Voting is open
I'm not saying we couldn't find a use for adorable little chibi monitors, and as @Lightwhispers points out the name alone is an excellent reason to build some. :p

But they're not going to be a substitute for expansion of our gunboat fleet. We'll still need to do that.

As to the safety issue, the big thing is that for the WWII Soviets, losing a few of these in storms wasn't as big a deal as it is to us. They had a lot more surplus industrial capacity to play with, and sustaining long-service professional crews was a less serious issue for them, whereas for us the veterancy and professionalism of our navy is one of the few areas where we have categorical superiority over our enemies.

So we probably don't want to play with gunboats that are likely to sink, which means we'd more or less have to restrict our chibi monitors to harbor patrol and river duty.

However. CHIBI MONITORS.
 
They could stop your foot from skidding off the deck, maybe?

They could be there so you have something to hang things off of, or to tie the boat to, or to tie things to the boat?
 
There is such a need for a generic patrol boat capable of steaming up and down the waterways without issue and engaging surface targets. Our current complement of vessels are very much river warships individually capable of a wide variety of missions. While that's not a bad thing it's not a capability we need from the entire fleet, the des Plaines class forms a good solid core, but where they are the sword we should have a dagger to complement it.

There's a lot of territory to cover and should we decide to expand our control of the rivers we're going to need the forces capable of keeping the rivers safe. While we certainly can build more des Plaines' (and we should) to do so, a class of river patrol craft capable of being fielded for less important tasks or, indeed, as support for our des Plaines would not be beyond merit. The question becomes what form such a craft would take and what we'd arm them with.

Something we can consider later once the subject becomes more relevant.
 
I think we have prepared and made the big strategic decisions as well as we could have realistically hope to do in our situation. There were things we could have done better if we had perfect information and we could be even luckier with the rolls but nothing can be done about that now. If we win, this battle will be won due to the failures of Lind's dogmatic military doctrines and our ruthless exploitation of those weaknesses. If we lose, it would be because we made a foolish mistake that needlessly wastes lives or allows the enemy to deploy unhindered, our multi-layered plans fell apart because one part of the plan failed and we needed all of the parts to work to succeed to avoid letting the enemy bleed us, or the numbers were simply too great and they overrun them before the supplies run out.

We defeated the eastern landing force due to several factors. We were able to deploy our navy to the battle because we secured the naval bases and coaling stations. We destroyed the proper Victorian navy (as weak as it was) in that lightning raid and forced them to move on the water with demoralized and inexperienced sailors. More importantly, we took the NCR deal and attacked the VAF when the enemy was loaded with AGMs as our navy attacked the supply ships. Had all these factors not come together, our air force and navy would be destroyed for no real effect. The enemy would have been able to land a second force or deploy their tanks. If that had happened, our eastern forces would have handily defeated perhaps even if the Big Red One had been deployed to the east. No one force can claim credit for this victory.

We now have a good but not perfect position to fight the southern force as we destroyed the eastern force completely and can focus on one front. However, the enemy air force can be deployed due to improved weather and we no longer have an effective air force. They still greatly outnumber us. The captured enemy officers might provide us with further information on the situation although they may say nothing or tell us lies to mislead us.
 
I think we have prepared and made the big strategic decisions as well as we could have realistically hope to do in our situation. There were things we could have done better if we had perfect information and we could be even luckier with the rolls but nothing can be done about that now. If we win, this battle will be won due to the failures of Lind's dogmatic military doctrines and our ruthless exploitation of those weaknesses.
To be fair, it would be almost unprecedented in the history of warfare for a force of four divisions with relatively primitive naval support and a hodgepodge of badly inferior aircraft to decisively defeat a force of fourteen divisions, two of them mechanized, with two or three times their number of more advanced aircraft.

The combination of Victorian brutality (making their main arms supplier hate them) and extremely flawed doctrine (crippling their naval and air arms) really has hamstrung their ability to fight what SHOULD have been a cakewalk campaign if one just counted up the assets in each side's order of battle.

