|
vyelkin posted:I'm sorry but I will vote against the "Ckona" on principle because of that abomination of a transliteration FTFY
|
# ? Aug 20, 2019 23:40 |
|
|
# ? Jun 9, 2024 02:33 |
|
Thanks friend, Skopa is a cool name
|
# ? Aug 21, 2019 01:08 |
|
vyelkin posted:Thanks friend, Skopa is a cool name Not as cool a name as Beagle.
|
# ? Aug 21, 2019 02:35 |
|
habeasdorkus posted:btw, this is the dreadnought we can currently build in our home yard: That's not a dreadnought, that is some morbidly obese pre-dread crime against naval engineering.
|
# ? Aug 21, 2019 05:15 |
|
eight 16-inch rifles and eight twelve-inch rifles on the same ship would be hilarious and I want to see this hypothetical ship in action now it would be way the hell better with a director on the secondary battery, but unfortunately we don't have secondary fire control technology yet.
|
# ? Aug 21, 2019 05:29 |
|
The correct roleplay option is a battleship with the highest possible torpedo protection, a bunch of torpedo tubes and a gazillion secondary and tertiary guns
|
# ? Aug 21, 2019 06:10 |
|
Boksi posted:Fever without any other symptoms? Yeah, I've had that, it sucks. Anyway, here's a fleet scout cruiser! habeasdorkus posted:
Infidelicious posted:That is really impressive cost cutting, and while quantity has a quality all it's own; I feel 1 knot of closing over our 23 knot CA's and B's is insufficient to reposition within a formation, and it will be incapable of escaping if it is forced into a cruiser battle without the rest of the fleet. Voting time!
|
# ? Aug 21, 2019 10:13 |
|
I'm voting for the proyect 33195
|
# ? Aug 21, 2019 11:00 |
|
Grey, as it's a new page and we've moved towards this new role-based request system, in future could you also quote the purpose/role we're choosing these ships for again? I'll pop and get it for this one
|
# ? Aug 21, 2019 11:06 |
|
Infidelicious posted:Fleet Cruiser and Commerce Raiding Omnibus
|
# ? Aug 21, 2019 11:11 |
|
FLEET SCOUT Proyekj 33961 or whatever it is I like the fact that we will get 6 of them so it will hurt less when one is inevitably torpedoed in a popup with nothing to be done about it. RAIDER Oh wait, there's something beyond "redacted because it was too similar", and in a bizzare twist it isn't the ship that was redacted because it was too similar. It was the Gorshok Meda, but I'm still voting for Goonchaya because it has more sensible guns for its unarmoured prey, and we can buy more of them.
|
# ? Aug 21, 2019 12:05 |
|
Fyodorevich and Goonchaya
|
# ? Aug 21, 2019 15:15 |
|
Skopa and Gorshok Meda
|
# ? Aug 21, 2019 15:22 |
|
Skopa
|
# ? Aug 21, 2019 15:59 |
|
I just want to point out that the other two fleet scout designs are both protected cruisers, which is in my opinion awful because eight inch guns do not offset the decrease in protection caused by the awful armor layout. The superstructure is gonna get shot to poo poo by any ol' popgun. The red bits are the armor, grey bits are coal bunkers for added protection EXCEPT OIL FIRED SHIPS DON'T HAVE THOSE. Also I stupidly thought the raiding cruisers were supposed to be built later, so I didn't submit a design for that Anyway, I can't in good conscience vote for any ship but the Proyekt, and I guess the Gonchaya which is at least cheap and not expected to fight in fleet battles.
