Nation Building 2028 A World of Strife (Modern)

[Spacekitty]

Have tried, problem is that it's a Google doc.

that's perfect. Littersly just paste the URL and we can click on it. Male sure you set it so that we cam view it

 

[JB5899]

that's perfect. Littersly just paste the URL and we can click on it. Male sure you set it so that we cam view it

Shhhh bob stop ruining my credibility as a mod.
Of course I knew to do that! Pfft!

 

[lcomstock4]

Make a second Doc we need one just for mod stuff

 

[lcomstock4]

ah
ehhh AKs are better in my opinion. Sexy, powerful and reliable. Not as accurate as they shoot 7.62 BUT they are fairly good even still.


Imagine an AK that shot 5.62 (whatever it is). That would be accurate, reliable and sexy! But not as powerful.


There should be an intermittent round. Like a 6.62...

The AK is not inaccurate because of the 7.62 but because of the design of the rifle. The AR-10 uses a .308 (7.62) but is extremely accurate. The AK was designed for Unskilled troops. The Soviet conscripted army who many didn't even speak Russian. The modern AR is very reliable. The reason the AK is so reliable is that it is simple which makes accuracy a challenge

 

[AdmiralKerkov]

Too add on the Nazi thing, I honestly don't think you are, but the axis and allies thing does not help, and kind of makes it seem like your heading towards it.

 

[Serenade]

But all of our numbers are from 2015 though, so my military Is still fairly modernized. Unless some people already made wondern weapons.

 

[High Moon]

We are going towards a Balkan war III

 

[Lordvader59]

No, because international alliances are involved now. A third Balkan War will become a third World War.

 

[Serenade]

Don't kill me bc I'm late in just catching up and while you do use the 2a6 there are less than 150 in service with most of your tanks being 2a4s and the MiG-29 was introduced in the 1980s so modernized for 2015? Fairly. But for 2031? Not so much.

I have 170 Leopard 2A6s in service not a big difference but . Most of my tanks are T-72s and such, but I now field more then a 1000 M84ASs which has been compared to the T-90. I also have the F-16 in service with the Greeks. I have M4 carbines if that helps anything.

 

[Spacekitty]

The AK is not inaccurate because of the 7.62 but because of the design of the rifle. The AR-10 uses a .308 (7.62) but is extremely accurate. The AK was designed for Unskilled troops. The Soviet conscripted army who many didn't even speak Russian. The modern AR is very reliable. The reason the AK is so reliable is that it is simple which makes accuracy a challenge

hm


I need to order some ARs...


no I want AR-11s! New gun!

 

[Shireling]

I chose the name "Axis" because it sounds cool. No other reason. In hindsight, I should've chosen "Nexus" or something of the sort.


Anyways, I had a revised idea for the floating fortress. Instead of a massive battleship, it should be a little over WWII-battleship sized, so pretty big for a warship, and designed not only to function as an anti-ship warship, capital ship, and VTOL carrier, but also be able to submerge.

 

[Spacekitty]

I chose the name "Axis" because it sounds cool. No other reason. In hindsight, I should've chosen "Nexus" or something of the sort.
Anyways, I had a revised idea for the floating fortress. Instead of a massive battleship, it should be a little over WWII-battleship sized, so pretty big for a warship, and designed not only to function as an anti-ship warship, capital ship, and VTOL carrier, but also be able to submerge.

Better.


Big "super ships" (Bigger than like the bismark and stuff" are too big and therefore are easy targets

 

[Shireling]

Better.
Big "super ships" (Bigger than like the bismark and stuff" are too big and therefore are easy targets

Well it also functions as an aircraft carrier, not just a ship-killer. Hence why its so big.

 

[Spacekitty]

Well it also functions as an aircraft carrier, not just a ship-killer. Hence why its so big.

I don't think it would be effective as a ship killer unless it had advanced guns. A good carrier is big enough for just the airplane.s Add some turrets on it and its HUGE

 

[Serenade]

I chose the name "Axis" because it sounds cool. No other reason. In hindsight, I should've chosen "Nexus" or something of the sort.
Anyways, I had a revised idea for the floating fortress. Instead of a massive battleship, it should be a little over WWII-battleship sized, so pretty big for a warship, and designed not only to function as an anti-ship warship, capital ship, and VTOL carrier, but also be able to submerge.

