StarDestroyer.Net BBS

Lonestar wrote:Dude, map probably won't be make until mid-august. I also wouldn't expect Stas to shift through this thread looking through every damn post.

Well, I'll be bringing my son into the world about that time. And is Stas the only person who can make the map?

Vohu Manah wrote:

Lonestar wrote:Dude, map probably won't be make until mid-august. I also wouldn't expect Stas to shift through this thread looking through every damn post.

Well, I'll be bringing my son into the world about that time. And is Stas the only person who can make the map?

Stas pretty much volunteered to make the map. He did the last map anyhow. Just submit what you want for a nation and he will give his input I guess.

Fingolfin_Noldor wrote:Is this for both Navy and Air Force or mutually exclusive?

It's for both, total. So if you want a smaller Navy to get a larger Air Force, you can.

RogueIce
What's AOE and AKE in the spreadsheet?

Also, when we get a carrier, does that imply a CAG already?

Those are both kinds of UNREP ships, Fingolf.

I also suggest that Army size is divorced from the point system, though Army equipment is not.

Fingolfin_Noldor wrote:RogueIce
What's AOE and AKE in the spreadsheet?

Also, when we get a carrier, does that imply a CAG already?

Reference to navy UNREP ships: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fast_combat_support_ship ; http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lewis_and_ ... cargo_ship

Carrier Air Wings have to be bought separately from the carriers that operate them. Yes, this means carriers are very expensive. They're very expensive in real life too.

Started a Map thread. By all means go post your stuff there.

Beowulf wrote:Reference to navy UNREP ships: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fast_combat_support_ship ; http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lewis_and_ ... cargo_ship

Carrier Air Wings have to be bought separately from the carriers that operate them. Yes, this means carriers are very expensive. They're very expensive in real life too.

This might mean it is too expensive for me to operate a Carrier initially. Hmm...

I'd suggest adding LSLs as a third Amphib category--large, seagoing ships which are nonetheless designed to ground themselves to offload tanks and personnel.

What are the differences between a Heavy Maritime Patrol and a Light Martime Patrol? What kinds of classes might be covered by each designation? I used Kilurki-class patrol boats last time and I'd likely use them again (if not a landlocked nation). I'm thinking they'd be classed as heavy maritime patrol but I'm not sure.

EDIT: Nevermind, I'm an idiot. I just noticed that the spreadsheet doesn't have ships on it, only aircraft.

Lonestar wrote:So, you really ARE going for the 100 MILLION BAYONETS READY TO DIE FOR THE EMPEROR! thing?

Well, 500 million would be a more worthy slogan now. Defence plans do call for mobilizing as many as 100 million personal in the event of invasion, with provisions for arming absolutely everyone with an RPG, anti tank mine or satchel of explosives.

Mr Bean wrote:[
Piif, I'll see him one better, I'll see your "South Asian Horde" and Raise you Mongolia, complete with Godamn Mongolians! , That or a Supersized North Korea complete with white Horse Riding "Great Leader" well know for his bowling score of 300 and super powers.

Yeah, I'm threw playing responsible Machiavellian world leaders, it's time to bring on the crazy. Combining Canassian Hedonism with Saddamstain planning with a large dose of Shroomian Leadership.

My government will be ruled by a shadowy Burma style military junta, but with a god Emperor and a peoples imperial primer as a public chief executive to help keep the countryside repressed and the Special Economic Zones flourishing.

As for weapons and special projects… I have a mix of old and new ideas in mind.

Vohu Manah wrote:What are the differences between a Heavy Maritime Patrol and a Light Martime Patrol? What kinds of classes might be covered by each designation? I used Kilurki-class patrol boats last time and I'd likely use them again (if not a landlocked nation). I'm thinking they'd be classed as heavy maritime patrol but I'm not sure.

EDIT: Nevermind, I'm an idiot. I just noticed that the spreadsheet doesn't have ships on it, only aircraft.

