Retry
02/03/14 09:46 PM
67.239.109.174
|
"And again if you can build the vehicle for less KEEPING the 5 RACs and the same armor and speed then please Retry show us your skills and build it."
5 RACs, check
Same armor? Improved upon. Double check.
Same speed, check.
The only difference is the weight, which is the only thing that can be changed with your strict specifications.. Unless you plan to be riding on glass I wouldn't complain about the heavier fuel cell engine.
So where is the specifications where you must keep it at 75 tons? You don't specify it, you don't get it. That's what happens when you don't be specific. Either way, weight is less relevant than cost.
Lol, really, your specifications try to do way too much on one vehicle. It's armor and lack of ammunition makes that very, very clear.
|
Karagin
02/03/14 09:53 PM
24.243.178.124
|
And actually yes 20 tons does change things, the vehicle went from a heavy one to an assault one, and thus limiting it's over all usefulness. It's not beaten by 20 tons, what you built is a 20 ton heavy version that again changes the over all role, the idea was for you to either build the same 75 ton vehicle or something better, instead you have chose to go heavier and build something that would not be used with main line forces and would be found stuck around drop ships defending those vs moving with the main line of battle forward to keep some level of Triple A coverage over them as well as provide ground suppression fire if needed, which as the fluff of the vehicle stated it was built to do.
So not sure what you proved with your 95 ton tank but I don't think you proved it's better or more effective then the Dragon HAAAV at its' 75 ton range.
Karagin
Given time and plenty of paper, a philosopher can prove anything.
|
Retry
02/03/14 09:57 PM
67.239.109.174
|
Tell me three reasons why the abstract class rating increase makes it any less useful.
Tell me how the hell a vehicle's role is changed by 20 tons despite the fact that the armament and speed remains the same. The only thing that changes is armor, and price, and half the price and twice the cost.
There is no reason this cheaper and better armored vehicle would fail to make it to the front lines than your more expensive deathtrap.
|
Karagin
02/03/14 10:02 PM
24.243.178.124
|
I gave my reason, you have your opinions and have offered nothing to show that your ideas improve the vehicle in any form or shape. I am sorry you don't like the vehicle and feel it's is a death trap etc...I find your ideas of improvements not offer much beyond a larger, thus harder to transport vehicle that loses it's cost gain by cutting into the fuel margins of dropships. Again I would like to see your idea of the vehicle built to spec using your ideas at the 75 ton range, or is that not possible?
Karagin
Given time and plenty of paper, a philosopher can prove anything.
|
Retry
02/03/14 10:06 PM
67.239.109.174
|
Saying my vehicle is too obese is hardly a reason, it's closer to a bias.
The 20 tons increase will be neglible for any sort of drophship. It just won't cut in much at all significantly.
And if you don't want to "cut into fuel margins of dropships", you lose the stupidly huge specs and make the damn thing smaller.
Improved the vehicle? How about 50% extra armor tonnage and half the cost?
Once again, the only way it can be "improved" with your awful and strict specs is by a tonnage increase or an addition of an XXL engine. I went with the former. Regardless, it is the same vehicle, just much cheaper.
|
ghostrider
02/03/14 10:39 PM
66.27.181.51
|
A point about lighter tanks. Not all bridges built can support heavier vehicles. Canon supplementals have actually limited some to make sure the heavy units could not advance past a certain point. It is actually a good thing. Nothing over x tons means the area can not be used to support an invasion. Limits the fights to a more prepared position.
I think we were expecting the lighter version with 4 racs instead of one with 5 and a fuel cell. Though at half the price, it appears it would have more buyers. A lighter weight might make it more appealing. The heavier armor looks to be what drove up the wieght.
Though I will say this. Retry stated he would rather have 2 vehicles. For the price he almost can.
|
Retry
02/03/14 11:02 PM
67.239.109.174
|
It's the weapon overload that is standard on weapon carriers. Based on his ludricous design specifications I just could not fit a fuel cell without sizing it up or losing the armor entirely. But doing so still makes the design cost a lot less.
I can make it much smaller by using only two or three RACs, but he just won't budge. It's really a stupid design decision on his part.
|
His_Most_Royal_Highass_Donkey
02/04/14 12:36 AM
172.56.15.163
|
Retry your tank is way over weight. I came up with 102.75 tons
Why argue if the glass is half full or half empty, when you know someone is going to knock it over and spill it anyways.
I was a Major *pain* before
But I got a promotion.
I am now a General *pain*
Yay for promotions!!!
|
Retry
02/04/14 12:41 AM
67.239.109.174
|
That's not what I calculated at all.
|
His_Most_Royal_Highass_Donkey
02/04/14 12:41 AM
172.56.15.163
|
Oops I forgot the turret. make that 106.75 tons
Why argue if the glass is half full or half empty, when you know someone is going to knock it over and spill it anyways.
I was a Major *pain* before
But I got a promotion.
I am now a General *pain*
Yay for promotions!!!
|
Retry
02/04/14 12:44 AM
67.239.109.174
|
By any chance are you adding any penalties for additional shielding like vehicle fusion engines? Those don't exist on FCEs.
|
His_Most_Royal_Highass_Donkey
02/04/14 12:47 AM
172.56.15.163
|
Fuel cell counts as an ICE aka is the double the weight of a standard fusion engine
Why argue if the glass is half full or half empty, when you know someone is going to knock it over and spill it anyways.
I was a Major *pain* before
But I got a promotion.
I am now a General *pain*
Yay for promotions!!!
|
Retry
02/04/14 12:48 AM
67.239.109.174
|
The program I use shows the vee only 5 tons overweight with a SFE, and 13 tons overweight with an ICE, and I am using neither. With all due respect, what are you talking about?
|
His_Most_Royal_Highass_Donkey
02/04/14 12:54 AM
172.56.15.163
|
What the heck is a SFE?
Why argue if the glass is half full or half empty, when you know someone is going to knock it over and spill it anyways.
I was a Major *pain* before
But I got a promotion.
I am now a General *pain*
Yay for promotions!!!
|
Retry
02/04/14 12:56 AM
67.239.109.174
|
Standard Fusion Engine. I at first thought you figured I was using a SFE and not a FCE. But it's even more than that far off.
|