Page 7 of 50
Re: SD.Net World Redux Comment Thread V
Posted: 2008-12-19 03:25pm
by Karmic Knight
Ryan Thunder wrote:I wanted to take control of
the white area, myself. I'll move that vertical line a bit, though, and turn it away from the territory you wanted so they don't overlap. Sound good?
That sounds great, we can work out a big showy post to make it official, the Western Wilderness has been Partitioned!
RogueIce wrote:PeZook: You didn't get those dice from someone with the MSA, did you?

INDUSTRIAL ESPIONAGE!
Re: SD.Net World Redux Comment Thread V
Posted: 2008-12-19 04:30pm
by Siege
Ryan Thunder wrote:Might be useful for open-pit mining. Are you sure that's for clearing jungle? XD
Ours is a dual-use jungle-clearing/strip-mining machine. It's just what you need! Buy a dozen, get the thirteenth half-price!

Re: SD.Net World Redux Comment Thread V
Posted: 2008-12-19 04:40pm
by Master_Baerne
Would anyone mind if I occupied part of the upper peninsula?[/url] My nation's been having problems with overpopulation, you see...

Re: SD.Net World Redux Comment Thread V
Posted: 2008-12-19 05:05pm
by Siege
Assuming you don't plan to do anything odd up there, I don't really mind. We're just a skip across the pond though, and our second-biggest city and single largest commercial harbor (La Palma) is sitting right at the northern tip of the San Dorado peninsula, so we have a pretty big vested interest in things remaining quiet and peaceful in that area. Expect huge tankers and endless naval sorties to ruin your view

.
If you're adjusting the map, though, pray change "real eight" to Valley Forge, and "San Doradan Mandate" to "Eastern-Occidental Free State". The latter is just an area we stabilized and are in the process of rebuilding into a viable self-governing entity (in exchange for natural resources, but that's another matter altogether... It's also not quite that big, by the way).
Re: SD.Net World Redux Comment Thread V
Posted: 2008-12-19 05:34pm
by Master_Baerne
Speaking of endless naval sorties, would you and Coiler appreciate Baernish assistance in your anti-pirate campaign? My carrier could use the practice.
Re: SD.Net World Redux Comment Thread V
Posted: 2008-12-19 05:55pm
by Ryan Thunder
Master_Baerne wrote:Speaking of endless naval sorties, would you and Coiler appreciate Baernish assistance in your anti-pirate campaign? My carrier could use the practice.
Pirates!? Where from?

Re: SD.Net World Redux Comment Thread V
Posted: 2008-12-19 06:05pm
by Coiler
Master_Baerne wrote:Speaking of endless naval sorties, would you and Coiler appreciate Baernish assistance in your anti-pirate campaign? My carrier could use the practice.
I certainly would appreciate your navy lending a hand.
Re: SD.Net World Redux Comment Thread V
Posted: 2008-12-19 09:58pm
by Master_Baerne
Okay then, one story post coming right up.
EDIT: On second thought, there'll just be a set of deployment orders. I'm really tired right now.
Re: SD.Net World Redux Comment Thread V
Posted: 2008-12-19 10:29pm
by CmdrWilkens
Total aside but in the same vein as the FASTA setup I don't know how Lonestar operates the Titan and X-plane program but since I'm the principal author of the Delta program I'm using the following chart for my failure/success setup:
Mission Status
Total Success, All Systems
Success, 1-2 Minor Failures
Partial Success. 1 Major or Multiple Minor failures, stable orbit reached.
Partial Failure, multiple major system failures, degenerative orbit reached.
Total Failure, destroyed on launch pad.
From
80
25
10
3
1
Re: SD.Net World Redux Comment Thread V
Posted: 2008-12-20 03:27am
by Ryan Thunder
Stas Bush wrote:Does anybody have any objections to Miratia developing air-launched missiles that can be mounted on the external hardpoints of a stealth aircraft without significantly affecting its radar signature?
Except from the fact that any external mounted weapons would still significantly affect RCS no matter what one does, none

Ah. Reality's sucks then, I guess.
Would you let me away with it merely reducing the stealthiness from Nighthawk awesomeness to B-1 Lancer levels?

