|
pinchofginger posted:Being that intel bote cannot defend itself, it also potentially ends up being a resource sink whenever it's in theatre: we'll have to have CAP around it for fear of losing our expensive asset. I don't know if the ELINT it provides us is going to be much better than what we can get through other means either. The AWACS can't defend itself either and it's one of our most critical assets. Neither can our refuelers. As to your second point, we literally just concluded a mission where we took massive losses due in part to not being able to detect jack for poo poo. An additional dedicated sensor platform would seem to be in order, no?
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2017 07:38
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 2, 2024 22:06 |
|
|
If the 7 gripens NG package include modernization for our current one I'd say gripen+invisiboat otherwise mirage2000+invisiboat
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2017 07:52
|
|
|
paragon1 posted:The AWACS can't defend itself either and it's one of our most critical assets. Neither can our refuelers. As to your second point, we literally just concluded a mission where we took massive losses due in part to not being able to detect jack for poo poo. An additional dedicated sensor platform would seem to be in order, no? ELINT isn't radar, and as I understand it the bote hasn't got the best radar going. If it was a proper seaborne radar platform I'd be putting on my floaties and jumping aboard. Instead it'll give us pretty much what we had last time out - which you point out helpfully wasn't super successful, *and* it adds an expensive, slow and hard to defend target. Edit: also, the EP-3 in the Broadstreet 'vark package seems to give us similar ELINT capabilities to the bote plus a pretty good surface radar. pinchofginger fucked around with this message at 08:32 on Oct 17, 2017 |
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2017 08:12
|
|
|
Paingod556 posted:If we have time, Tornados, Backfires and Fencers I think we can only pick options from the list for 3d printing at the moment
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2017 08:16
|
|
|
pinchofginger posted:ELINT isn't radar, and as I understand it the bote hasn't got the best radar going. If it was a proper seaborne radar platform I'd be putting on my floaties and jumping aboard. Can we lash a ground based radar to the deck and make it a multi-role vessel? Also I brought it up in the discord, but I'll mention it here too: Yooper any reason we can't have Gripen F instead? My reasoning is that it gets more people off the sideline and into action. If there's a good reason (or even a bad one) why not, so be it. Just thought I'd ask.
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2017 08:19
|
|
|
DesperateDan posted:I think we can only pick options from the list for 3d printing at the moment I know, hence they're on the backburner unlike the Flogger-J. What's important is all variable geometry all day erry day for maximum style
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2017 08:20
|
|
|
Bote! (Also lol swiss gripens)
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2017 08:49
|
|
|
DesperateDan posted:I think we can only pick options from the list for 3d printing at the moment Paingod556 posted:I know, hence they're on the backburner unlike the Flogger-J. No. The printed planes get their own procurement cycle.
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2017 09:00
|
|
|
Just sort of curious - what is the 'bote' thing sprung from? If there's like something greater behind ti or not just to get in on the cool kids thing?
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2017 09:06
|
|
|
wedgekree posted:Just sort of curious - what is the 'bote' thing sprung from? If there's like something greater behind ti or not just to get in on the cool kids thing? It's a 'cool kids' thing. A boat was mentioned in one of the supplier introduction videos as a throw-away line and it stuck. More specifically, a certain segment of the thread latched onto it like a hungry dog on a porkchop and it's been a running gag ever since. It pops up every now and again, along with the 'we should seize and island nation as our BoO.
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2017 09:20
|
|
|
CourValant posted:It's a 'cool kids' thing. Cool thanks!
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2017 09:34
|
|
|
In another CYOA I voted for the protagonist to do a dance of peace at bird-monsters and at ant-monsters. The novelty of "bote" doesn't compare. Unless we could somehow create an unholy merger of a sig-int/radar ship and a submarine.
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2017 09:44
|
|
|
RandomPauI posted:In another CYOA I voted for the protagonist to do a dance of peace at bird-monsters and at ant-monsters. The novelty of "bote" doesn't compare. Unless we could somehow create an unholy merger of a sig-int/radar ship and a submarine. Why not the stealth ship from Tomorrow Never Dies? It can cloak, hack spy satellites, is invisible to radar, and does it all on 1990's AOL.
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2017 09:47
|
|
|
The spy ship is a national-level intelligence asset. It will allow us to sniff out poo poo that we can't even dream of right now, using passive sensors so the enemy doesn't even realize we're listening until our stealth fighters drop a bomb straight on the vital McGuffin he thought we didn't know about. It's easily the most interesting thing we've been offered yet, and it comes with a good number of either very high or very decent capability fighters as a core choice. I'm very horny for the boat rn.
