- Pronouns
- Reader
It isn't. We get them back back as base starcrystals they cost in the first place which enter our exotics stock.
Turn 3.
Turn 4, after refitting 30 assault ketch and making 2 star anvils.
Last edited:
A Different Breed (Warhammer 29K)
- Location
- Dragyxx
- Pronouns
- He/Him/His
Not sure about tank adjacent just yet.
But on the other hand, upgrading from 'pickup truck' to 'Humvee' is still a pretty good step. The thing still has those glaring engine weakpoints (though someone at least put a grill on the front of them so they don't blow up from sucking in debris) that stop it from truly being a proper armored vehicle, but is now at least properly serviceable as a light combat vehicle instead of a ramshackle technical.
Humvees at least do have a place on the battlefield, even if it isn't as a main battle tank.
Last edited:
Hmm.
No stabilization and one point of maneuverability looks very painful for a SPG; without a bunch of at least one of the two it both needs to start and stop frequently to be able to fire accurately, and is slow about starting and stopping. And taking the Starlight and only one engine seems like a waste.
Since adding defensive systems and weapon systems in after the chassis step is going to bloat the price regardless, I'd say bite the bullet on another engine or two, maybe one each payload and speed, letting you take three points out of Strength to put into Stability and Maneuver. Yes, it's more expensive, but the moment we've decided to go for a flexible hull we're accepting spending more EP in return for less time and AP designing chassis; follow that logic to completion and don't get stuck trying to compete with the specialists on cost.
Nice catch. I totally missed that.
IIRC, the math works out such that we're getting ~400 Starcrystal back per refit, but the difference in prices is 450.
I don't recall if any of the refits were of ships with guns so totally scrapped they were unrecoverable, but there's certainly some element that's keeping us from recovering the full price of the cost to produce.
Medium armor is again though, tank armor. So, we're not looking at a thin skinned vehicle, but a rather...well, a Tank Destroyer or maybe an AA gun, or IFV, but not a general purpose APC or a high-speed rocket-artillery piece, or a scout tank...
Well, I did just do this hilarious little design for a light tank, if you'd like to see it.
Light Tank Model:
Light Chassis (10 Slots base)
-Fully External Plasma Turbine (-0 slots, 8 EP/engine)
-Enhance Speed (+1 engine, total 2)
--Speedx3
--Maneuveringx2
-Basic Armor Light
-Enhanced Armor : Engine Assembly +3 EP
-Crew Spaces : Basic Pods
-Defense System : Holo-Field (-2 slots, +16 EP)
-Vehicle Weapon Slot (-6 slots)
2 slots free, 40 EP+base chasis fees, and a single vehicular weapons slot that could take a Fusion Lance to do Melta things up close and friendly to whoever you just bumrushed with all that speed I threw on this little scout-tank.
With how much of an investment each heavy or superheavy vehicle would be relative to lighter vehicles (SH weapons tend to cost several times as much as vehicle weapons) we should take a crack at doing both first to see what our options are before we pigeon-hole either into a specific role.
Designing a chassis is 2WAP apiece while designing a ship hull is 5WAP so we could do 2 different chassis for less than designing a single hull.
We've probably got 10 WAP for next turn (likely -2 from designing a new clean sheet chassis since that may take more than 1 turn) and no urgent military commitments or expansion plans since we seem to still be ramping up wargear production.
Depending on whether it'll be done next turn there's potentially "Commission Strike Craft" since we just started a new iteration of our strike craft chassis and "Commission Vehicle(s)" probably has 2 candidates since we just started a new iteration of our light grav-tank chassis and jetbike which would be 3 WAP in total.
There's also designing a new heavy capital ship so we can get some active defenses onto our Combat Brig which would be 3 WAP.
Our BAP is pretty tied up right now so it's debatable as to whether we'd even be able to start any ship refits but getting the design work out of the way while our WAP isn't tied down with reorganizing our forces sounds like a good idea.
If all those options mentioned above end up being picked we'd still have another 4 WAP which would be just enough for 2 "Chassis Militization" actions.
Main drawback would be that we'd be potentially locking out 6 WAP for a few turns if the new clean sheet chassis we designed this turn takes more than 2 turns to complete.
Last edited:
- Pronouns
- Reader
Some of that is the star anvils and some starblaster carbines cost I think. Either @Mechanis may have made a math error because whichever way you shake it the exotics costs don't quite add up, or there is some cost to repairing disabled heavy starlance weapon battery that we aren't accounting for. Some clarification is probably needed.
I think having seen the options available to iterant designs of vehicles, it's worthwhile getting an iterant of the brigantine. Between 1700 starcrystals and 360 fatesever, as well as possible anti-boarder options, it's worth the investment.
Alectai
Speaks Words of Wisdom... On occasion
Yeah, I absolutely think we should do a Brig version first so we can start refitting our damaged ones rather than letting them just hang out in our hangar doing nothing.
We also still need to get a walker design at some point to see how they work.
On that note, for next turn we've got 2 BAP potentially locked into Power Distributers (No ETA), 2 locked into allied fleet repairs and refits (still several turns), and potentially 1 BAP in Seer Circle construction (might not be a 1 turn clear) so we're looking at 15 BAP at most, 14 BAP at the mid end, or 11 BAP at worst depending on whether some of those listed projects finish or not.
Since we're likely to be designing a new strike craft next turn I'd say we're going to want to allocate 2 BAP into Missile Launchers but one BAP related tech that I'm really interested in is Superheavy Las-weapons since that unlocks Turbo-laser Destructors.
