SD.net's World OOC/Discussion thread?

[phongn]

Perhaps. But if you want to try and go that route, you will at the least not be able to have a VLS system on there. You'll basically be limited to a pre-VLS CG-47, at best (though I guess you can upgrade computers and stuff, but hey, glitches happen). Plus since all I can find on the CG-42 is that it was cancelled and unbuilt, you're going to have to provide justification for fielding 31 of the things.

That's silly, though. There's nothing fundamentally different about CGN-42 and CG-47, even with VLS upgrades, to prevent deployment of it for a large nation. This isn't a B-70 or A-12 scenario here.

[RogueIce]

Perhaps. But if you want to try and go that route, you will at the least not be able to have a VLS system on there. You'll basically be limited to a pre-VLS CG-47, at best (though I guess you can upgrade computers and stuff, but hey, glitches happen). Plus since all I can find on the CG-42 is that it was cancelled and unbuilt, you're going to have to provide justification for fielding 31 of the things.

That's silly, though. There's nothing fundamentally different about CGN-42 and CG-47, even with VLS upgrades, to prevent deployment of it for a large nation. This isn't a B-70 or A-12 scenario here.

Like I said, since all the information I found on it was that it got cancelled before the first Tico was ever built, then I'd say limiting it to a nuclear-powered pre-VLS Tico is not unreasonable. If he (or anyone else with their pet technology) feel otherwise, the onus is on them to prove it.

Since we're going with what is auto-magically given to us, I don't think that's too unreasonable for him to justify a nucleared powered, VLS AEGIS cruiser if such never actually existed. Preferably with something other than "it is so because I say it" on A) a practical level (it's not like everybody is going to be an expert here) and B) hey, if nothing else, it provides information on the capabilities and stats for the rest of us to use it if we're so able.

[Shroom Man 777]

Um... what does this mean for my twin mothership submarines?

Retcon them as a smaller class. Like I retconned Shady's and Deathdealers F-22s as a ploy to scare off larger nations.

I assume the costs and terms of developing such a thing like a Submersible CVN is freaking enormous; thre are real world projects ofthathowever, so you definetely should give it a shot

Can I retcon them to something on the level with Typhoon/Akula-class ballistic missile subs (SSBNs) modified into cruise missile submarines (SSGN)? Like what they did to the Ohio-class, replaced the nukes with cruise missiles, UCAVs, and SEAL teams.

Can I? Can I? Can I?

I mean, this really isn't science fiction... and I sort of did announce developing them.

[MKSheppard]

Like I said, since all the information I found on it was that it got cancelled before the first Tico was ever built, then I'd say limiting it to a nuclear-powered pre-VLS Tico is not unreasonable. If he (or anyone else with their pet technology) feel otherwise, the onus is on them to prove it.

During the 1970s there were two programmatic paths towards getting AEGIS SPY-1 to Sea:

DD-963 Option: 9,500 ton modified Spruance. Became CG-47.

CGN-42 Option: 12,100 ton evolution of Virginia Class CGN Hull. Not proceeded with.

And you're saying that VLS technology is some magic thing? They installed it on Spruances for god's sake.

Anyway, according to Friedman's US Destroyer's 2nd Edition; CGN 42 was cancelled for because the Carter ADministration looking to cut military spending, CGN-42 was an easy line item to kill; and Harold Brown (then SecDef) made a bullshit thing about how you would get two CG-47s for the price of one CGN-42; deliberately omitting that this was for the FIRST ships, not for the later follow ons...

[K. A. Pital]

Shroom Man 777, yeah, Ibelieve SSGNs are fine. After all it just details "modern submarines".

[Beowulf]

Shroom Man 777, yeah, Ibelieve SSGNs are fine. After all it just details "modern submarines".

SSGs are fine. Nuclear submarines must be Virginias.

[K. A. Pital]

ah, okay. sorry, my bad.

I would like to remind that the rules are strict:
1) AFV/Plane/Ship types which ahve not been laid down - i.e. a paper ship/plane/AFV are allowed to be constructed but NOT allowed for initial procurement.

It has came to my attention that CGN 42, despite all technology readily able, is a paper ship.

It is certain that we would have to uphold the Rules here: because, say, between Tu-160 and T-4M (I-100) plane, both are essentially variants of the same with same technology. One got cancelled and it's possible it was the better one. Still its off hands

[Shroom Man 777]

Then I'm gonna have 12 diesel subs and 2 of my custom SSGNs (not too wanky). Is that alright?

[I've already mentioned them repeatedly in the past posts and no one objected...]

[Beowulf]

I think it should be a bit more clear: if it never entered full rate production, it can't be used. For ships, this is a requirement that 2 existed at any given time.

[K. A. Pital]

when did you announce the subs? If it was long enough ago, you could argue conversion is feasible in those months.

[K. A. Pital]

I think it should be a bit more clear: if it never entered full rate production, it can't be used.

What is the reason for this rule? Testbed types flying/swimming means such craft existed and was produced, just not mass produced.

I would object to this, because this would render my real CVNs down to TAKRs, i don't really care for other things.

[Shroom Man 777]

It was announced at Page 7, during the start of the Syndromian Strike here.

It's already been sailing for 21 pages, certainly some considerations can be allowed

[Besides, things weren't so regulated or clarified back then.]

[Look for Yer Mom]

[RogueIce]

I think it should be a bit more clear: if it never entered full rate production, it can't be used. For ships, this is a requirement that 2 existed at any given time.

I think if it never entered full rate production, you can't field a fleet of the things. But if it managed to enter a prototype or testbed status, or was at least partially built for operational use, you can have them in a limited capacity. But there will be bugs and defects until you work them out.