Re: SD.Net World Redux Comment Thread V
Posted: 2008-12-20 07:09am
by K. A. Pital
Reduction of RCS is allright, most nations work to reduce the RCS of their hardware. "Stealth" is a different set of requirements and it is very demanding of external weapons... demanding that there be none

Re: SD.Net World Redux Comment Thread V
Posted: 2008-12-20 10:22am
by CmdrWilkens
Stas Bush wrote:Reduction of RCS is allright, most nations work to reduce the RCS of their hardware. "Stealth" is a different set of requirements and it is very demanding of external weapons... demanding that there be none

Given the money that both SNC and MESS (not to mention IRT and Japanistan) have put into IADS "Stealth" probably requires an RCS under .0001m^2 at this point.
Re: SD.Net World Redux Comment Thread V
Posted: 2008-12-20 10:36am
by Fingolfin_Noldor
CmdrWilkens wrote:Stas Bush wrote:Reduction of RCS is allright, most nations work to reduce the RCS of their hardware. "Stealth" is a different set of requirements and it is very demanding of external weapons... demanding that there be none

Given the money that both SNC and MESS (not to mention IRT and Japanistan) have put into IADS "Stealth" probably requires an RCS under .0001m^2 at this point.
Well, that is dependent on a combination of factors, not least stealth is only limited to a certain bandwidth of radar frequencies. The SNC does however extensively deploy VHF radar with long wavelengths to detect stealth aircraft.
In RL, there are a number of Russian VHF radars which Shep also deployed.
Re: SD.Net World Redux Comment Thread V
Posted: 2008-12-20 12:34pm
by Karmic Knight
Fingolfin_Noldor wrote:Don't you guys thing that a Kirov is tad overkill to deal with pirates? Sure, she's nuclear and quite fast, but yeah... Might be better off with... like small and fast boats? Come to think of it, perhaps it's time to start advertising high speed patrol boats.
There is a reason Gizmonic sells:
Re: SD.Net World Redux Comment Thread V
Posted: 2008-12-20 12:41pm
by Fingolfin_Noldor
Karmic Knight wrote:Fingolfin_Noldor wrote:Don't you guys thing that a Kirov is tad overkill to deal with pirates? Sure, she's nuclear and quite fast, but yeah... Might be better off with... like small and fast boats? Come to think of it, perhaps it's time to start advertising high speed patrol boats.
There is a reason Gizmonic sells:
Those are great but, I'd rather offer something more muscular and has better endurance and seakeeping. But yeah, you get what you pay for.

Re: SD.Net World Redux Comment Thread V
Posted: 2008-12-20 02:40pm
by Master_Baerne
"There is no such thing as overkill, because there is no such thing as negative dead."
More seriously, I don't really have that many smaller ships. Sure, there are destroyers and frigates, but my navy isn't really built to fight pirates, and the corvettes I do have belong to the Coast Guard.
Re: SD.Net World Redux Comment Thread V
Posted: 2008-12-20 04:25pm
by Ryan Thunder
CmdrWilkens wrote:Stas Bush wrote:Reduction of RCS is allright, most nations work to reduce the RCS of their hardware. "Stealth" is a different set of requirements and it is very demanding of external weapons... demanding that there be none

Given the money that both SNC and MESS (not to mention IRT and Japanistan) have put into IADS "Stealth" probably requires an RCS under .0001m^2 at this point.
Well yes, but you still have to be able to distinguish between my warplane and, say, a very fast-moving flock of birds.
So, super-radar is OK, but heavy-armed stealth isn't plausible? That's not fair.

Re: SD.Net World Redux Comment Thread V
Posted: 2008-12-20 04:51pm
by PeZook
Ryan Thunder wrote:
Well yes, but you still have to be able to distinguish between my warplane and, say, a very fast-moving flock of birds.
So, super-radar is OK, but heavy-armed stealth isn't plausible? That's not fair.