We defeated the eastern landing force due to several factors. We were able to deploy our navy to the battle because we secured the naval bases and coaling stations. We destroyed the proper Victorian navy (as weak as it was) in that lightning raid and forced them to move on the water with demoralized and inexperienced sailors. More importantly, we took the NCR deal and attacked the VAF when the enemy was loaded with AGMs as our navy attacked the supply ships. Had all these factors not come together, our air force and navy would be destroyed for no real effect. The enemy would have been able to land a second force or deploy their tanks. If that had happened, our eastern forces would have handily defeated perhaps even if the Big Red One had been deployed to the east. No one force can claim credit for this victory.
To be fair, I think that even with a bit less success on the die rolls, we'd have stood a chance. It turned out the Victorians were painfully short of air-to-ground munitions, to the point where they are now critically low- their air force shot its bolt in air to ground bombardment and our own air force sacrificed itself to ensure that bolt missed.

It's unclear to me how much damage the VAF could actually have inflicted, even if more of them had gotten through the Commonwealth Air Force attack. We might have lost gunboats and troops. Don't know if we'd have lost the whole fleet barring extreme disaster on our end, though.

We now have a good but not perfect position to fight the southern force as we destroyed the eastern force completely and can focus on one front. However, the enemy air force can be deployed due to improved weather and we no longer have an effective air force. They still greatly outnumber us. The captured enemy officers might provide us with further information on the situation although they may say nothing or tell us lies to mislead us.
As noted, they appear to be running critically low on munitions for aerial bombardment, so that's something, at least. Especially since their munitions are much less effective than they ought to be (they can't fire four Maverick antitank missiles and pot four tanks, in other words).
 
All right.
So just a heads up, but this one gets kind of gruesome. Like, a 3/10? Just, there's some blood, and some sanitized descriptions of the result of a fight.

Nouvelles Du Jour
Édition anglaise

String of Attacks Continue, 15 Dead
In the third such incident in as many weeks, a Victorian Occupation Outpost was assaulted! The facility, located in Saint Jean Sur Richelieu, reported power outages and communications interference at about 12:17 AM. Response by the Victorian invaders was slow, due to the heavy storms turning the roads to muck and ruin, and a belief that the interference was the result of the storm.

When the Victorians arrived, they found a scene of total carnage and destruction. Half a dozen bodies were located in main promenade, dead in various ways-- two with bullet wounds, one with lacerations to the throat from a small instrument, one strangled, and two others killed by what have been described as "sword wounds." Further inside the base, someone had brought down the ceiling of the garage on the armored vehicles, with the rest stolen or otherwise missing.

Inside the base's main hub, colonel William Cross-- leader of the boots on the ground in this part of Quebec-- and his general staff were all found dead. Here, it was a raw mix of gunfire and sword strokes-- shattered bullets and casings littered the ground like snow after a blizzard, so terrible had been the fighting. The number of attackers is unknown at this time, though rumors from the office of the investigators in charge of reviewing the security footage say five-to-seven.

In response, Victoria has sworn to crack down even harder, and take revenge for these slights. In particular, they have sent the Barbarian's Bane, Colonel Adair Ezekiel, to take control of the situation. He is famed and recieved much commendations for meritorious actions in Pennsylvania.

Hopefully, this merely represents an upswing in anti-Victorian activities, and not their apex, compared to the single men dead of earlier assaults.
--
White.

His skin, his hair, and his coat.

That was the color of Colonel Adair on the outside.

Immediately he turned his gaze towards the map of the area, his sycophants inside the office with him, as well as a handyman, fiddling with an air vent. It was stretched out on the opposite wall from his desk, with several areas outside the city marked in red. Farms. Supply depots for rebels and the worthless masses, too.

"Burn them. Loot the food and supplies. Kill those who resist."

His officers nodded and set out, single file, through the door, to see his will done. The last one, some blond brat, turned as he was walking out. "Do you want us to set a watch here, sir?"

"No. I'll not let these...French degenerates frighten me, and neither should you."

And with that, his staff parted to do his work.

Leaving only the colonel.

The Handyman.

And the revolver he was attempting to load inside the vent.

The colonel snagged his own pistol from his desk drawer, already loaded, and pointed it at the handyman-- an undescript fellow, but for his long hair, tied in a ponytail that fell past his waist. The colonel did not even rise from his thick, padded chair, an old style one, like something your grandfather might own.

"I suppose you figured you'd kill me now, then?"

The handyman said nothing, simply raised his hands in submission. "Wasn't quite the plan. I do the officers.

He does you."

At that exact moment, there was a sound like meat being skewered. The colonel looked down, and saw a curved piece of metal sticking through his heart. The shock meant it did not hurt-- yet-- and so he lightly touched the tip, already sticky and red.