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2017 10:55
|
|
|
aphid_licker posted:The spy ship is a national-level intelligence asset. It will allow us to sniff out poo poo that we can't even dream of right now, using passive sensors so the enemy doesn't even realize we're listening until our stealth fighters drop a bomb straight on the vital McGuffin he thought we didn't know about. It's easily the most interesting thing we've been offered yet, and it comes with a good number of either very high or very decent capability fighters as a core choice. Bote horniness intensifying
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2017 11:14
|
|
|
I suppose the real question is how well that translates into CMANO and if it actually produces any real value for us. Having the Saab up and loud means we can see anything that's not stealth anyway and being able to listen in is no good when it comes to actually engaging the enemy with missiles.
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2017 11:17
|
|
|
aphid_licker posted:The spy ship is a national-level intelligence asset. It will allow us to sniff out poo poo that we can't even dream of right now, using passive sensors so the enemy doesn't even realize we're listening until our stealth fighters drop a bomb straight on the vital McGuffin he thought we didn't know about. It's easily the most interesting thing we've been offered yet, and it comes with a good number of either very high or very decent capability fighters as a core choice. You know I used to not actually care too much if we got the bote or not a bit  huh? as long as we got the 117s but now I'm reminded of how close to Ace Combat this LP is in the best of ways and how instrumental the Intelligence Vessel Andromeda was to Ace Combat 5 and, uh, positive buoyancy Captain.
Groggy nard fucked around with this message at 12:01 on Oct 17, 2017 |
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2017 11:56
|
|
|
aphid_licker posted:The spy ship is a national-level intelligence asset. It will allow us to sniff out poo poo that we can't even dream of right now, using passive sensors so the enemy doesn't even realize we're listening until our stealth fighters drop a bomb straight on the vital McGuffin he thought we didn't know about. All of this depends on how much latitude we get given by Yooper out of engine. Anyone had a play with this thing in CMANO? Can we get some idea of what tangible benefit it offers in operation? I mean, other than being able to prance about on deck in cute uniforms? (Don't get me wrong, I am pro-navy, but I want any boat we buy be the *right* boat rather than the right now boat.)
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2017 12:02
|
|
|
This is actually the first procurement round where I vote for boat. I think getting combat ships is no good for us, but a spy ship... 
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2017 12:04
|
|
|
slothrop posted:I love procurement. Can't we keep them all though? 1. - Pre-1989. If something is 1991, or that era, propose it. Yes, the more observant among you will notice that's the Gulf War. (The First One) Why? Well in the first Gulf War only 5% of the ammunition expended was guided weaponry. Gulf War II it was 50%. Operations today are greater than 90%. It's cinematic to have lots of planes swooping in, dodging AAA, sailing past SAM's, only to completely miss with iron bombs and having to do it all again tomorrow! You can choose a core, a core and an option, no core-no option, just 3d print, or any combination. Yes, you could buy 140 MIG-21's.   pinchofginger posted:Yooper, can we sell aircraft we've procured at any point? slothrop posted:Can we lash a ground based radar to the deck and make it a multi-role vessel? The ole radar on the bote trick eh? Unfortunately no. The sophisticated nature of the ELINT package is completely washed out by a strong radar. You can listen really good, or emit really good, but not both. We can absolutely roll with the Gripen F's. Anything that gets more pilots in the air is cool with me.
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2017 12:22
|
|
|
Yooper posted:
Ok then great and vengeful GM, lay it on us! Or is this something we discover AFTER procurement? Also will we see theatre previews before procurement voting? Not fussed either way. We could make an informed decision or shoot in the dark! Either way is fun
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2017 12:37
|
|
|
slothrop posted:Ok then great and vengeful GM, lay it on us! Or is this something we discover AFTER procurement? It'll be an in-mission surprise. Nothing plane destroying, just an interesting quirk. Emergent Technologies and all that jazz. The theater previews are in-process. I'm debating about a faction system to make mission choices less linear and more fluid. You'll see.
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2017 12:48
|
|
|
Yooper posted:1. - Pre-1989. If something is 1991, or that era, propose it. Yes, the more observant among you will notice that's the Gulf War. (The First One) Why? Well in the first Gulf War only 5% of the ammunition expended was guided weaponry. Gulf War II it was 50%. Operations today are greater than 90%. It's cinematic to have lots of planes swooping in, dodging AAA, sailing past SAM's, only to completely miss with iron bombs and having to do it all again tomorrow! Question, Why did you add in the bison (2002) on the list? Just seems so much better than anything else we could print.
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2017 12:50
|
|
|
I would definitely like the boat and the 117s, but not sure which of the K&P cores. The Gripens have rarely let us down and upgraded could be very nice, but the potentially prohibitive cost of munitions is a big mark against them. If we could get the DB upgrade so they could use alternative munitions that'd be nice, but we can't rely on that. I also think they're the most likely in-universe choice, given our history with the airframe &c. Mirages would be the alternative for more numbers, I guess.