The spreadsheet does have ships on it. Try the other sheet in the book. However, they're aircraft. An example of heavy maritime patrol would be a P-3. A light one would be a S-3.

I'll be editing my proposal again soon.

Vohu Manah wrote:What are the differences between a Heavy Maritime Patrol and a Light Martime Patrol? What kinds of classes might be covered by each designation? I used Kilurki-class patrol boats last time and I'd likely use them again (if not a landlocked nation). I'm thinking they'd be classed as heavy maritime patrol but I'm not sure.

EDIT: Nevermind, I'm an idiot. I just noticed that the spreadsheet doesn't have ships on it, only aircraft.

The spreadsheet does have ships on it. Try the other sheet in the book. However, they're aircraft. An example of heavy maritime patrol would be a P-3. A light one would be a S-3.

I'll be editing my proposal again soon.

Beowulf wrote:The spreadsheet does have ships on it. Try the other sheet in the book. However, they're aircraft. An example of heavy maritime patrol would be a P-3. A light one would be a S-3.

I'll be editing my proposal again soon.

Again, I'm a dumbass. I didn't notice the second book (I need to go to bed). Anyway the class of ships I mentioned are smaller than corvettes (or at least my read on said ships leads me to believe that they're smaller than corvettes).

Vohu Manah wrote: I'll be editing my proposal again soon.

Again, I'm a dumbass. I didn't notice the second book (I need to go to bed). Anyway the class of ships I mentioned are smaller than corvettes (or at least my read on said ships leads me to believe that they're smaller than corvettes).[/quote]

Those things are much smaller then corvettes at 170 tons with only automatic cannon for armament, they fall in the category of patrol boats and would be very cheap, the price of a pair of main battle tanks maybe. Older corvettes were enlarged missile boats with only basic systems, for example the Nanuchka, and should cost around 1/10th as much as a destroyer. Newer corvettes like the Sa’ar 5 or Meko A-100 are much larger and more capable and would cost more like 1/4th as much as a destroyer.

I know I probably won't be able to afford them, but I'd like a pair of lthese.

How are we handling land Defense? If I want (In true North Korea Fashion) enough WWII era Artilley to grid by grid flatten my nearest neighbhor what is that going to cost me? Or in true Soviet fashion I want great underground tank-yards full of T-34/85's with reservests to maintain them how much will such a force cost trust me?

It's one of those things, unlike a third Gen Fighter which can still hold it's own(Under the right circumstances) a 4th or 5th Gen Tank(Being in the eight Generation at the moment) is nothing more than a speed-bump to a modern MBT but oh so useful in the simple fact that three reservets in a T-34 are much more dangerous than three reserveset with Ak-74's if nothing else than to soak up very expensive anti-tank weapons so attacking me with a ultra-modern force will effective would be so cost ineffective as to be ruinous on most countries.

Mr Bean wrote:How are we handling land Defense? If I want (In true North Korea Fashion) enough WWII era Artilley to grid by grid flatten my nearest neighbhor what is that going to cost me? Or in true Soviet fashion I want great underground tank-yards full of T-34/85's with reservests to maintain them how much will such a force cost trust me?

It's one of those things, unlike a third Gen Fighter which can still hold it's own(Under the right circumstances) a 4th or 5th Gen Tank(Being in the eight Generation at the moment) is nothing more than a speed-bump to a modern MBT but oh so useful in the simple fact that three reservets in a T-34 are much more dangerous than three reserveset with Ak-74's if nothing else than to soak up very expensive anti-tank weapons so attacking me with a ultra-modern force will effective would be so cost ineffective as to be ruinous on most countries.

I think it's reasonable for any country to have in reserve 150% of the equipment it has in active service if that is equipment is completely grossly obsolescent in every way imaginable. To have more capable reserve equipment it can only be 50% of the strength of your current active-duty equipment; and this is for the Army; things should be even worse for the Navy and Air Force to reflect the general worldwide trend to recognize that mobilization assets are largely pointless.