Entente!

 

[Shireling]

I don't think it would be effective as a ship killer unless it had advanced guns. A good carrier is big enough for just the airplane.s Add some turrets on it and its HUGE

The design I had in mind is a low superstructure and an overall submarine-shaped design. Instead of a flight deck, it would have an interior hangar that the door opened out of the prow, but it would mostly be designed for VTOL craft like helicopters and Harrier jets considering trying to land a conventional jet inside a closed hangar is like an accident waiting to happen. It would have heavy armor, maybe two or three railguns that could pop out from the deck, various lasers and microcannons for point-defense, depth-charges for use against submarines while above water, then all of it fold up and the ship be able to submerge like a submarine. The largest threat is probably aircraft and submarines, because it still wouldn't be specialized for submarine warfare, just able to submerge to avoid enemy fire. A regular sub would eat its lunch. But with escorts, a viable, self-defending capital ship.

 

[Spacekitty]

The design I had in mind is a low superstructure and an overall submarine-shaped design. Instead of a flight deck, it would have an interior hangar that the door opened out of the prow, but it would mostly be designed for VTOL craft like helicopters and Harrier jets considering trying to land a conventional jet inside a closed hangar is like an accident waiting to happen. It would have heavy armor, maybe two or three railguns that could pop out from the deck, various lasers and microcannons for point-defense, depth-charges for use against submarines while above water, then all of it fold up and the ship be able to submerge like a submarine. The largest threat is probably aircraft and submarines, because it still wouldn't be specialized for submarine warfare, just able to submerge to avoid enemy fire. A regular sub would eat its lunch. But with escorts, a viable, self-defending capital ship.

VTOL would work well.


France doesn't have Railguns yet tho

 

[Spacekitty]

I like how Poland or whoever isn't trying tio make rail gun cannons. No no that's too main stream


THERE MAKING RAIL GUN SMALL ARMS


Because they totally have the tech

 

[Serenade]

I like how Poland or whoever isn't trying tio make rail gun cannons. No no that's too main stream
THERE MAKING RAIL GUN SMALL ARMS


Because they totally have the tech

That was me. Yugoslavia had two railgun designs already, I'm using those as my base, railgun cannons I think are only suitable for defense which I won't participate much in. Maybe one of my allies.

 

[Spacekitty]

That was me. Yugoslavia had two railgun designs already, I'm using those as my base, railgun cannons I think are only suitable for defense which I won't participate much in. Maybe one of my allies.

Yeah but even the USA doesn't hacve rail gun small arms. USA RIGHT NOW in rela life has a rail gun. You can get a rial gun cannon in a decade likely. A small arm for troops is decades away

 

[Shireling]

It shouldn't be too hard to develop a naval railgun. I don't expect the first Charlemagne to leave drydock until 2040. I might just go and update my entire fleet.

 

[Spacekitty]

It shouldn't be too hard to develop a naval railgun. I don't expect the first Charlemagne to leave drydock until 2040. I might just go and update my entire fleet.

If you don't leave Syria wren gunna steal your rail gun and blow up the big pointy tower

 

[Serenade]

Yeah but even the USA doesn't hacve rail gun small arms. USA RIGHT NOW in rela life has a rail gun. You can get a rial gun cannon in a decade likely. A small arm for troops is decades away

The USA is developing a naval railgun. I am developing a smaller railgun. Of course I expect it to have less power but nonetheless still potent because it is just a railgun. What I am developing is on some parts, easier due to the railgun producing less heat and requiring less power, and in some ways, the shell being fired will also have have a win or loose deciding factor.

 

[Spacekitty]

The USA is developing a naval railgun. I am developing a smaller railgun. Of course I expect it to have less power but nonetheless still potent because it is just a railgun. What I am developing is on some parts, easier due to the railgun producing less heat and requiring less power, and in some ways, the shell being fired will also have have a win or loose deciding factor.

I feel like a small arm rail gun wouldn't be powerful enough to launch a projectile at high speeds. It would be quiet a bulky and heavy gun and I don't think it would work being that small

 

[Shireling]

Have it fire a high-explosive shell in a magnetic sabot.