|
# ? Aug 21, 2019 16:15 |
|
Proyekt Gonchaya
|
# ? Aug 21, 2019 18:15 |
|
Boksi posted:I just want to point out that the other two fleet scout designs are both protected cruisers, which is in my opinion awful because eight inch guns do not offset the decrease in protection caused by the awful armor layout. The superstructure is gonna get shot to poo poo by any ol' popgun. The light cruiser armor scheme design is AoN without AoN tech bonus and will be penetrated and take structure and flotation damage and corresponding reductions in speed / begin flooding from any shell hit that isn't the belt. Escorts are going to be on AF, and will get pulled into cruiser fights, often by themselves. 24 knots is insufficient to escape most current, much less near future threats in the event it is drawn into a battle. Most importantly it cannot escort the Tsars Yacht. Fyodorovich GONCHA Infidelicious fucked around with this message at 19:15 on Aug 21, 2019 |
# ? Aug 21, 2019 18:34 |
|
Proyekt Gonchaya The heavier fleet cruiser would be nice, but we need hulls. And those 'raider' BCs are grotesque.
|
# ? Aug 21, 2019 20:27 |
|
While I would like to vote for the Skopa, it has too many torpedo mounts and not enough guns. We need ships with guns to kill destroyers. Fyodorovich, Gonchaya also, why not goonchaya? while it's not russian, google says it's 'confused' in Bangla
|
# ? Aug 21, 2019 21:25 |
|
terrenblade posted:While I would like to vote for the Skopa, it has too many torpedo mounts and not enough guns. We need ships with guns to kill destroyers. A.) Above water Torpedo mounts would have turned both of our losses in the past year into resounding victories; as the Falconyet acting as a fleet screen / scout was perfectly positioned to sink opposing Battleships in both engagements, had she been equipped with above water torpedoes. B.) 6" shells are likely to disable or sink newer, larger 1000T+ DD's in a single hit regardless of location, and can reliably damage other cruisers whereas 4" can not. C.) Using Cruisers to effectively screen against DD's is going to get harder and harder as gunnery accuracy and range improves; we should just stop building Battleships that are incapable of defending themselves against Destroyers. 18-24 5/6" guns with 2" of armor and 24 3-4" guns is less than 1000T and, all things considered is a trivial amount of weight in comparison to armor, engine or even the shells and powder of the primary cannon... this will also become more important as the Aerial threat becomes more pronounced. Launching a series of light cruisers that will be AF, and make 24/25 knots in TYOOL, 1917 is a great way to spend 80m on Artificial Reefs to restore the ecology of the Baltic after the next war. Infidelicious fucked around with this message at 00:00 on Aug 22, 2019 |
# ? Aug 21, 2019 23:53 |
|
Infidelicious posted:The light cruiser armor scheme design is AoN without AoN tech bonus and will be penetrated and take structure and flotation damage and corresponding reductions in speed / begin flooding from any shell hit that isn't the belt.
|
# ? Aug 22, 2019 01:33 |
|
January 1916 The new ships are sent to the design board. – The first five submarines are laid down. A white peace is agreed! February 1916 Four more destroyers are commissioned. I place the order for the light cruisers – but with the post war budget cut, things may be tight for a while. The French and Austrians have fighters. We may be able to build these soon, as BUORD choses. You get to pick two focuses from the following list. I place an order for a fighter based off Manoeuvrability and speed off BUORDS requests. March 1916 We spar with the French some more. France scraps a 1901 Battleship. April 1916 The destroyers come out in dribs and drabs. I see an opportunity to take more land, and we now control North Korea. Another hull breakthrough is ours. I am forced to halt construction on the light crusiers in favor of finishing the Ryska Sjön. May 1916 Better armour is ours, as are the new docks. June 1916 We have a dreadnought once more! Ah well, you can't be luck all the time! The boffins say we can now drop bombs from planes! How original! July 1916 There have been some construction errors in our new seaplane carrier. More money, bombing airships and a new fighter. August 1916 Another good month for breakthroughs. At least others are having finical difficulties. September 1916 At least others are having finical difficulties. October 1916 It's looking like we may soon be at war with France. I have the spare cash to start putting directors into our ships. December 1916 Nothing of interest happens for the next two months, and it is back to you. Tensions with France are high. Our finances are steady, but nearly fully committed. The fleet in being. The fleet in waiting. The silent service. And research.
