|
Post by archkyrie on Jan 26, 2012 4:25:27 GMT
This is for discussing the:
(1) Allowance of special projects. Before you build it, you might want to know if we'll let you use it. Some things might not be allowed if they are too powerful. Some might just be delayed if it is a bit ahead of itself in technology.
(2) The creation of special categories within your own armory for unique weaponry that does not fit within the existing categories.
(3) The price to be assigned to said projects. New categories will be given a set price. Special projects will have their prices discussed on an individual basis.
|
|
furturewarfare
Not a Noob
Leader of the American Federation BATTLE MOD
LRAM INC: Giving a world of hurt, one tank at a time.
Posts: 238
|
Post by furturewarfare on Feb 5, 2012 22:15:18 GMT
|
|
Sgtsammac
Ruler of the United Kingdom
Admin Acc
Posts: 3,288
|
Post by Sgtsammac on Feb 6, 2012 3:33:59 GMT
Oh at least. And I wouldn't expect it to be done until somewhere in the late 1930s at least. Pre WWII tech wouldn't be able to handle something like this. That being the case, I'm going to throw a price tag of 150k on it. Price includes research, materials, ammunition, fuel to move the thing, the several hundred crew it'll need, etc. I may change my mind on the price later, but something like this would only exist in a very well funded military, and even then only 1 or 2 would exist.
|
|
shark
Battle Mod
You can't always do what's right. You can always do what's left.
Posts: 1,167
|
Post by shark on Feb 20, 2012 12:39:17 GMT
Henson 20mm Autocannon by Shark ~ We should all be more like Green Man, on Flickr It turns out I botched my research, and this is more a WW2-esque weapon than I thought. The earliest model that starts to resemble what I've got didn't show up until '27... so what do you think, leave it alone for a couple years? I figured it'd make a great defensive weapon. As for pricing, I think an autocannon should be at least $200, probably more.
|
|
Sgtsammac
Ruler of the United Kingdom
Admin Acc
Posts: 3,288
|
Post by Sgtsammac on Feb 21, 2012 16:01:20 GMT
Well if you think about it, a 20mm auto becomes an HMG by the time it exists. By wwii the normal mg is an lmg, or mmg at most.
Sent from my VM670 using ProBoards
|
|
shark
Battle Mod
You can't always do what's right. You can always do what's left.
Posts: 1,167
|
Post by shark on Feb 21, 2012 16:02:43 GMT
fair enough
|
|
furturewarfare
Not a Noob
Leader of the American Federation BATTLE MOD
LRAM INC: Giving a world of hurt, one tank at a time.
Posts: 238
|
Post by furturewarfare on Mar 10, 2012 3:34:05 GMT
|
|
shark
Battle Mod
You can't always do what's right. You can always do what's left.
Posts: 1,167
|
Post by shark on Mar 12, 2012 6:27:32 GMT
|
|
sgtsammac
Ruler of the United Kingdom
Death to the kingdoms enemies.
Posts: 2,988
|
Post by sgtsammac on Mar 12, 2012 6:32:10 GMT
Look on flickr. Sor for late reply future M2000 = $200k
|
|
|
Post by asrodrig on Mar 13, 2012 7:43:57 GMT
|
|
sgtsammac
Ruler of the United Kingdom
Death to the kingdoms enemies.
Posts: 2,988
|
Post by sgtsammac on Mar 13, 2012 15:40:13 GMT
Landing craft are actually free, In speaking with malachi units with more RP value than Combat are free.
|
|
|
Post by asrodrig on Mar 13, 2012 23:26:47 GMT
Okay, I was just checking because it does have a machine gun on it, after all.
|
|
sgtsammac
Ruler of the United Kingdom
Death to the kingdoms enemies.
Posts: 2,988
|
Post by sgtsammac on Mar 14, 2012 6:16:51 GMT
Yea, Thats what always caught me out, but just having a basic weapon doesn't mean its a combat vehicle, but yea they are free
|
|
shark
Battle Mod
You can't always do what's right. You can always do what's left.
Posts: 1,167
|
Post by shark on Mar 17, 2012 12:05:27 GMT
What's our stance on chemical weapons? At the moment I'm wanting to field CLF₃ and Lewisite. Both via Artillery and maybe CLF₃ rockets. Do I have to make shells, or can I just say that I've loaded up with them. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ClF3en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LewisiteIf you want to read up on them.
|
|
sgtsammac
Ruler of the United Kingdom
Death to the kingdoms enemies.
Posts: 2,988
|
Post by sgtsammac on Mar 17, 2012 12:10:43 GMT
I am still waiting on a reply from malachi, Hold your horses Although i think they may be subject to the same rules as nuclear WMD.
|
|
sgtsammac
Ruler of the United Kingdom
Death to the kingdoms enemies.