A dark flower was beginning to bloom on his coat as his blood spread out.

Then he felt it.

He felt the burn of his heart, stabbed through with archaic-shaped steel. He felt his mind going dark at the edges, as the blood left and was not-- could not be-- replaced. He felt oozy, and breathless.

Then his killer pulled out the sword, and colonel Adair felt nothing again on this mortal coil.
--

So I had plans for doing something in Quebec about the Resistance as far back as June, but couldn't actually think of what to do.

Then I played through Assassin's Creed and decided that would be a good inspiration for it.
Non-canon, for the moment. Also, which Assassin's Creed?
Name: Sara Goldblum

Description: A lean, sharp-eyed woman in her mid-fifties, Goldblum is part of the very last generation of Americans to have anything resembling a normal childhood before the Collapse hit in full fury. She has a very long, bitter list of memories of everything that has been taken from her and hers. Her entire adult life has been an extended, organized, carefully planned exercise in militancy, in hopes of one day avenging everything on that list. It shows. Her hobbies include gallows humor and bomb design.

Biography: Born in Kenosha, Wisconsin in 2019, Sara graduated from high school shortly before the onslaught of the Wisconsin Nazis reached its peak, devastating her home. She herself was interned in their Oshkosh concentration camp, from which she escaped along with her confusingly named high school friend, Sara Johnson. Sara and Sara soon joined with an anti-fascist guerilla band, and not long thereafter became accepted into its leadership. From there, the formation of the Wisconsin Iron Brigade is a matter of history, as was the sequence of events by which Sara Johnson ultimately became de facto mayor of Chicago with Goldblum as one of her trusted military advisors.

Family: Sara's immediate family died in various sweeps, purges, and targeted killings by the Wisconsin Nazis. After the War on Nazis, she married fellow guerilla George Plains. Plains transitioned into socialist political organizing, publishing, and broadcast radio after the war. The couple had two daughters, Chaya and Layla. George died of tuberculosis in 2058.

Political Affiliation: American Leadership Party, one of the less-than-handful of delegates elected to the Chicago Convention on that platform. Consistently outspoken on defense issues, consistently willing to abstain on almost any contentious domestic policy issue that doesn't obviously relate to veterans' affairs and/or killing Victorians.
Added to the character index.
The talk about building up our navy has inspired me to write this up about what might be a Victorian view on naval warfare:
------
Naval 'Warfare' is, at its most basic, war for control over bodies of water, whether it be rivers, lakes, or whole oceans, on the assumption that controlling said bodies will give the combatants involved a critical advantage.

However, this is a naturally flawed assumption. Humans cannot farm in the water. Humans cannot live in the water. Ultimately, any war will be decided on the land, an area where ships, being unable to leave the water, are useless in, and their ability to shell the coastline is easily countered by simply moving further inland. Every man trained as a sailor is one less that can be trained as a rifleman, every scrap of metal used to build a ship could have been better served equipping soldiers on solid ground. Every resource dedicated to supporting a naval war is a resource wasted, as now there is less to fight the real battles.

Every major war of the 20th Century has reinforced this fact, the two World Wars being the most obvious examples. In the first, the navy of Germany was tremendously outgunned by that of Great Britain alone, even before adding the French Navy into the equation. And yet, the conflict in the west was fought on French, not German soil. In the Second World War, the naval disparity between Germany and its opponents was even greater, and Germany saw correspondingly greater gains, outright conquering France and bringing almost all of Europe under its control. The focus on naval warfare that the enemies of Germany suffered from saw them face defeat after defeat, and it was only through internal sabotage and overwhelming numbers that they were able to triumph over a more skilled and more efficient German military.

Our Communist opponents have made the same fatal error as the western Allies did in past conflicts. They have invested far too much into their Navy, leaving their army pathetically outnumbered, undertrained, and outdated in its thinking. The only word that can accurately describe what will happen when this embarrassment of an army meets our Fourth-Generation War experts is "slaughter."
------
"Preparing to fight a naval war means you do worse everywhere else! Us sucking at it is proof of how good we are at the real fighting!"

I was thinking about adding something about the Vietnam War ("America had an infinitely better Navy than North Vietnam, and still lost"), but decided to just focus on Victoria's Germany fetish.
Canon.

FINALLY CAUGHT UP. CHRIST Y'ALL POST FAST.
 