|
# ? Aug 22, 2019 13:10 |
|
These are the currently in effect Laws of the Russian Empire: Concord of the Admiralty and Tsar, 1899 Grey Hunter posted:"The research budget shall be set to 12%. December 1901 Admiralty Session Infidelicious posted:No Ship Left Behind Act vyelkin posted:Bring Your Own Battleship Act December 1905 Admiralty Session Zip! posted:PUT YOUR TOYS AWAY Act December 1906 Admiralty Session wedgekree posted:Hail Germania Act December 1907 Admiralty Session Infidelicious posted:"Stop the Undersea Fetishists Act" March 1909 Special Admiralty Session Saros posted:Tsushima Time act December 1909 Admiralty Session Gervasius posted:Verni Paradox Act simplefish posted:Flying The Flag Act December 1910 Admiralty Session Gay Hitler posted:Update ship operating manuals Act wedgekree posted:Research and Rearm Neophyte posted:A (Single) Potato in Every Pot May 1914 Special Admiralty Session Epicurius posted:Tsar's Holiday Act Servetus posted:Anarchy for thee, but not for me. December 1914 Admiralty Session Mister Bates posted:The Fleet Air Arm Act Infidelicious posted:Anti Kleptocracy and Creative Latitude Act December 1915 Admiralty Session Xarn posted:Risk the Yacht Promulgation habeasdorkus fucked around with this message at 14:30 on Aug 22, 2019 |
# ? Aug 22, 2019 13:19 |
|
Also, I made an error in the cost of the new submarine calculations- if we're spending ~20m on them, we can afford to build only that one flight of five.
|
# ? Aug 22, 2019 13:21 |
|
Proposal: "Freddy, my French friend, fries frogs on Fridays" - Place all intel on France: set it to High and all other nations at the lowest possible - This to remain unaltered until either a) another nation is more tense than France or b) we conclude a war with France. - In either case, a vote will then be triggered to set new intel priorities
|
# ? Aug 22, 2019 13:35 |
|
I once again propose the Naval modernization act All currently old(obsolete?) vessels must be sent to the yard for maintenance and refit, or be scrapped.
|
# ? Aug 22, 2019 13:41 |
|
Austerity in the Dreadnought Age Act: Scrap the pre-dreadnought battleships Evstafi and Imperator Pavel I. Do not undertake new reconstructions of any other pre-dreadnoughts, with the eventual goal of scrapping all of them and replacing them with modern dreadnoughts. Dreadnoughts are not even the future, they are the present. Maintaining pre-dreadnoughts is nothing more than a drain on our national resources, and the ships themselves are easy prey for our enemies' modern fleets and future graveyards for thousands of our sailors.
|
# ? Aug 22, 2019 13:44 |
|
Dance Officer posted:I once again propose the Naval modernization act I need a definition on this, what does "old" mean? Do you mean their regular maintenance schedule? E: As pointed out, we already have a part of this in effect, per the Updated Ship Manuals Act. habeasdorkus fucked around with this message at 14:30 on Aug 22, 2019 |
# ? Aug 22, 2019 14:10 |
|
vyelkin posted:Austerity in the Dreadnought Age Act: Seconded.
|
# ? Aug 22, 2019 14:10 |
|
simplefish posted:Proposal: Seconded - this would override some of the Research & Rearm Act as pertains to spying on higher tech nations:
|
# ? Aug 22, 2019 14:11 |
The update ship manuals act must be enforced
|
|
# ? Aug 22, 2019 14:12 |
|
It might be a good idea to give the lead ship of the Proyekt cruisers a proper name and not just a placeholder design name. Renaming Act of 1917 The cruiser currently known as 'Proyekt 33915' is to be renamed as Katastrofa. This is a good and auspicious name.
|
# ? Aug 22, 2019 14:59 |
|
Boksi posted:It might be a good idea to give the lead ship of the Proyekt cruisers a proper name and not just a placeholder design name. Seconded
|
# ? Aug 22, 2019 15:29 |
|
Given the speed at which our ships get sunk, isn't naming them a waste of time?
