StarDestroyer.Net BBS

Crossroads Inc. wrote:Ok you guys, who else is going to sign my Airship thing? Need a bunch to particapate.

me for one but that was assumed

Mr Bean wrote:The UKB is opposed to the Open Skies Pact, specificly provisions 1, Total Free space will not be tolerated, dedicated transport "lanes" would be allowed.

Ok, so is Byzantium Airlines allowed to fly to at least to the main UKB airports?

Stas Bush wrote: It's the largest hovercraft in the world, but it's a "small" assault ship I mean, we also build ROPUCHA-II class (Pr.755) for OMSK members exclusively, and we plan to locate the ROPUCHA shipyards in Pezookia (of course, if PeZook doesn't mind - I just want to have some historic justice, those ships are great and they were made in Poland )

Well...no, I don't mind at all

More investment is always good!

It's really simple, the 60 knot ASM carrying 450 ton ships are a powerful threat in those seas, and coasts will soon look more like ASM Swarms ready to kill for any large ship. Which means, in absence of large combat venues, that huge fleets are mostly needed for nations on the outer side of the Archipelago. A nation like me doesn't need. that.

The problem with using hydrofoils exclusively is that the BlackBeard swarm can acquire and kill them just fine, too - 60 knots is not going to save you from a Mach 1+ missile screaming towards you, and hydrofoils can't carry any sort of heavy anti-missile defence.

A Burke has two CIWS systems and VLS SAMs, which gives it fast reaction time against incoming missiles. A 50 missile salvo will still kill pretty much any battlegroup, but a "heavy" group using destroyers and missile cruisers will have better odds at survival and will probably lose less ships than a purely hydrofoil based one.

Again, it comes down to your threat matrix: If you actually expect to challenge the Blackbeard-deploying states around the Central Sea, you will need heavy ships with good defences, or a lot of hydrofoils (Three heavy foils for one Burke without air support was the ratio which Warsaw Pact planner would be comfortable with). A very strong air force is also needed, and maybe suborbital bombers in the extreme.

If you want security and defence, then you have two models: A blue-water navy and air force capable of simply crushing any would-be invader or a lot of hydrofoils, shore defence missile batteries, drones and submarines. The second model is cheaper, but it gives the initiative to the enemy since he chooses where to strike with his heavy combatants.

I think that Antares or Uragan are better than Halifax class frigates for procurement personally and I will downsize my navy middle this year. Why? Antares or Uragan are heavier than any pirate force they can meet, normally (and large forces and ships like DDGs are spotted by AEWs prior to encounter anyway). They can move at 60 knots, which other ships cannot. However, their seaworthiness is not limited in normal regime, and up to 5 grades wavestorm on foils! That's unmatched by most fast naval ships, to maintain 50 knots at a 5 grade wave? It's due to the automatic foil control and anti-sidelean system in those ships.

They can't avoid a missile, though, and even one hit by an SM-2 will be an automatic mission-kill. I agree they are excellent for anti-pirate patrols because of their awesome speed (it gives reaction time) - but then again, frigates and destroyers can operate helicopters, so a combination of the two seem best for such tasks.

Hughes is of course planning on something new (besides the largest consumer blimp the current luxury HK-47) but that was last year. As a "Red Killer" exactly what Hughes is up to is unknown. Though the fact that they already have the WWII era tech, third largest Ground effect transport in this new world, on display at their headquarters....

Plus, there's a lot of empty ocean out there. While OOC we have decided that only new players will pop up, that can change. Plus from an IU perspective, we've been having new nations appear out of nowhere for awhile now. So how do we know that the previously empty oceans in our world won't suddenly be host to the terrible Kingdom of Trolls, or The EssBee Confederation or whatever? So keeping assets capable of dealing with that would be prudent, at least for those of us on the edges. Concentrating on just the Central Sea could come back to bite you as the world develops.