[K. A. Pital]

Just to clear: theres a big difference between a piece of paper and the start of test type (or straight on serial type) production.

And what is this going on with airspace. The LAST thing we need now is a fucking war starting over this.

Also, it's strange that Beowulf would propose a "any given 2 ships" for prouction runs: very real production runs of modern ships, which have been built, can have 1 ship just due to modernity.

this is also different from a plane test type for all it's worth, you don't build "test ships" and if there's a ship as much as laid that means it's the real deal.

[RogueIce]

Just to clear: theres a big difference between a piece of paper and the start of test type (or straight on serial type) production.

And what is this going on with airspace. The LAST thing we need now is a fucking war starting over this.

Indeed. Although if you consider it, since the RB-1C doesn't exist, that little "incident" never happened.

Frankly we can use the discussion, since otherwise we were left with everyone basically locked out of space unless you wanted to start a war. Though we could certainly use a bit more restraint here in actions that are being undertaken.

[Shroom Man 777]

Uhh...umm.... I ripped the thing off from a videogame...

It can be retconned into something else. Any suggestions?

[MKSheppard]

Indeed. Although if you consider it, since the RB-1C doesn't exist, that little "incident" never happened.

So a B-1A with a different avonics outfit more suited towards high resolution reconnaisance isn't possible?

[Beowulf]

I'm willing to give on the test type issue.

As for the airspace, I tossed a suborbital craft over Shepnukistan. Shep responds with sending a wing of aircraft that don't even rate the title of paper over me.

I'm perfectly fine with SSGs, but SSGNs weren't permissible as a trade for diesel subs.

[Beowulf]

Indeed. Although if you consider it, since the RB-1C doesn't exist, that little "incident" never happened.

So a B-1A with a different avonics outfit more suited towards high resolution reconnaisance isn't possible?

B-1A never entered series production. You can have a limited number, but not entire fucking wings of them.

[Shroom Man 777]

If I detail the capabilities of my fictitious submarine and keep it within bounds of reality, will it be alright?

[RogueIce]

Indeed. Although if you consider it, since the RB-1C doesn't exist, that little "incident" never happened.

So a B-1A with a different avonics outfit more suited towards high resolution reconnaisance isn't possible?

Sure it's possible. Go ahead and build some. The point is, if it didn't exist you don't magically get to have a fleet of them at the start.

Don't blame me. Blame the short-sightedness of military planners. I'm sure Stas would like to have more than one buggy CVN in his fleet if he could, but them's the breaks.

[RogueIce]

If I detail the capabilities of my fictitious submarine and keep it within bounds of reality, will it be alright?

If it's possible and within your means, you could build it. But after a design phase and (one would hope, anyway ) a suitable testing phase before it went operational.

[MKSheppard]

Sure it's possible. Go ahead and build some. The point is, if it didn't exist you don't magically get to have a fleet of them at the start.

I've been away from this game for three days (72 days in game) due to me you know, being in North Carolina and seeing it explode, and having 16 pages to catch up with. So lets assume that okay, I managed to re-engine my B-1Bs into B-1Cs to restore high altitude high speed performance; and also produced a dedicated recon version of the B-1C.

I'm willing to toss:

FB-22
RF-22 (recon version of FB-22)
A-12
F-24 Super Tomcat Plus

And reduce the number of CGN-42s, with an offset of equal numbers of conventional CG-47s built.

[Sea Skimmer]

You know it’s really really pointlessly stupid to be ruling out initial use of never built crap, what possible reason does this have? Are you all going to try to argue that many people participating in this little game actually know enough to make detailed comparisons of different equipment possible, the only reason to restrict what people can use? It’s a hell of a lot more reasonable, and allows for much more interesting orders of battle (especially considering that real life countries don’t even fucking exist!) if we can use anything that decently fits into feasible current day technology, and the allowed numbers in the oob, and to then just assume everything everyone has is just roughly equivalent. I wouldn’t have wasted time getting back into this act if I’d realized this course of action was being perused.

[K. A. Pital]

if we can use anything that decently fits into feasible current day technology

Well, "anything" is a bad rule phrase. It will be a XB-70/T-4MS 200 wankfest real fucking soon, and the game will turn into TBO wankage whilst smaller nations would run around looking for what to do, disinterested in becoming accustmed to paper weapons.

"Roughly equivalent" means that it is equivalent.

A T-4MS200 for example is not roughly equivalent to other crafts.

How about Bartini WIGs, all calculated and even test ran with aerodynamic models? They are feasible with todays' tech, but they'd FUCK UP the tech tree if given to anyone who just wishes to have them from the very start.

Hell, I'm more willing to side with Beowulf, ditch all S-47 and ditch the Ulyanovsk CVNs than to allow a free-for-all.

*grunts* as if we didn't have enough weapon wankfests

This game, when using simple crafts, is instinctively understood to nations both small and large, and allows for good grip on economy and military expenditure even for starting members. When using complicated tech but possible, off the grid when a nation starts, just makes it fucking pointless to invest into anything and makes teh whole GDP angle redundant bullshit.

"Initial use of never built crap" means everyone will start gettng superior US aircraft wankoprojects wings, FULL of it, superior ships with the latest techonologies (and if we just allow all tech to function it means there's shitloads of satelites which just suddenly BEAMED up there for AEGIS purposes!). Initial use of never built crap means nuclear superheavy AFVs from the start (and why would anyone not choose Ob.279 if he's at least a Kingdom? The thing is a massive fucking overkill heavy MBT). Anything from the start.

Just no.