|
Friend Commuter posted:What, are you calling for helping the Klackons finish off the Mrrshan? What nonsense. I will not allow you to smear these courageous people! The Mrrshan are proving themselves a valiant bulwark against the bug hordes from the East. Within these Mrrshan lions beats a Freedom loving heart, open to free trade and the values promoted by the Human Republic. Do you not hear the call of the valiant Mrrhan guerillas fighting off the monstrous Hive Mind!? Pah. I must now fully pledge myself to an alliance with the Mrrshan. I would not have been forced to do this without this vile provocation by Friend Commuter.
|
#
¿
Jan 25, 2017 18:01
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 15, 2024 05:17 |
|
|
Death to the Darlok
|
|
#
¿
Jan 26, 2017 00:29
|
|
|
I againt state my support for an Alliance with the Mrrshan. These valiant people need our support in these trying times. (post made in case my vote before it became official doesn't count)
|
|
#
¿
Jan 26, 2017 01:20
|
|
|
inflatablefish posted:Incidentally, is anyone else getting really annoyed at the design of the Mrrshan Queen? It's like they had a design meeting that went, "How can we characterise this ruler to make her distinctive? Wait, I know - tits! And a cocktail dress! And flirting in every sentence!" They're fairly faithful to the original design: 
|
|
#
¿
Jan 26, 2017 01:30
|
|
|
I wouldn't call a man who wrote a constitution that permitted slavery "good" but sure, whatever, it's your LP.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 26, 2017 06:39
|
|
|
M. D. Design Bureau wishes to give its full support to the Bauer doctrine. No strongpoint, no matter how strong, without fleet support, will hold off a dedicated assault by a stellar empire. And they don't do anything on the offense, either. Let us not build another Maginot Line. The Bauer doctrine will not only allow us to maintain a much larger number of adequate reaction forces to reinforce our existing defenses, it will allow us to concentrate far more power than we could so far in a single killing blow if the need arises.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 26, 2017 06:53
|
|
|
nweismuller posted:Harrison would point out his proposed strategic stance would explicitly station powerful fleet forces in support of strongpoints. M.D. Design Bureau would wish to point at the map of the galaxy. Our main fleet cannot be everywhere, and without sufficient logistical flexibility, we cannot field a sufficent number of ships to have a sufficient number of sufficiently strong fleets, while still maintaining a sufficiently large attack force. As we have learned with the Bulrathi - defense does not end threats to the Republic. Our wars should be ligtning wars - Our main fleet looking for a single breakthrough point and with sufficient logistical tail to exploit it, while a flexible and mobile defense force keeps our homes safe. Light ships are the key to this. Not big overpriced battlecans that only look good on paper.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 26, 2017 07:10
|
|
|
Dong Quixote posted:The Maginot line would have worked great if it weren't for crap allies who didn't build their share of it and got steamrolled. The US tried the flexible picket ship approach for the first few decades of the Navy and repeatedly got shamed by navies with actual line ships. The Maginot line got bypassed, not because of someone elses blame, but because it was inherently flawed as a concept in an era of mobile warfare. The era of naval battleships ended in favor of a small core of specialist ships surrounded by a bajillion escorts. Which is what the Bauer doctrine is about. Remember, when our battleships(cruisers) fell against the Bulrathi armada, it was the destroyers that gave us a victory. And our troops transports were what gave them total, irrevocable defeat. (Also, static defenses are notoriously squishy in MoO games past the first) And let me remind you again, there is no such thing as a successful defensive war if the enemy can just bypass our defenses and blew up half the Earth with shapeshifting commadoes.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 27, 2017 13:32
|
|
|
Destroyers, fellow senator, destroyers. Not frigates. Frigates are a relic of the past. But destroyers have the perfect combination of power, size, expendability, and self-sustainability that can allow us to field them in massive numbers, with the right doctrine. Those are our fighters, fellow senator. That is the power of logistics. I would rather lose the crew of an escort than the crew of a battleship, or, providence forbid and we foolishly choose follow the wrong doctrine, the population of a planet we couldn't protect because it was beyond our "fortress" wall. And only a large fleet can help us establish a co-prosperity zone in the driftward rim, and ensure that the iron will of the Republic is to be followed, or at the very least, respected, in the galaxy. It takes years for a new battleship build on Paradise to make it to the frontlines of the war. A new destroyer can swiftly be assembled in the orbit of a fringe world, especially with adequate materials (BC) brought in by the fleet's logistics arm. Furthermore, it is a lot easier to retool a destroyer on the fly. Remember what happened to the Bulrathi once they faced our PD boats. We can ensure that something like that never happens to us with this doctrine.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 27, 2017 16:50
|
|
|
M.D. Design Bureau will favor a design centered around armored destroyers armed with phase cannons and torpedoes, mixed in with PD boats, and backed with offense-focused battlecruisers intended to take out priority targets from behind the relative safety of the destroyer screen. Further research into miniaturization of phase cannon technology is advised. Incidentally, the Bauer doctrine favors this design, having a swarm of destroyers doing the tanking for expensive and much more difficult to replace battleships and battlecruisers.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 27, 2017 17:46
|
|
|
Siegkrow posted:I Put forth the motion to build AS MANY SHIPS as we need to zerg the battleship and take orion. Since the Bauer doctrine helps us do this better, does this count as your vote for it? 