If we could integrate the capabilities of Turbo-Laser Destructors to our Starlance weapons it could potentially lead to a significant increase in the lethality of naval Starlance batteries for any ship where we've got a bunch of them since unlike Lances which are a collection of small beam emitters producing a coherent beam the Starlance is a singular emitter.
Edit:
For reference Turbo-laser destructors are described like this:
Integrating the capabilities of Turbo-laser destructors would allow for a greater deal of flexibility for naval grade Starlances as they could alternate between a steady stream of fire for lots of weaker targets or opt for simultaneous blasts for tougher targets.
This would be most helpful for something like the Starcaster which should benefit greatly from not overkilling smaller ships with their practically unmatched range and power (only competitors so far are custom built superweapons like that moon-piercing gun on Grimtusk's flagship).
Last edited:
- Pronouns
- Reader
The fata Morgana will absolutely take more than one turn. I don't think we are likely have any major warhost battles in this half of the current century that would necessitate a rush of our chassis design, but we'll absolutely end up needing a combat brig that isn't a glass cannon within 10 turns. Best to just get on it so we can have at least a trio ready.
I think between the cruiser and light cruiser being done, and the combat brig delayed until we have an iterant model of the brigantine hull, we can afford to put super heavy Las weapons off for several turns.
Now the news about bonesinger is a fair bit worse than that. On top of power distribution assuming that is a lock in, and continue ship repairs, we also have Quilan's next batch of refits for 2 BAP, and we intend to enter diplomacy this turn with Stel-Uit to fix there fleets as part of bringing them into our alliance, which likely means another 2 BAP to start their repairs. So, possibly as little as 8 BAP.
Now, I know it's tempting to develope missiles and rushing into a strike craft design, but we just finished spending 4 BAP on development options and none on forges or foundries, and we have two turns until haywire bombs finish, so let's put things off until turn 7 when we are guaranteed 3 more BAP just from the lack of refits or ship repairs to start. Then we'll have both technologies turn 8 and can do design.
F0lkL0re
Officially not an Inquisitor
- Location
- Shetland
Oh I'm not saying don't do the brig I'm just saying that if the time to completion for the iterations is separate from the Fata Morgana then doing another round of iterations to cover the other chassis could be a good idea.
EDIT: sorry for not being clear
Last edited:
Don't forget we just took
this turn.
There's a good chance we'll be spending a lot of WAP on this over the coming turns.
Though also a good chance we'll be getting a lot more WAP back from it, too.
Last edited:
The slight issue I have with this design is that given how outnumbered we've been told that we are, and what that means about the volume of fire that's floating around the battlefield, I'd probably want to have the up-armoured crew compartment on a transport, just to increase survivability. A transport can easily be carrying a couple of hundred points of people's gear, plus the value of the people, and spending 8 points to increase their survivability is worth it.
I'm a lot less confident that training field officers would help generate WAP.
Warrior AP seems to be much more about things that a Ministry of Defence would do, not what a General Staff or officer core would do.
Having company commanders and up doesn't seem like it would make you any more capable of designing city sized voidships, integrating experimental technologies into a vehicle chassis, or many of the other options on the Warrior AP list.
Assuming we can easily increase WAP (and don't need something like more Shards of Khaine to upgrade the shrine), I think expanding the military bureaucracy is the kind of thing we'd need to spend Steward AP on when we've sorted out our government.
It depends when we think we'll have the production capacity to efficiently build foundries for them.
We're probably better off going straight to clean sheet designs if we think that our Bonesingers will be busy on other projects and building Forges/Foundries for existing equipment for long enough.
Last edited:
- Pronouns
- Reader
this is essentially setting up training on the various aspects of war, including logistics, so you can see how that might make WAP go up from improved efficiency in the use of the new facilities that are the source of their additional BAP, which they have had for fewer than 5 years at the start of turn 5.
this is accurate regrettably. our iteration designs last turn targeted our most numerous in existing models chassis. further focus on that area probably isn't wise. neither is rushing into another chassis militarization while we still have to design vehicles which use the iteration chassis to make foundries for them.
What we've got left are speeders, heavy jetbikes, and grav barges.
I don't believe doing anything with the grav barges is worthwhile; I'm pretty sure we can't remove "open topped" through iteration, and while I'll tolerate open topped on a long range artillery platform, grav barges aren't going to ever mount superheavy guns, so they're at best short ranged artillery.
Speeders we just don't have that much investment in. We could probably use a decent light tank, but we've seen that Iteration can't make up for certain critical weaknesses of our technicals, so we certainly shouldn't get that light tank through iteration of a technical.
Lastly we've got Heavy Jetbikes. We've actually got a decent chunk of EP in these, though a lot of that is the ~55 EP in exotic weapons each that I assume we wouldn't be planning on keeping. Jetbikes are also a vehicle type that doesn't suffer that much from being airbreathing and having an exposed engine, their crew is too heavily exposed to spend resources covering up the other weakpoints. But with our new Iterated Jetbike having a heavy mount, I don't think we've got a role planned for an iterated version of the Heavy Jetbike.
(For a newbuild Heavy Jetbike, I could see making a Jetbike that's actually capable of carrying Ithilmar. Maybe with a hands-free control system so both riders can fire personally carried heavy weapons. But we're not doing that with an iteration.)
It's possible, I suppose, but I don't personally expect knowing how to train generals will give us any more capacity to design new models of voidcraft, for example.
At best I'd expect that project to eventually unlock projects that are like Foundries but for officers and specific troop types, academies basically, although I'd expect even that to come after a period when we have to recruit officers manually, similarly to how we recruit Battle Psykers with Seer AP at the moment, reflecting us building up experience in how it works.
And super-heavies.