It's unclear to me how much damage the VAF could actually have inflicted, even if more of them had gotten through the Commonwealth Air Force attack. We might have lost gunboats and troops. Don't know if we'd have lost the whole fleet barring extreme disaster on our end, though.
We'd have lost the entire fleet.
A Slammer has a 500kg warhead, enough to kill modern destroyers, let alone 400 ton gunboats.

They had over a hundred planes in the air.
If even a single squadron had launched air to surface missiles, and only achieved a 50% hit rate, every Commonwealth ship would be dead and the Vics would be able to resupply with impunity.
 
We'd have lost the entire fleet.
A Slammer has a 500kg warhead, enough to kill modern destroyers, let alone 400 ton gunboats.

They had over a hundred planes in the air.
If even a single squadron had launched air to surface missiles, and only achieved a 50% hit rate, every Commonwealth ship would be dead and the Vics would be able to resupply with impunity.
You may have forgotten that the Victorians fired missiles at our gunboats during the retreat from the Buffalo raid. They did some damage, but not a lot, and didn't sink anything.

Their hit rate is decidedly less than 50%. :p
 
Last edited:
Yeah, we really owe the NCR one for the sabotage.

Still, in the next phase Vic air force is going to finally pose a real threat, even with some AA in the army units. We don't have one of our own to hold them back anymore and I bet they've figured out they've been sabotaged by now or will soon.
 
Yeah, we really owe the NCR one for the sabotage.

Still, in the next phase Vic air force is going to finally pose a real threat, even with some AA in the army units. We don't have one of our own to hold them back anymore and I bet they've figured out they've been sabotaged by now or will soon.
Maybe. On the other hand, their entire military doctrine revolves around aircraft being fairly ineffectual, the official party line is that airstrikes are ineffectual, and honestly so far their performance has been pretty consistent with "Vietnam rules," in which air to air missiles had about a 10% kill rate and planes regularly said "fuckit" and went in to engage each other with guns.

I'm pretty sure that's where most of the kills against our air force actually come from. The Californians seem to have done a great job sabotaging Victorian munitions, which was important because it's the easiest kind of sabotage to conceal (along with intentionally fucking up software which is just cruel to do to a bunch of Viks... :drevil: ). But they can only have done so much to sabotage the bulk performance parameters of the airframe (speed, engine power, etc.) without it being immediately obvious to anyone who tried to fly those planes.

I suspect that Victorian fighters are, thanks to the sabotage, almost entirely ineffectual when engaging with missiles... but still mostly effective when engaging with their autocannon. And since, quite frankly, they outnumbered our planes 2:1 and the F-16 is far, far more capable in a dogfight than the planes we had up in the air... that would have been enough.

...

Then there's the question of what the Viks even intend to DO about being sabotaged, even if they figure it out. Their antitank and antiship missiles are borked, and worse yet they're pretty much out of it. They don't have training or equipment to do the obvious thing and just pelt us with dumb bombs and rocket pods, because they never supplied the VAF with such weapons. They're down to strafing us at this point.

And as they learned after Buffalo, where we shot down five of their jets in exchange for damage to four gunboats, having to come in close and strafe means that they're maximally vulnerable to our return AA fire, since AA guns can actually engage them meaningfully when they do that. And they don't have a lot of training in defense suppression or evading defenses.
 
In fact, question for the thread. What is strafing altitude for an F-16? The Vee is technologically simplified and a bit lighter than base, if that matters.
 
Cursory glance suggests... Pretty goddamn high.
 
In fact, question for the thread. What is strafing altitude for an F-16? The Vee is technologically simplified and a bit lighter than base, if that matters.
Not sure, but a (very) quick search about F-16s and strafing seem to involve a quite a few examples of crashing into the ground. Apparently strafing for F-16s is labeled as "very risky." But again, this is just a very quick glance.

