoured than a Sherman tank. I would forecast problems with both speed and suspension (that is, reliability). That is quite problematic.

How about this:
Take the Project 2206 truck engine (one should be far, far enough), and build an armoured vehicle from it. Driver's compartment armoured 1.5cm, passenger 0.5. Mount a Project 2202 15mm machine gun on it, with the gunner standing in the driver's compartment. Possibly armour ahead.
Basically, make it quick and armoured enough to survive small arms fire, and armed enough to provide fire power to infantry they wouldn't otherwise have. Do not make a tank out of it.

To sum up: Don't make an infantry fighting vehicle if we haven't even got an armoured car, much less a tank ;-)

Well, we have a truck, and we will possibly have an AA truck next turn or the turn after. This would increase our mobile anti-air power - in the island defense role, however, the AA gun alone should have the desired effect. Maybe use it with a to-design armoured transport vehicle?

On the mines, I have a different, more critical view. We already have basic naval mines (the cruiser from the beginning has mine laying equipment which I assume to be contact detonated ones). More advanced ones, operating for example with a magnetic proximity sensor, would need new technology and therefore be new projects, while contact mines will be - for island defense - very useful.
There are two usages I can see for mines: Mining sea ways and mining island coasts. The former will mostly impose strategic disadvantages to our enemy - the need to clear those mines. Useful, but commerce raiders and submarines should be more efficient. The second will mean to mine the approaches they have to take to the shore, so they have to clear the mines under fire from coastal guns. That's more useful, but our current ones should suffice.
Additionally, they shouldn't be that similar to anti-infantry and anti-tank mines. Basically, naval mines are heavier and use different detonation mechanisms - and don't need hollow charges or shrapnel. It's probably like developing a motorcycle or a tank - different parts, but some small are the same.

Oh and for strategy I wanna add look out posts on the mountain, well supplied infantry can get across it on foot so we need a warning system. Plus we can map it incase we ever invade our neighbour to allow us to cross it.

Do you mean lookout posts to look for invaders, or to map the land they can see from there? The former is useful, and will probably be done along with scout flights to see them before they're only an hour away, the second one will probably not work for any meaningful distance between the island and mainland.

and are going to have a rocket testing range that we can make SAMs from in a decade or so.

We'd need guidance modules, among other things, before that. That might take a while, more like two decades. They will be needed, but I myself prefer better aircraft...

What I'd like for next turn are four things:
- A better torpedo
- A better torpedo boat - using the newly developed engine (2301) and torpedo (see 1) we can probably see pretty good commercial raiders from a forward base - like crow island.
- A fighter plane - we need some air cover, and it's either that or a heavier naval patrol and torpedo aircraft, which should probably come next year.
- A tank. Honestly, last time we developed one in 1920 ;-) It should provide us with anti-tank and anti-infantry firepower that we can use to either squash pretty much a sea invasion without enough artillery and air cover (a.k.a. what probably awaits us) and use them on a land-based war. We sadly lack a highly armour piercing design, and would need to use the 40mm cannon for now, but we could also develop a high-speed variant of that.

Oh, and a question to AseaHeru: What exactly should the planned combat role for the APC? I principally like such a role, but I can't get me an opinion without things like armour strength and armament. Plus, I believe that for the next turn, a  real tank is more important.

This thread is thought for discussion about The Glorious Design Bureau of the People, to avoid crowding the main thread.

Have fun!

Notice: I am thinking about putting the latest turn in here, but this will make this post far longer - spoilers within spoilers seem not to work.

Also I understood one thing... Wasp is a bad proposal, Revolutionary torpedo boats are quite good for the shore defense role, we should build those and then refit it with new weapons later when they become obsolete. (like removing 80mm gun and installing ASW equipment)  No need to waste our time designs a ship of similar role, while we can build them now, when we need it!