Posts: 2,988
|
Post by sgtsammac on Mar 17, 2012 15:18:30 GMT
Alright, Chemical and Biological weapons and WMD are subject to the same rules as Nukes however light chemical warfare agents like tear gas and such are free game.
|
|
shark
Battle Mod
You can't always do what's right. You can always do what's left.
Posts: 1,167
|
Post by shark on Mar 17, 2012 15:26:09 GMT
fair enough.
|
|
furturewarfare
Not a Noob
Leader of the American Federation BATTLE MOD
LRAM INC: Giving a world of hurt, one tank at a time.
Posts: 238
|
Post by furturewarfare on Mar 18, 2012 1:12:02 GMT
What is going to be the Price of Superships when they come out?
|
|
sgtsammac
Ruler of the United Kingdom
Death to the kingdoms enemies.
Posts: 2,988
|
Post by sgtsammac on Mar 18, 2012 7:18:49 GMT
It depends on the use of the supership (Battleship, missile cruiser, carrier, ect.) but expect it to be a fair bit more than your normal boat, probably around the 10k-20k mark.
|
|
|
Post by asrodrig on Apr 5, 2012 0:40:45 GMT
What kind of helicopter do you mods reckon this is? KFI AH-Hammerkop by Typical Cricket - never used 06 before, on Flickr Length: 16.66 m Guns: 1 × nose turret with either a 40 mm grenade launcher or a 7.62 mm machine gun and 1 × belly turret with a 30 mm cannon Rockets: 20x 70 mm rockets
|
|
|
Post by ProkAdama on Apr 5, 2012 0:48:04 GMT
Hey dude you can judge it yourself, but I would say medium, since it is bigger than any small ones like the Mi-2 conversions and the AH-1 and less massive then an mi-24.
|
|
|
Post by asrodrig on Apr 5, 2012 0:50:12 GMT
Blackhawk is medium, and it's about 20m iirc. At 16, I was going to say this is a small, but I wanted mod confirmation.
|
|
|
Post by ProkAdama on Apr 5, 2012 0:55:59 GMT
The Blackhawk falls under transport doesn't it But yeah, confirm with a mod.
|
|
sgtsammac
Ruler of the United Kingdom
Death to the kingdoms enemies.
Posts: 2,988
|
Post by sgtsammac on Apr 5, 2012 8:40:53 GMT
"Medium Gunship: $400"
|
|
|
Post by number4 on Apr 6, 2012 0:56:54 GMT
1989. Be afraid. Be very afraid.
|
|
|
Post by ProkAdama on Apr 6, 2012 0:59:36 GMT
I'm using the Berkut 1990; so no worries for me. Well not actually a Berkut, but you'll see.
To Mal: You're going to force everyone to start using forward swept designs. Just because it's "efficient in maneuvering" doesn't mean it inflict twice as much casualty than a traditional. It limits imagination to only forward swept designs, because who's going to design fighters just for intercepting bombers?
And if it was so efficient IRL, then all nations would be using forward swept designs, as no one wants to spend money on a shitty design that will be outmaneuvered and gunned down twice as much even if they have a superior number. Just saying. It can't really inflict two times more casualty; that's just unbelievable. Plus, the forward swept should be more expensive as it carries less fuel.
|
|
|
Post by number4 on Apr 6, 2012 9:07:57 GMT
|
|
Sgtsammac
Ruler of the United Kingdom
Admin Acc
Posts: 3,288
|
Post by Sgtsammac on Apr 6, 2012 12:58:41 GMT
"The concept continued to be dismissed as highly impractical until the late 1970s, when DARPA began investigating the use of newer composite materials to avoid the problem of reduced divergence speed through aeroelastic tailoring. Fly-by-wire technology allowed for the design to be dynamically unstable and improved maneuverability. Grumman built two X-29 technology demonstrators, first flying in 1984, with forward swept wings and canards. Maneuverable at high angles of attack, the X-29 remained controllable at 67° angle of attack.[3] Advances in thrust vectoring technology and a shift in air combat tactics toward medium range missile engagements decreased the relevance of a highly agile fighter aircraft. In 1997, Sukhoi introduced the Su-47 fighter prototype at the Paris Air Show. It has not yet entered production, although it underwent a series of flight tests and performed at several air shows." ~ Wikipedia
Traditional will continue to work just fine once thrust vectoring is introduced in a manner other than the ability to hover. Besides that, when engagements start happening at distance with missiles instead of guns, maneuverability starts to take a back seat anyway. You're not dogfighting anymore. Not to the same point you used to anyway.
|
|
|
Post by ProkAdama on Apr 6, 2012 13:14:21 GMT
That may be true, but 2x losses is too much. Maybe 1.5x or even less.
|
|
Sgtsammac
Ruler of the United Kingdom
Admin Acc
Posts: 3,288
|
Post by Sgtsammac on Apr 6, 2012 13:19:43 GMT
Hmm, alright, I'll drop it to 1.5x
|
|