Plus, I would remind you all that the resolution of the Astorian Hostage Crisis with the hijacked airliner in Terra Libertia would have been far more difficult (if not impossible) without my carrier being available. Larger platforms simply offer more flexibility, even if they aren't perfectly suited to the Central Sea.

As PeZook said, you have to decide what you want to do and what you need to be capable of undertaking, for yourself and your alliance. Simply declaring one method as the be-all, end-all of strategic thinking for our world is absurd.

Also note for regular "Airship Lanes" the Bear Republic wishes for recognition of the 2009 "Tavern Crawl" throught all tourism based nations as an officilal airlane/flight plan...

also of note small dog sized rats now exist...

what to do with the psychotic ahhhnuld rats is up to you.

note the Bear Republic does breed albino rats for lab work, and for pets, or for pet food. We have no desire to breed Norway rats, they do that job well enough on their own..

Fingolfin_Noldor wrote: Ok, so is Byzantium Airlines allowed to fly to at least to the main UKB airports?

UKB Airports are situated around the outside of the land area. And follows traditional "file a flight plan and stick to it" not "Your in a plane/Zeppelin, feel free to overfly anything you want"

The UKB has established flight corridors for planes, always has been, I assume most nations do. Flying a plane outside the approved area results in some unfriendly attention by the nearest fighters.

Also on the note, per the OP if a new nation pops into existence, our population treats it as if it was always here, even if the player only gets control on the day they join.

I'll stress this again, these people have no history, they were hand-waved into existence by Q, their memories, their childhood's are only so much handwavium. These are not people transported from old Earth, these are people who up until two years ago, did not exist period.

Now of course with babies being born there are people who will grow up, have real childhoods and the like. That's besides the main point, in order for this world to work we assume new players were always there but simply totally isolationist... and highly hedonist in order to explain why they are just coming on the world scene now.

We've not yet reached the point where players will be hopelessly left behind, except in the Space Industry. Nukes can be acquired in a month, but the Space Industry, forget it, the UKB is so far ahead it's not even funny.

Speaking of which more news in that regard soon.

The Yosemite Bear wrote:well I have hover mobile APCs and both transport and attack Helos. No actual real armour though...

Do you have any mine resistent vehicles or light APC's such as the M113 for sale? I'm looking for wheeled or tracked vehicles.

Mr Bean wrote:

Fingolfin_Noldor wrote: Ok, so is Byzantium Airlines allowed to fly to at least to the main UKB airports?

UKB Airports are situated around the outside of the land area. And follows traditional "file a flight plan and stick to it" not "Your in a plane/Zeppelin, feel free to overfly anything you want"

The UKB has established flight corridors for planes, always has been, I assume most nations do. Flying a plane outside the approved area results in some unfriendly attention by the nearest fighters.

That's acceptable. Standard security measures must be observed after all.

Mr Bean wrote:Also on the note, per the OP if a new nation pops into existence, our population treats it as if it was always here, even if the player only gets control on the day they join.

I'll stress this again, these people have no history, they were hand-waved into existence by Q, their memories, their childhood's are only so much handwavium. These are not people transported from old Earth, these are people who up until two years ago, did not exist period.

Now of course with babies being born there are people who will grow up, have real childhoods and the like. That's besides the main point, in order for this world to work we assume new players were always there but simply totally isolationist... and highly hedonist in order to explain why they are just coming on the world scene now.

Does that count for the leaders, too?

Anyway, given how we just popped into existence, a prudent leader would probably figure it is not totally unreasonable that, given the vast empty spaces, Q could decide to use our planet as a dumping ground for some other people, as well. And at any rate, this is only one relatively small reason to maintain a bluewater force anyway, at least for those on the outside edges of the world (the Central Sea is another matter).

RogueIce wrote:
Does that count for the leaders, too?

Non-Gamer leaders. We came whole from Earth, this world was created along with a country for us to rule because Q likes to fuck with people.