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2017 12:57
|
|
|
Wait, can we 3D print botes, as long as they are pre 1991? If so, let's get some simple stuff to defend spy-bote.
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2017 13:03
|
|
|
I get the feeling 3d printed botes will have to be WWII era stuff. Guns, unguided rockets, unguided torpedoes, etc.
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2017 13:08
|
|
|
RandomPauI posted:I get the feeling 3d printed botes will have to be WWII era stuff. Guns, unguided rockets, unguided torpedoes, etc. I mean, the Iowa did see limited action in Desert Storm... 
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2017 13:19
|
|
|
orcbuster posted:Question, Why did you add in the bison (2002) on the list? Just seems so much better than anything else we could print. In the off case that every modern fighter gets blown up and we still have mission objectives to accomplish. If you guys decide to buy 140 of them I'll simulate a supply chain and only send you 8.
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2017 13:23
|
|
|
I'm fine with this. If the cut off is 1989 then I think I'd like to order some Bisons and Flankers when we get to the print procurement phase.
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2017 13:31
|
|
|
Yooper posted:In the off case that every modern fighter gets blown up and we still have mission objectives to accomplish. If you guys decide to buy 140 of them I'll simulate a supply chain and only send you 8. Figured as much, just nice to check :P
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2017 13:38
|
|
|
I know this isn't gonna be relevant until after the next mission, but quick one about new 3d printed planes. You said a 1973 design would be $73mil for tooling- is that going to be the actual metric? So a first-flight 1960 RAAF Canberra would be $60 mil, while a top of the line 1985 SEPECAT Jaguar comes out at $85 mil? Really looking forward to this procurement system coming into play, getting us closer to an Ace Combat Infinity timeline every hop.
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2017 14:13
|
|
|
Paingod556 posted:I know this isn't gonna be relevant until after the next mission, but quick one about new 3d printed planes. You said a 1973 design would be $73mil for tooling- is that going to be the actual metric? So a first-flight 1960 RAAF Canberra would be $60 mil, while a top of the line 1985 SEPECAT Jaguar comes out at $85 mil? When Yooper gives a news update that an asteroid is on collision course with Earth we know convergence is at hand.
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2017 14:15
|
|
|
Honestly as much as i like gripens as our thing, Mirages will get the job done fine considering anyone we fly against will also have limited assets and we reallllly need the numbers. invisibote seems awesome now that I actually know what it does (but i still want something with some punch
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2017 14:18
|
|
|
My concern with the Gripens is that they leave us with no BVR options that aren’t taxed except the two Kfirs (and remember, we all voted for more smaller missions so a per mission increase is even worse that way). Yeah the devs said they’ll add AMRAAM Cs as an option but who knows when that will happen.
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2017 14:25
|
|
|
I like Gripens because they're catbirds, but Mirages were in Area 88 so that's fine too.
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2017 14:26
|
|
|
Paingod556 posted:I know this isn't gonna be relevant until after the next mission, but quick one about new 3d printed planes. You said a 1973 design would be $73mil for tooling- is that going to be the actual metric? So a first-flight 1960 RAAF Canberra would be $60 mil, while a top of the line 1985 SEPECAT Jaguar comes out at $85 mil? Basically yes. But with age comes an interesting penalty. The 3DPrint folks are copiers, not redesigners, so critical flaws in alloy, material, or even plane ole design, aren't going to be fixed. Add to that a compounding error in the 3DPrint process. Which gives us this :  Yes, we can print a 1955 Cadillac JetFighter but it's gonna have some issues. Failures range from comms going down, radar going bad, weapons locking up, all the way to fires and engine damage. This will happen in mission and will be totally random. Exact failure percentages are going to change, the chart is just to illustrate the older it is, the more likely it is to have issues.