Let's compare both designs, Wasp and Torpedo boat (I classify Revolutionary as torpedo boat, nor as destroyer:
Cost efficiency: Hard to say. The Wasp has one fourth of the tonnage, so my first impulse would have been to classify it as one fourth the cost. However, it mounts the same gun, and only half the torpedoes, so I'd rather say the difference is about 3-1 or so.
Anti-Ship (small): Both mount the same 80mm gun, but the Revolutionary torpedo boat has it armoured and in a turret, allowing more fire control. Against smaller ships, the 40mm mounts can be used. So, in a direct duel, it's probably a draw, with an advantage to the Revolutionary as it can drive in one direction and shoot in another.
Anti-Capital: The only relevant thing will be torpedoes, of which the Revolutionary carries twice as many tubes (plus total), while the Wasp will be able to bring more to bear due to its lower cost. Advantage Wasp, with 50% more torpedoes total and distributed platforms.
Anti-aircraft: Definitely the Revolutionary. The other has a few machine guns, that's all.
Operational range: Revolutionary.

Result: Revolutionary is more flexible and all in all probably more cost efficient against anything but capital ships which we're unlikely to encounter. They can be paired with the Protector for AA and anti-capital / raid and scout support.


Agreeing on G, voting for it.

Also, an observation for next round: The truck engine can actually be used unmodified in tanks - it's more powerful than the ones used in light and early medium tanks.

why do you want the biplane to be mostly wood?

I should have been clearer - I was meaning wood and canvas. Editing post to clarify.
I see several advantages:
- Wood is cheaper
- Wood is easier to handle production-wise
- Wood is, contrary to metal, probably not an important war resource.
- Later, when radar comes into play, the plane will be nearly invisible to that.

Voting for: 1, 2, 3, 5, A, B, C, D, Alpha, Beta, Delta. Not voting on the machine gun - wait? We can get it to 20kg, just a bit heavier than the 8mm one? Damn, voting for lightweight.

All right, thank you. One addition: How many factories can we build currently, with the possible build-up due to Crow's island?

So, as I see it, we need several things at once: We need airplanes, we need ships, and we need defensive installations for land.
First, airplanes:
The scout airplanes are a basis we can improve from. We most definitely need a better engine for them. And, I would install two of the Project 2202 15mm machine guns as armament. So, necessary: Design engine, design plane.

Ships:
We have a 2500t dry dock and a 1000t dockyard. Therefore, our optimum production would use both. However, we only have capacities for one completely new design, which we'd need to be more than 1000t to make full use of our new naval cannon. (Probably, at least. You could cram one on a thousand ton design, but not much else.) Plus, as this will probably be our main ship for now, it should probably be able to fight against every threat.

Land-Based Defense:
We need defense against coastal landing parties, most of all. This requires both beach fortifications and anti-ship fortifications. For anti-ship ones I'd use the Project 2201 naval cannon. It's new, and better than anything we else we have. Building a factory for them will also supply our ships come next year.

So, main problem is: We can only design one new vehicle/ship. I believe the ship to be more important, as we will mostly fight a naval-based war ("our mainland shares no land border with them").
My ideas:
[Redacted as UR has posted one before that I like. Damn you! ]
Proposal 3: Design a powerful aviation engine. If possible, continue from the Project 2206 truck engine. Probably not possible.
Proposal 4: Design a high-velocity, 40mm anti-aircraft gun.
Our current 40mm gun is hampered by the inability to elevate more than 50° and its quite slow firing rate. Improve the firing rate and the elevation, and it should provide much more useful than before.

Proposal C: Build a naval cannon factory.
This should produce fourty Project 2201 naval cannons per year that will, until a ship is designed and built, be installed in coastal fortifications.
Proposal D: Switch production from Mosin-Nagant to the Revolutionary Rifle.
It works, now.

Proposal Beta: Fortress Crow's Island: Send all produced Revolutionary Rifles to the Island to equip troops, as well as the squad portable machine guns. Concentrate proposal A's fortifications there, at first. Stockpile ammunition. Mine the waters around them.


Not voting yet myself.