And yes as it stands 19/20's of our world is giant open ocean, in fact if you want to picture our world on a globe, just take the map we have now, put it where Africa used to be then delete all the rest of the land in the world Also we probably have little in the way of ice-caps considering how generally warm our world is.

So yes, we the leaders fully expend to new land to poof into existence, while the people we rule/govern/dominate look at us funny because of course the Island of the Cybernetic Dinosaur Riding Amazon's was always there, yesh next thing you know you'll be tell me you never even seen a Space Hamster mating flight.

Or similar nuttyness

Mr Bean wrote:Non-Gamer leaders. We came whole from Earth, this world was created along with a country for us to rule because Q likes to fuck with people.

And yes as it stands 19/20's of our world is giant open ocean, in fact if you want to picture our world on a globe, just take the map we have now, put it where Africa used to be then delete all the rest of the land in the world Also we probably have little in the way of ice-caps considering how generally warm our world is.

So yes, we the leaders fully expend to new land to poof into existence, while the people we rule/govern/dominate look at us funny because of course the Island of the Cybernetic Dinosaur Riding Amazon's was always there, yesh next thing you know you'll be tell me you never even seen a Space Hamster mating flight.

Or similar nuttyness

Yeah, just checking. That would then be a reason for someone like me to keep carriers and the like. I know there's a possibility for other random nations to pop up from nowhere and would rather be ready for it than not (since for all I know one day we'll get a massive and potentially hostile power bloc about where North and South America should be).

I won't be able to use that particular justification to my people or anything and would of course need others (as I outlined above) but it's something to keep in mind for those of us who would know.

Mr Bean wrote:

RogueIce wrote:
Does that count for the leaders, too?

Non-Gamer leaders. We came whole from Earth, this world was created along with a country for us to rule because Q likes to fuck with people.


And yes as it stands 19/20's of our world is giant open ocean, in fact if you want to picture our world on a globe, just take the map we have now, put it where Africa used to be then delete all the rest of the land in the world Also we probably have little in the way of ice-caps considering how generally warm our world is.

So yes, we the leaders fully expend to new land to poof into existence, while the people we rule/govern/dominate look at us funny because of course the Island of the Cybernetic Dinosaur Riding Amazon's was always there, yesh next thing you know you'll be tell me you never even seen a Space Hamster mating flight.

Or similar nuttyness

So... eventually we will try spicing this world with some random acts of God/Q?

Fingolfin_Noldor wrote:
So... eventually we will try spicing this world with some random acts of God/Q?

One a year, last year of Zalbania Kill-bots, I've got an idea for this year, but I won't kick it off until later tonight.

On another note, I'd like to add "Weath's" top 25 most weathy company's list sometime this week, who's should be on the list? And what number do you see them at?

No question number one is the ISCA, but who else goes on the list?

Mr Bean wrote:On another note, I'd like to add "Weath's" top 25 most weathy company's list sometime this week, who's should be on the list? And what number do you see them at?

No question number one is the ISCA, but who else goes on the list?

How are we going to quantify that? Lots of us have various companies in various industries, but it's hard to quantify how much assets and money they make.

I'm not saying it's the end of all

I'm keeping my carriers and destroyers, if one can notice just downsizing the frigates and assembling a fast and capable littoral defense force.

The frigates may be still reanimated in the future and quite likely will be, but now I seek to reduce operative costs to raise procurement costs I need new craft. I guess my fleet is more defense oriented now, and the fast craft will help to conduct rapid-response missions which all my ships, except the larger CVNs and heli-carrying Destroyers, cannot.

And yes, the heavier a ship is, the higher it's survival ratio, but the problem is that seas are going to be so oversaturated. Really, ship "surival" per se in case of war is irrelevant - even one good ASM hit can render a DDG "out of battle". It won't be sunk, but it won't be fighting either. I mean, Russian planners with our cheap subsonic "Uran" missile made it's payload overpowered like 145 kgs of explosives. If the "Uran" reliably hits a DDG, two hits (1,8 to be precise) are enough to render the ship inoperable with a probability of 0,9.