Sea Skimmer wrote:Those things are much smaller then corvettes at 170 tons with only automatic cannon for armament, they fall in the category of patrol boats and would be very cheap, the price of a pair of main battle tanks maybe. Older corvettes were enlarged missile boats with only basic systems, for example the Nanuchka, and should cost around 1/10th as much as a destroyer. Newer corvettes like the Sa’ar 5 or Meko A-100 are much larger and more capable and would cost more like 1/4th as much as a destroyer.

Doesn't the Sa'ar 5 have very bad seakeeping and is dangerously top weight?

Fingolfin_Noldor wrote: Doesn't the Sa'ar 5 have very bad seakeeping and is dangerously top weight?

Yup, the problem was partly alleviated by not mounting most of the planned armament. Still the thing has a much better radar and electronics setup then earlier corvettes/missile boats and basically twice the previous standards of displacement. A Nanuchka is around 700 tons, Sa’ar 5 is over 1,300 and the present day Meko A-100 is 1650. IIRC Russia just started building a new corvette that’s nearly 2,000 tons.

This is why I’m saying we should distinguish between old low capability often single role corvettes and new ones which are basically scaled down multirole frigates.

Sea Skimmer wrote:Yup, the problem was partly alleviated by not mounting most of the planned armament. Still the thing has a much better radar and electronics setup then earlier corvettes/missile boats and basically twice the previous standards of displacement. A Nanuchka is around 700 tons, Sa’ar 5 is over 1,300 and the present day Meko A-100 is 1650. IIRC Russia just started building a new corvette that’s nearly 2,000 tons.

This is why I’m saying we should distinguish between old low capability often single role corvettes and new ones which are basically scaled down multirole frigates.

At this rate, what was a corvette 20 years ago, would now be a patrol boat!

Fingolfin_Noldor wrote: At this rate, what was a corvette 20 years ago, would now be a patrol boat!

Actually, some modern corvettes displace as much as large WWII destroyers, and what we call a destroyer is a heavy fucking cruiser by WWII standards.

We just keep going up!

PeZook wrote:

Fingolfin_Noldor wrote: At this rate, what was a corvette 20 years ago, would now be a patrol boat!

Actually, some modern corvettes displace as much as large WWII destroyers, and what we call a destroyer is a heavy fucking cruiser by WWII standards.

We just keep going up!

Yeah, largely because they figured that they wanted to expand the destroyer's anti-air capabilities and here we are.

I need some help from our military gurus in designing my nations force. I plan to have my nation be in the armpit of the world, surrounded by third world shit holes that are extremely unstable. So basically my military will be getting involved in lots of bush wars ala the apartheid era South African government. What sort of force structure would be good for that? My nation will have land borders with most of these places but to make things more interesting I am thinking of placing some of this states in an archipelago nearby necessitating a navy of some sort. Finally I'd like to have my nation maintain at least some capability for conventional opponents. Should I just loosely base my force on South Africa’s current or apartheid era forces or look elsewhere for inspiration?

Raj Ahten wrote:I need some help from our military gurus in designing my nations force. I plan to have my nation be in the armpit of the world, surrounded by third world shit holes that are extremely unstable. So basically my military will be getting involved in lots of bush wars ala the apartheid era South African government. What sort of force structure would be good for that? My nation will have land borders with most of these places but to make things more interesting I am thinking of placing some of this states in an archipelago nearby necessitating a navy of some sort. Finally I'd like to have my nation maintain at least some capability for conventional opponents. Should I just loosely base my force on South Africa’s current or apartheid era forces or look elsewhere for inspiration?

Try Singapore or Israel. Both countries do their best to be the best in the region, but not necessary the "best in the world".

I am loosely basing my new country upon the SFRY. I am even thinking about using the same flag and coat of arms(or perhaps a modified version), and my map will soon be ready.

So can you guys help me out with the military stuff? I was going to use the thing that Rogue made, but my laptop is giving me problems and doesn't want to run excel.