Edit: Huh. This is from Wikipedia, so I'm not wholly sure of how reliable it is, but here's an interesting bit:
The F-16 is the first production fighter aircraft intentionally designed to be slightly aerodynamically unstable, also known as "relaxed static stability" (RSS), to improve maneuverability.[71] Most aircraft are designed with positive static stability, which induces aircraft to return to straight and level flight attitude if the pilot releases the controls; this reduces maneuverability as the inherent stability has to be overcome. Aircraft with negative stability are designed to deviate from controlled flight and thus be more maneuverable. At supersonic speeds the F-16 gains stability (eventually positive) due to aerodynamic changes.[72][73]
To counter the tendency to depart from controlled flight—and avoid the need for constant trim inputs by the pilot, the F-16 has a quadruplex (four-channel) fly-by-wire (FBW) flight control system (FLCS). The flight control computer (FLCC) accepts pilot input from the stick and rudder controls, and manipulates the control surfaces in such a way as to produce the desired result without inducing control loss. The FLCC conducts thousands of measurements per second on the aircraft's flight attitude to automatically counter deviations from the pilot-set flight path; leading to a common aphorism among pilots: "You don't fly an F-16; it flies you."[74]
I'm not any sort of expert (or even enthusiastic novice) on aircraft, but if the Victory Falcon has less electronics, then it might not have the flight control system, which means it's even more unstable. That in turn might make the Falcon very unsuited to strafing runs.
 
Last edited:
So, as kind of an economic side note, we do have a severe lack of... anything that makes decent steel that's not a nickel. And this kind of leads to multiple issues in terms of production of good quality steels. And along with issues with fuel sources that further cause a lot of industrial disruption, but fortunately, we have two things that sorta help with that.

In terms of fuel, we do have 1/5 of the total US LNG deposits right under us, and a lot of very heavy oil. While it would be fairly painful to process the oil into useable lighter fuels, we will have bitumen, lubricants, and a bit of diesel. Plus, we can crack it down for more to help augment the fuel supply since that would give us a larger diesel fraction. And as long as we don't need to make kerosine from it, it's not too energy intensive. And with LNG we have so much of it right under us and with just a bit of fracking. We can have enough to convert most civilian vehicles to run on it at a reasonable cost. Or at least, most of the new vehicles that we make. This, however, needs decent steels to make pressure tanks hard enough to store compressed natural gas.

Fortunately, there is one kind of steel that can come in and save the day. And that is Boron Steel as its not a terrible tool steel and can be hardened well, and is probably the best substitute we have for not having vanadium/chromium to manufacture better steel. All we need is to secure the Borax deposits near lake superior and then to exploit them or trade for them. And it would just take a minimal amount of borax and steel mill changes to make decent steel with good high-temperature properties. Allowing us to start matching 70's tool steels in hardness, and far exceeding them in high-temperature performance.
 
I am going to vote against any further use of Old World Equipment in this battle unless there is a VERY compelling reason to break it out.

(We have five uses total, right? Four, now.) I hope to reverse-engineer some of it eventually, for one thing.

...The Old World Equipment is, like, Javelin missiles, drone-in-an-artillery-shell, APFSDS cannon rounds, that kind of thing, right? Just trying to get a picture.
 
Last edited:
In fact, question for the thread. What is strafing altitude for an F-16?
It depends. How badly do you want to hit what you're aiming at, and how hard do you want to hit it?

You can fire the plane's 20mm Gatling cannon while in level flight a mile off the ground, and those cannon rounds will come down eventually. Somewhere. Congratulations, you have "strafed" the "target." But you almost certainly didn't hit what you were theoretically supposed to be aiming at, assuming you even saw it.

Conversely, you can at treetop level and line up a burst that walks along the ground right into the target. You will assuredly hit the target, assuming you don't suck a tree branch or eight into your jet intake and crash before reaching it. Or get riddled with bullets as everyone with anything bigger than a rifle opens up in your general direction. And be cautioned, the thing you hit the target with may be your own plane. Or you may overfly it and get "shot down" by debris or ricochets bouncing up and hitting your plane.

There's a happy medium, of course.

...

Alright Zoomies, How Do You Shoot Yourself In An F-16 - AR15.COM

Firearm Discussion and Resources from AR-15, AK-47, Handguns and more! Buy, Sell, and Trade your Firearms and Gear.

A comment in the link indicates starting the strafing from one to 1.5 miles out, at a downward angle of 5 to 25 degrees. That would imply a maximum altitude of 3000 feet (if one is diving fairly sharply and opening up from extreme range) and a minimum altitude of about 450 feet (if one is descending at a very shallow angle and opening up from close range).

Not sure, but a (very) quick search about F-16s and strafing seem to involve a quite a few examples of crashing into the ground. Apparently strafing for F-16s is labeled as "very risky." But again, this is just a very quick glance.