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2017 14:57
|
|
|
 Hired Goons, let'sGo Gripen. These are not our old Gripens. They're better in every single way. So why get the Gripen NG? 1. It's who we are. When we made headlines in Lhasa and Angola, we did it in Gripens. When we sent the Chinese Navy to the bottom, we did it in Gripens. Let's keep the Gripen flame burning. Gripens are the Hired Goons. 2. Bonus plane. This isn't a seven-Gripen deal, it's an eight Gripen deal. We only have one Gripen C left, and it's due to be sold off. But Yooper has confirmed that if we buy Gripen NGs, the last Gripen C will be upgraded, too. 3. Sensors. Modern air combat is about seeing first and shooting firs. The Gripen NG have low-probability of intercept AESA radars. They see further, they see better, and the enemy can't easily detect them. They also have an IR sensor. In every theater, we've run into stealth fighters. It's about time we had something that can see them. 4. Penny wise and pound-wise. Yeah, Meteors are expensive. But the math on them still works out. Let's say we fire off our current stock for $1.5-2 million a pop. Nothing new there. And even if the prices pick up, we still come out ahead. We can lose $15 million in MiG-21s (plus their ammo and payments to their widows) to kill a target. Or, we can spend $8 million on a Meteor or some SDBs and lose no one. 5. Firepower = Efficiency. Gripen NGs can carry six Meteors. Two Gripen NGs can do the job of three older Gripens. That means we'll have more aircraft free for strike missions! 6. Better for smaller missions. Smaller missions mean a bum-rush strategy won't work as well - there's too many planes for not enough airspace. A smaller group of high-end fighters will do much better, But there's more! We need to choose options. And what better choice than the Nighthawks and the Invisibiboat?  When the skies are clear, the F-117Cs can buzz around and drop bombs. But when night falls, they come into their element. They have ALARMs for killing radars and GPS and laser-guided bombs for everything else. Used wisely, they're our ace in the hole.  Look at her. She's squat, lumpy, and a little clumsy. But she's got a secret...she can do this:  This baby vacuums up the radar emissions of every single enemy plane, ship, and SAM. It can see them long before they can see us. Plus, we might be able to make some side money selling the ELINT we gather. So, what will he have now? -8 Gripen NG -7 Tornadoes -4 F-117C -2 AMX-11 We are a little short-handed when it comes to air-to-air capability. Come 3D printing time, we'll want to add some fighters with BVR missiles. Maybe some early Flankers or some F-14As (yes, I know they're underpowered...yes, I have been watching Top Gun...) In the meantime, let's do some math. After spending $400 million on the core and $249,999,999 on the bonus, we've spent $649,999,999. That leaves us with $396,725,308 in the bank. Relying on Bisons for CAP isn't an amazing idea. They're really short-legged. With only two short-ranged Archers and two mid-ranged Adder As, they still have a 150 nmi combat radius and only 40 minutes on station. And no in-flight refueling option. We should still get a few, but I'd recommend we save our money for other things later. I'd say buy 12 Bisons for $90 million and save the rest for a decent 3DP plane. That leaves us with $306,725,308, we can get some very interesting things for that... Bacarruda fucked around with this message at 16:56 on Oct 17, 2017 |
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2017 16:39
|
|
|
I think the funniest thing is that Yooper keeps trying to get us away from the crazy missiles but they're so insanely good (and if you don't have them and the enemy does, your expensive plane is so insanely screwed) that there's almost no amount of disincentive that will make using an 8 million dollar missile rather than losing a 70 million dollar plane a bad trade.
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2017 16:46
|
|
|
Night10194 posted:I think the funniest thing is that Yooper keeps trying to get us away from the crazy missiles but they're so insanely good (and if you don't have them and the enemy does, your expensive plane is so insanely screwed) that there's almost no amount of disincentive that will make using an 8 million dollar missile rather than losing a 70 million dollar plane a bad trade. Probably a side effect of the game being set in 2023, with all the craziness thereto (including privately owned Raptors and proliferated PAK-FAs), thus there's a feeling of needing to keep pace with the tech edge. If the game were set in 1993 we would be begging for Sparrow IIIs.
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2017 17:02
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 2, 2024 22:06 |
|
|
TheDemon posted:It's not an air radar or jamming boat. It will hardly affect the mission environment at all. What it will do is give us information on what our opponents are doing to help with mission planning. Or possibly predict in-mission events (as set up by scripts). ELINT will also let it track things a bit, but that's more like having a floating satellite than a radar. So I poked and prodded the CMANO engine to the best of my ability and was able to determine the following: 1. The bote has to actually have LOS to the emitter to detect it. In practicality this means the bote is restricted by the curvature of the surface of the earth. It also means that the screenshot in Baccaruda's post isn't entirely true (My fault, it's my screenshot, turns out you can always see static radar sites) because those are too far away on the ground. 2. In real function, the bote picked up a P-8I Neptune emitting at 200nm, which is exactly the range on it's emitter. It gave one of those "probability zones" that is pretty big. Since the ship is silent, the Neptune didn't see it at all. I also placed an F-14, which gave a similar result. 3. I then added the Saab to the scenario, somewhere from a cross angle to the bote. Between the two of them they immediately triangulated the P-8, and were able to significantly narrow down the location of the F-14 that I placed a bit farther away. 4. I coaxed the P-8 over to where the bote is and it didn't figure out what it was until it got into IR range (30nm). The conclusion of all of this is the bote will be a great asset but also one we want to keep secret and stealthy. My recommendation would be to not flag the boat as HG but try to hide it somewhere at a different angle than the Saab will be, and possibly hide amongst civilian vessels. Also never turn the radar on, it's not useful at all. In game engine terms, we might want to ask that it be placed on an allied "side" if that isn't too much trouble.
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2017 17:13
|
|