|
# ? Aug 22, 2019 15:37 |
|
Epicurius posted:Given the speed at which our ships get sunk, isn't naming them a waste of time? If we don't name them, we can't shout their names as calls for revenge. I propose The Tsar's East Asian Piracy Vacation. We argued during the last war about whether to keep the Tsar's yacht in combat operations; weighing the morale benefit of the Tsar leading his men with the threat to his personage. I propose that in the event of war with France the Tsar's yacht should be stationed on our Esat Asian coast and designated as a commerce raider. This will give the Tsar the opportunity to grace our newly acquired colonies with his August presence and lead our raiders in the fight, without being too close to anyone who could shoot back. Servetus fucked around with this message at 16:26 on Aug 22, 2019 |
# ? Aug 22, 2019 16:24 |
|
habeasdorkus posted:I need a definition on this, what does "old" mean? Do you mean their regular maintenance schedule? E: As pointed out, we already have a part of this in effect, per the Updated Ship Manuals Act. Ships with (O) added to their name are obsolete/outdated, and cost more to maintain. If we have a law governing it, we sure as poo poo have some ships with an (O) right now.
|
# ? Aug 22, 2019 17:11 |
|
(Prince Valeryan Igorovich Urodlivyy, founding member of the Русские созданы для борьбы и победы Salon, at a historical costume ball in St. Petersburg, circa 1899) The Ensign of the Русские созданы для борьбы и победы Salon, Circa October 1906 Friends, Countrymen, and Loyal Subjects of our most Imperious Tsar Nikolai II Veliky, It has been an astonishing 15 years since the State Council set about to organize our naval affairs. In that time we have seen a panoply of Orders, Acts, Statutes, Edicts, and Proclamations enter effect. It is now time to bring them into alignment, and bring ourselves into preparedness for the decade and a half to come. As such, it is my pleasure to announce the Admiralty & State Sorting & Harmonizing Omnibus of Legal Edicts. This is a package of three Acts, all aimed at bringing currently enacted statutes into concordance with our current aims. As it would make no sense to undertake such a project piecemeal, I humbly request that someone second this rear end in a top hat. Reorganization of Priorities Act Whereas: We do not have the fleet capacity to fight any peer competitor at this time and we have an outdated battle fleet. Therefore:
A Wolfpack in Being Act Whereas: We will have only 10 active submarines upon completion of our current flight of ships, and are woefully short on undersea raiders. Therefore:
The Keep Your Friends Closer Act Whereas: We are currently risking our relationship with our allies in the United Kingdom with indiscriminant spying, and at the same time have ordered our diplomats to make nice with the stroppy Hun. We must correct these errors before they damage state security. Therefore:
Thank you for your time, my fellow fine Ministers of State. Now if you'll excuse me, I need to return to my drafting board to determine what must be shifted to place a runway upon Our Emperor's Royal Yacht. habeasdorkus fucked around with this message at 17:43 on Aug 22, 2019 |
# ? Aug 22, 2019 17:19 |
|
I think we need to be more precise about which ships need to be scrapped verse refitted. All our CA-class ships with the exception of the Grigori are outdated and the Grom and the Grigori are the same class, just built in different years. Should the Grom be scrapped while the Grigori remains in service? Do we need whatever partial functionality is provided by Vorobey-class or can they be scrapped? An open ended call to refit or scrap ships could be met by misinterpretation. Our five surviving Podlivs are outdated should they be scrapped or refitted? If refitted will we keep them in the battle line or put them on commerce protection? We need to be more focused on what we need to keep for the moment, versus what cannot be salvaged.
|
# ? Aug 22, 2019 17:26 |
|
habeasdorkus posted:Reorganization of Priorities Act I second the Admiralty & State Sorting & Harmonizing Omnibus of Legal Edicts. King Hong Kong fucked around with this message at 19:49 on Aug 22, 2019 |
# ? Aug 22, 2019 17:49 |
|
|
# ? Jun 9, 2024 02:33 |
|
Seconded: A Wolfpack in Being Act The Keep Your Friends Closer Act
|
# ? Aug 22, 2019 18:52 |