Edit: Huh. This is from Wikipedia, so I'm not wholly sure of how reliable it is, but here's an interesting bit:

I'm not any sort of expert (or even enthusiastic novice) on aircraft, but if the Victory Falcon has less electronics, then it might not have the flight control system, which means it's even more unstable. That in turn might make the Falcon very unsuited to strafing runs.
The Falcon isn't just difficult to fly without the flight control system, it's unflyable. That's kind of the point- it gains maneuverability superior to almost any other plane (including most of ours in the recent air battle), at the price of being unable to fly without computer control. Ironic to see the Victorians use it, but there it is.

So yeah, I don't think we can plausibly assume that the F-16V doesn't have a flight control computer. If it didn't, the Viks wouldn't be able to fly the things at all.

So, as kind of an economic side note, we do have a severe lack of... anything that makes decent steel that's not a nickel. And this kind of leads to multiple issues in terms of production of good quality steels. And along with issues with fuel sources that further cause a lot of industrial disruption, but fortunately, we have two things that sorta help with that.

In terms of fuel, we do have 1/5 of the total US LNG deposits right under us, and a lot of very heavy oil. While it would be fairly painful to process the oil into useable lighter fuels, we will have bitumen, lubricants, and a bit of diesel. Plus, we can crack it down for more to help augment the fuel supply since that would give us a larger diesel fraction. And as long as we don't need to make kerosine from it, it's not too energy intensive. And with LNG we have so much of it right under us and with just a bit of fracking. We can have enough to convert most civilian vehicles to run on it at a reasonable cost. Or at least, most of the new vehicles that we make. This, however, needs decent steels to make pressure tanks hard enough to store compressed natural gas.

Fortunately, there is one kind of steel that can come in and save the day. And that is Boron Steel as its not a terrible tool steel and can be hardened well, and is probably the best substitute we have for not having vanadium/chromium to manufacture better steel. All we need is to secure the Borax deposits near lake superior and then to exploit them or trade for them. And it would just take a minimal amount of borax and steel mill changes to make decent steel with good high-temperature properties. Allowing us to start matching 70's tool steels in hardness, and far exceeding them in high-temperature performance.
Good post is good.

I am going to vote against any further use of Old World Equipment in this battle unless there is a VERY compelling reason to break it out.
We are very likely to need to break it out to engage the CMC mechanized division. They're going to be tough and well-equipped, and also likely to be willing to take very heavy losses before breaking. If we don't want them to make headway, we may have to break out the big guns on them.

Similar issues apply to the Savior Division's tanks, in that they have the potential to slam through our lines by sheer numbers of armored vehicles, then cut off the retreat of our infantry. It's harder to stage an effective delaying action against a bulletproof opponent, especially one with big fat tank tracks to go off-road.

I'm hoping to get through this campaign without using Old World Equipment more than one or two more times, but I don't think it's realistic to expect us not to need it again.

(We have five uses total, right? Four, now.) I hope to reverse-engineer some of it eventually, for one thing.

...The Old World Equipment is, like, Javelin missiles, drone-in-an-artillery-shell, APFSDS cannon rounds, that kind of thing, right? Just trying to get a picture.
The problem with reverse-engineering a lot of that stuff is that it requires manufacturing technology we simply don't have (like 2000-vintage semiconductor fabricator plants), or access to rare materials we don't have (like uranium).

I doubt we're going to be able to duplicate it faster than we can convince someone else to sell us kit of comparable quality.
 
The Falcon isn't just difficult to fly without the flight control system, it's unflyable. That's kind of the point- it gains maneuverability superior to almost any other plane (including most of ours in the recent air battle), at the price of being unable to fly without computer control. Ironic to see the Victorians use it, but there it is.

So yeah, I don't think we can plausibly assume that the F-16V doesn't have a flight control computer. If it didn't, the Viks wouldn't be able to fly the things at all.

huh, so if cali got really clever and did somethign sneaky with the software, they might be able send a signal and have the last few flights of f16's they sold to the vics fall out of the sky. Assuming it would be easy to program the computer to wipe itself/turn off if it receives a signal.
 
Last edited:
The Falcon isn't just difficult to fly without the flight control system, it's unflyable. That's kind of the point- it gains maneuverability superior to almost any other plane (including most of ours in the recent air battle), at the price of being unable to fly without computer control. Ironic to see the Victorians use it, but there it is.