It has the same probability of hitting a littoral fast hydrofoil, and it can be killed with 1 missile; except losing it is a lot more affordable then a destroyer.

And before you laugh at that, consider the following fact: a Harpoon missile (220 kg warhead) reliably struck a Lybian "Vohod" boat, which remained seaworthy after that, however, a fire forced the crew to abandon ship and it sunk. The boat was 330 tons. Mine are quite the same.

An AK-630, IIRC, can reliably hit an incoming subsonic ASM and kill at least one per each 6-barrel gun mount. [EDIT: checked, the 1970 WARPAC planning assumed that a single AK-630 CIWS can hit a Harpoon missile with 0,4-1,0 probability depending on naval conditions; moreover, the AK-630M1-2 Roy (Swarm) was modernized to hit supersonic anti-ship missiles].

What I'm arguing is not a replacement of Destryers, but Frigates. Seriously, the ALMAZ hydrofoils pack the same strength as a frigate, have the same, if not better, survivability, but cost less, are smaller an faster. Not as much autonomy, but then, they are littoral ships.

[EDIT: also, slower types of missiles, I'm not talking about super or hypersonic monstrosities like Moskito or Yakhont style missiles, have bad lock on for perpendicular travelling targets with speeds over 40 knots]

Stas Bush wrote: And yes, the heavier a ship is, the higher it's survival ratio, but the problem is that seas are going to be so oversaturated. Really, ship "surival" per se in case of war is irrelevant - even one good ASM hit can render a DDG "out of battle". It won't be sunk, but it won't be fighting either. I mean, Russian planners with our cheap subsonic "Uran" missile made it's payload overpowered like 145 kgs of explosives. If the "Uran" reliably hits a DDG, two hits (1,8 to be precise) are enough to render the ship inoperable with a probability of 0,9.

Yeah, but for a subsonic missile, a DDG will have lower probability of actually getting hit (More CIWS, VLS SAMs and larger, more powerful radars)

Stas Bush wrote:It has the same probability of hitting a littoral fast hydrofoil, and it can be killed with 1 missile; except losing it is a lot more affordable then a destroyer.

Again, it comes down to what you want to do. DDGs are surface combatants, and should be used for carrier escort and engaging enemy heavies. They have no business running around coastal waters.

Stas Bush wrote: What I'm arguing is not a replacement of Destryers, but Frigates. Seriously, the ALMAZ hydrofoils pack the same strength as a frigate, have the same, if not better, survivability, but cost less, are smaller an faster. Not as much autonomy, but then, they are littoral ships.

Well, yeah - when you put it this way, the hydrofoil idea is sensible.

They don't need endurance in the Central Sea, and if they are going to fill in for frigates (patrol, escort and pirate killing duties) they are indeed an excellent choice, probably better than frigates. The problem arises when you try to fight a blue-water DDG and CVN deploying navy with hydrofoils, in which case they get murdered.

Stas Bush wrote:[EDIT: also, slower types of missiles, I'm not talking about super or hypersonic monstrosities like Moskito or Yakhont style missiles, have bad lock on for perpendicular travelling targets with speeds over 40 knots]

The Blackbeard has a variable attack profile and multiple tracking systems, so I wouldn't count on it missing. And if it does have problems, we can just update the software so that it goes subsonic if the target moves too fast.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

And now for something completely different...

Damn. Do we get zombies now?

So let me see my deliveries for this year and tell me if I missed you

Byzantium:

4 An-124
5 An-225
50 Mi-28A

30 Il-96-400
----------------
1 Beriev AI (Phalcon radar) competing versus Boeing AWACS - LUCRATIVE, CONFIRMATION PENDING

? number of Tu-160 competing versus B-1B Lancer - LUCRATIVE, CONFIMRATION PENDING, possible counteroffer: Tu-22M3.