|
|
#
¿
Jan 31, 2017 22:59
|
|
|
I hereby dub the residents of the opposite side of the galaxy "Far-Quads"
|
|
#
¿
Feb 1, 2017 07:18
|
|
|
Freudian posted:The Anthropic Subjugation? If you want to be both clever and really mean, call it The Anthropic Shadow.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 1, 2017 15:49
|
|
|
POOL IS CLOSED posted:I must be! I usually read this LP on the awful app, after all. For one, he's friend comMuter, not comPuter.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 1, 2017 16:23
|
|
|
I'm all for gestures that include as many frees, uniteds, federateds, people'ss, independents, and so on in our name. Going forward with an independent proposal: United Galactic Republics If a country can claim a continent it doesn't hold just by itself for itself, surely a galactic nation can claim a galaxy?
|
|
#
¿
Feb 2, 2017 12:04
|
|
|
f
|
|
#
¿
Apr 26, 2017 10:59
|
|
|
There can be only one.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 27, 2017 20:12
|
|
|
Fleet design: Design
|
|
#
¿
Jun 24, 2017 11:47
|
|
|
MD Design Bureau proposes the following: Taffy class torpedo cruiser (ingame class: destroyer): base: 76tc, 822 space Battle pods for a total of 941 space (24tc) Magneto-gravitic shields taking up 259.2 space (30tc) Heavy armor (46tc) 3xrear mounted Heavy Warhead Fusion Torpedoes taking up 675 space (72tc) A tiny bit of free space left. Total cost of 248tc Designed for large scale fleet battles against capital ships. We can produce 6 of these for the cost of one superheavy battleship (for a total of 18 100 damage torpedoes every 10 seconds), and maintain 8 of them for the same logistics strain. Do not require specialized shipyards and can (with sufficient imports) be rapidly manufactured on undeveloped border worlds or recent conquests. You really don't have an excuse not to have a couple of these guys tagging along. Impi class assault frigate base: 38tc, 551 space Battle pods for a total of 626 space (10tc) Optronic computer (16tc) Structural analyzer taking up 75 tons (6tc) Battle scanner taking up 60 tons (8tc) Magneto-gravitic shields taking up 108 space (20tc) 1xfront mounted Heavy Autofire Wide-Focus Graviton Cannon taking up 202.5 space (48tc) 1xfront mounted Heavy Autofire Graviton Cannon taking up 180 space (44tc) A tiny bit of space left A total of 190 tc Designed for close range annihilation of whatever. We can produce 8 of these for the cost of one superheavy battleship (for a total of 16 heavy autofire graviton cannons, half of which are great against shields), and maintain 16 of them for the same logistics strain. Do not require specialized shipyards and can (with sufficient imports) be rapidly manufactured on undeveloped border worlds or recent conquests. You will take losses when using these, but they can be replaced much more easily than some of the ships that were lost in action recently. The two designs above are meant to be used in tandem. The following tactic should be mostly self-explanatory. Blue for torpedo boats and torpedoes, green for assault frigates, red for the enemy.  A point defence ship or four can be added to the mix if needs be.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 27, 2017 10:19
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 15, 2024 05:17 |
|
|
Uh, sure, Taffy and Impi. I guess I'll also go with Nightingale, Hoplite, and Herakles I probably should have designed a dedicated PD boat, but c'est la vie.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 28, 2017 10:05
|
|