So yeah, I don't think we can plausibly assume that the F-16V doesn't have a flight control computer. If it didn't, the Viks wouldn't be able to fly the things at all.
I guess this would be another reason the rest of the Victorian Army tries not to think about the Air Force that much.

We are very likely to need to break it out to engage the CMC mechanized division. They're going to be tough and well-equipped, and also likely to be willing to take very heavy losses before breaking. If we don't want them to make headway, we may have to break out the big guns on them.

Similar issues apply to the Savior Division's tanks, in that they have the potential to slam through our lines by sheer numbers of armored vehicles, then cut off the retreat of our infantry. It's harder to stage an effective delaying action against a bulletproof opponent, especially one with big fat tank tracks to go off-road.

I'm hoping to get through this campaign without using Old World Equipment more than one or two more times, but I don't think it's realistic to expect us not to need it again.
Well, the whole minelaying thing had, aside from delaying them, a thing about hopefully costing them armored vehicles, so with a 3v1 roll and an overall difference of 3, I'm hoping that at least some of the Savior Division's tanks got totaled. But yeah, I fully expect to use another OWE shot for this battle.

Speaking of which, what role do you see the Big Red One (mostly Devil Brigade with OWE) doing at the first line? I was wondering if something like having them prevent any Victorian fording attempts away from Monroe might be worth it (particularly worried about the CMC division trying something like this.) Forcing the Victorians to slog through Monroe (which is said to be one of the best places to fight a defense battle) seems like a good way to grind them down and maybe break their Fanaticism.

huh, so if cali got really clever and did somethign sneaky with the software, they might be able send a signal and have the last few flights of f16's they sold to the vics fall out of the sky.
Well, Poptart did just say this on Discord about that:
That said, yes, you expect the NCR's sabotage to be kicking into high gear...now-ish.
 
Last edited:
In fact, question for the thread. What is strafing altitude for an F-16? The Vee is technologically simplified and a bit lighter than base, if that matters.

High angle strafe for the F16 starts at 8000 feet above ground level.
Low angle strafe starts around 3000-5000 feet above ground level.

Recommended minimum height for pullout according to USAF doctrine is 1000 feet.
It used to be 500 feet, then a pilot crashed in Iraq.
Some pilots still get as low as 200 feet.
 
While letting a mechanized or armored division wreak havoc would be bad news, we've done surprisingly well for ourselves so far and we can well afford to give up a lot of ground, and the OWE is an irreplaceable trump card. We cannot buy more of it at any cost.

Thus the best use for it, in my opinion, is held in reserve for until we NEED it for something critical, to stop a massive disaster or break open the enemy lines at a critical moment in a long campaign. Wait until we absolutely NEED to wallop the Russians advancing on Chicago Right Now. Or We NEED to smack around whoever has that nuke we passed up in nation creation before they get ideas about setting it off, Right Now.

Eh, but that's just my opinion. I guess we'll see how things go.
 
I am going to vote against any further use of Old World Equipment in this battle unless there is a VERY compelling reason to break it out.

(We have five uses total, right? Four, now.) I hope to reverse-engineer some of it eventually, for one thing.

...The Old World Equipment is, like, Javelin missiles, drone-in-an-artillery-shell, APFSDS cannon rounds, that kind of thing, right? Just trying to get a picture.
Among other things. Abrams tanks, for one. Strykers. M4 carbines. In this particular instance, everything the Devil Brigade in particular would need to fill its order of battle.
 
While letting a mechanized or armored division wreak havoc would be bad news, we've done surprisingly well for ourselves so far and we can well afford to give up a lot of ground, and the OWE is an irreplaceable trump card. We cannot buy more of it at any cost.

Thus the best use for it, in my opinion, is held in reserve for until we NEED it for something critical, to stop a massive disaster or break open the enemy lines at a critical moment in a long campaign. Wait until we absolutely NEED to wallop the Russians advancing on Chicago Right Now. Or We NEED to smack around whoever has that nuke we passed up in nation creation before they get ideas about setting it off, Right Now.

Eh, but that's just my opinion. I guess we'll see how things go.
OWE is a depreciating asset.
The better our army gets, the more industrial production we have, the more foreign trade we engage in, the less we need it.
What it buys us is time to get our affairs in order.

Spending all 5 to shatter the current Victorian army like glass and buy us half a decade would frankly be a bargain at the price
 
Voting is open
Back
Top