Langley

6 A-90 Orlyonok assault/cargo craft
18 STRIZH-1 ekranoplan trainer-fighter (optionally the copilot's cabin is fitted with a single 12,7-mm machine gun)

Private bidder:

1 Pr.775M "Cesar Kunikov" landing ship (MESS Ropucha II)

Vedra:

2 Il-96-400

10 Murena hovercrafts (delivered over the next 2 years)
4 Antares class patrol boats (delivered over the next year)

Shroomania:

5 Zubr landing hovercraft (delivered over the next 2 years)
20 Dzheyran landing hovercraft (delivered over the next 2 years)
20 Murenas landing craft (delivered over the next 2 years)

As a special offer for it's good military order, Shroomania will be supplied with 1 KM-class Ekranoplane and 2 A-90 Orlyonok cargo/assault Ekranoplane free of charge

Royal Rail Republic

1 Sputnik class passenger hydrofoil
3 Cyclone class passenger hydrofoil
3 A-90 Orlyonok Ekranoplans
10 STRIZH-1 ekranoplans (copilot MG custom)

Damn. Do we get zombies now?

No. We had Black Mesa and nothing happened

DDG will have lower probability of actually getting hit (More CIWS, VLS SAMs and larger, more powerful radars)

More CIWS and SAM is indeed an advantage. The Uragan has only 1 CIWS 6-barrel autocannon and 1 SAM complex, technically though if you operate them in swarms, they could work together in attack formations. A DDG will require more missiles to kill, certainly.

The problem arises when you try to fight a blue-water DDG and CVN deploying navy with hydrofoils, in which case they get murdered.

Indeed, but why would you? You could use the Uragan swarms in joint operations with your own Destroyers probably, since it's weaponry is formidable and a battle in open seas would probably not involve hypersonic Anti ship missiles, as augmentation. Or to defend your coast, always with support from the coast, and heavier fleet ships.

The Antares is too lightly armed to pose any challenge to huge battleships of course, and it's function is different too

The Blackbeard has a variable attack profile

Yes, but the MESS so far doesn't operate any hypersonics, or advanced subsonic ASMs en masse, doesn't it? It was the OMSk and FUN who saturated the seas with ASMs so it's not like i'm creating some anti-Blackbeard ship; instead, I would even install Blackbeard on my Kirovs

P.S. I also propose eased travel restrictions betwen RT, Shroomania and Pezookia: under 1 month duration of travel does not require a visa, for people working in either nation the procedure of extending duration also does not require a visa, but merely a work permit. Visa only required for longer stay without work.

Stas Bush wrote: Indeed, but why would you? You could use the Uragan swarms in joint operations with your own Destroyers probably, since it's weaponry is formidable and a battle in open seas would probably not involve hypersonic Anti ship missiles, as augmentation. Or to defend your coast, always with support from the coast, and heavier fleet ships.

This is why I proposed a FUN naval strategy conference. We need to work this shit out between ourselves and share the responsibility.

Bean,

I would put Porter-Marist-Greer (PMG) Medical Group in the top 25. They are the largest BioTech company in Wilkonia which should, if I'm reading the declarations correct, be the largest such industry in our little world. Possibly also Fulton Naval Yards considering they build a lot of the small (sub 8,000 DWT) vessels along with the world's largest container vessel and the largest vessels in the WIN fleet.

Also, the ISCA is not really a company. It doesn't even have "profit" as its stated goal - it actually spends a lot more in R&D than it brings in with ship sales after cost, thanks to member contributions, so I really don't think it desrves to be on top of a "companies of SD.net world" ranking.

Stas, are you selling any frigates? I would be interested in buying some.

Name your price.

I am also interested in buying some Blackbeard's from Shep. If i can squeeze them into my budget.


PeZook do you think it's reasonable that my GDP increased by 10% in the past two years(5% a year)?