There are birds than fly at 800 kmph? That's some interesting species there...
EDIT: And heavily-armed stealth is quite plausible. You just build a bigger airplane to accomodate the weaponry
Shep used AA armed strategic bombers to escort his bombers ; I can't see why this couldn't work with things like the B2.
Of course, selling high technology specifically designed to overcome SNC and MESS air defences is not going to win you many friends, you know

Re: SD.Net World Redux Comment Thread V
Posted: 2008-12-20 05:28pm
by Karmic Knight
Coiler wrote:Sadly, there was no mention of when X-Day would be in the documents, and most of them were simple specifications. Still, this news was worth passing back to the commanders of all the FTO fleets currently participating in the anti-pirate operations.
Coiler, does this mean that your navy is sending that Mirata is planning the fishy development?
Also, will you, the FTO Naval Anti-Pirate Action, be coordinating these raids with the Commonwealth anti-pirate actions already in progress?
Re: SD.Net World Redux Comment Thread V
Posted: 2008-12-20 05:37pm
by Coiler
Karmic Knight wrote:
Coiler, does this mean that your navy is sending that Mirata is planning the fishy development?
No, it just means that the documents are incomplete.
Also, will you, the FTO Naval Anti-Pirate Action, be coordinating these raids with the Commonwealth anti-pirate actions already in progress?
I don't see why not.
Re: SD.Net World Redux Comment Thread V
Posted: 2008-12-20 06:04pm
by CmdrWilkens
PeZook wrote:Of course, selling high technology specifically designed to overcome SNC and MESS air defences is not going to win you many friends, you know

Well that and developing the R&D as well as industrial base to actually develop said technologies would bankrupt most states that aren't Imperium sized...unless they spent 10-15 years on it.
Fingolfin_Noldor wrote:Karmic Knight wrote:
There is a reason Gizmonic sells:
Those are great but, I'd rather offer something more muscular and has better endurance and seakeeping. But yeah, you get what you pay for.

Well I can say that with the introduction of FFG(X) which will start rolling out soon I'm gonna have a whole crapload of F-100s to get rid of in the next few years. Given they cost somewhere in the $400-500mil new and fully equipped and I'd be selling them used we'd probably be looking at a price in the $200mil range, less if it comes without the weapons suite (probably in the range of $120-$150mil). Still pricey but its fully bluewater capable.
Re: SD.Net World Redux Comment Thread V
Posted: 2008-12-20 06:35pm
by Ryan Thunder
CmdrWilkens wrote:PeZook wrote:Of course, selling high technology specifically designed to overcome SNC and MESS air defences is not going to win you many friends, you know

Well that and developing the R&D as well as industrial base to actually develop said technologies would bankrupt most states that aren't Imperium sized...unless they spent 10-15 years on it.
Right, right, of course, as a general rule, you must always be able to squash me like a bug, even with your (hueg) numerical advantage removed. Sorry, I forgot.
Now, about these pirates: where are they from?
Re: SD.Net World Redux Comment Thread V
Posted: 2008-12-20 06:46pm
by Siege
Ryan Thunder wrote:Now, about these pirates: where are they from?
Sabika.
Re: SD.Net World Redux Comment Thread V
Posted: 2008-12-20 06:47pm
by Karmic Knight
Ryan Thunder wrote:right, right, of course, as a general rule, you must always be able to squash me like a bug, even with your (hueg) numerical advantage removed. Sorry, I forgot.
Now, about these pirates: where are they from?
Everywhere and nowhere.
Costa would possibly be a place.
I have homegrown pirates myself and RogueIce are beating up, and there should be a healthy number of pirate shanty towns along the Wilderness.
But I really don't know for sure other than my homegrown oppressed group, no you can't fight those.
Re: SD.Net World Redux Comment Thread V
Posted: 2008-12-20 07:08pm
by Ryan Thunder
SiegeTank wrote:Ryan Thunder wrote:Now, about these pirates: where are they from?
Sabika.
May I bomb it to Mars?