Technology Stats Help

[Subtleknifewielder]

Hmm...it doesn't matter if the AI were too smart...I mainly had it as a way to counter the neural interfacing the Norldandic pilots traditionally had with THEIR planes.

[Voodoo Nova]

Computing Power doesn't equal Intelligence.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AI

It's a goddamn complicated topic. And simulating a brain or something similar will be fun, even with such advanced computers.

Lynneth is right here. Although no matter how advanced the AI, it still will need a human counterpart to ensure a high reliability.

[Centurius]

Yeah but I was thinking a large system with so much code for all possible situations it could encounter it could technically be considered AI as it processes all data extremely fast. It isn't AI in the real sense as it works on a pre-set program but it could process data and provide the rest of the system faster than a human doing it manually.

[Voodoo Nova]

Yeah but I was thinking a large system with so much code for all possible situations it could encounter it could technically be considered AI as it processes all data extremely fast. It isn't AI in the real sense as it works on a pre-set program but it could process data and provide the rest of the system faster than a human doing it manually.

Well, that isn't AI, that's data processing. It still needs a person, and technically you can't program it for all possible situations because you'll always have that one situation that happens that isn't programed. When that happens, you will need a human to take over. I do not think that any technology in CNRP will ever include true AI systems, and it'll just end up being better identification systems or other data processing systems.

Edited September 20, 2009 by Voodoo Nova

[Voodoo Nova]

This thread will now be used for both CNRP tech and ERP tech to allow for a central tech advice thread.

[Lynneth]

Hm.

Voodoo, could I use most of my old bavarian stuff for the PRC?

What would I need to tone down, if anything?

[JerreyRough]

Hm.

Voodoo, could I use most of my old bavarian stuff for the PRC?

What would I need to tone down, if anything?

The Earth timeline as we know it ended December 31, 2009

-SNIP-

All nations will start off with equal technology. All modern-day technology existing today is available - after a brief grace period of 2 weeks, new technology will be allowed to be made.

Follow them guidelines in the thread, but all your stuff should be allowed.

Edited September 20, 2009 by JerreyRough

[Lynneth]

If any are of your own design, then no.

Follow them guidelines in the thread, but all your stuff should be allowed.

Obviously, I'll use IRL-PRC weapons in the first weeks and then shift to my own stuff, slowly. I'll RP development and whatnot.

[Voodoo Nova]

Hm.

Voodoo, could I use most of my old bavarian stuff for the PRC?

What would I need to tone down, if anything?

You can, tone it down to be what would be more modern, so nothing extremely fancy. This means things like no dual primary guns on tanks, etc.

[Lynneth]

You can, tone it down to be what would be more modern, so nothing extremely fancy. This means things like no dual primary guns on tanks, etc.

What about the ETC gun on my MBT? From what I know there are working ETC prototypes already, only not as efficient as they (the US, who obviously funded that IRL) would like it.

I'd probably RP the development for making the gun effective enough so that it's not as good as my CNRP-weapon, but still packs way more punch than conventional guns.

[Voodoo Nova]

What about the ETC gun on my MBT? From what I know there are working ETC prototypes already, only not as efficient as they (the US, who obviously funded that IRL) would like it.

I'd probably RP the development for making the gun effective enough so that it's not as good as my CNRP-weapon, but still packs way more punch than conventional guns.

I already answered this on IRC, but might as well share for the rest of the RP community. You can, at a toned down level.

[Executive Minister]

NDII IFV/Light Tank: The two look pretty good. Your crew should be four, because you also need a loader to load the shells in manually. Your "Knee Capper" shouldn't be automated, you're better off keeping it as Coaxial with the "Torrent" being the gun on top.

Roger that, although I was going for an autoloading system, to reduce crew numbers and thus, size and weight.

NMI Ripper: I assume you are basing the style of the gun off of the AK, meaning that it is meant to spray a lot of fire in one area without much concern for accuracy. The bullet type should be one or the other. You're better off skipping the ability to modify the rifle and sticking with the more common round. Most (if not all) modern guns don't have a 'DAD' because it's relatively useless. A soldier should change out their magazine after every battle anyways. The liquid nitrogen thing, I don't believe is possible on guns today (I'd be interested in seeing the research to this).

Oh, I meant that that rifle is capable of being "modded" (not in the field, mind you) for either round... i guess "produced for" would have been a better wording. The DAD is a no-go... all renders of the Nod GAU-3 Eliminator have a DAD, which sucks, but oh well I mentionned that the Ripper needed extra weight to compensate for phenomenal recoil (the heavier the weapon, the less recoil). As for the liquid nitrogen, I just surmised that while some guns used a water cooling shround, shouldn't ultra cold liquid N be better?

NDII Defender: Keep it simpler, if the plan is to make this an anti-tank defend system. Keep it to one gun, and you can make more of them. The tank's chassis being separated like that also makes it incredibly weaker underneath where it joins. The autoloader makes your tank unreliable to a degree, and you should keep it to training men to load faster. The digging system should be completely gone, it's useless and makes the tank a sitting duck when it is digging and dug in. You can manually create these sort of things quietly and more efficiently with a corp of engineers, and the tank wouldn't need to worry about the AHDM system malfunctioning. I suggest making a separate vehicle for the AHDM system. As with the light tank above, your "Knee Capper" shouldn't be automated, you're better off keeping it as Coaxial with the "Torrent" being the gun on top. You will also need a loader as a crewman.

Hmmm... i think you're right but... seeing as how I rped the tandem 120's and AH-DM extensively i thing they're a no-go as well... I mean, the whole point of the AH-DM is to quickly set up a position, rock it for a bit, then get out move to another positon and rinse/repeat. I'm going to get rid of the .50 cal Kneecapper... the 30mm is the coaxial gun, with the torrent turret mounted near the hatch. That makes the total weapons the dual 120's, 30mm coaxial and 9.55mm on the hatch. This thing wasn't made for MP i suppose... I'll reduce fielded numbers significantly for now... I guess the NDII Chapperone w/ 120mm will serve as the MBT

NDII Devastator: As a main battle tank, it looks decent. The tank's defenses will find it hard to block all anti-tank missiles, etc. The pod looks pretty good, and the likelihood of the tank itself surviving an onslaught of three tanks is highly unlikely with the average tank crew. Any well placed ordinance will take out this tank.

Lol, this thing was supposed to be the CNRP equivalent of the Apocalypse tank or mammoth tank from Red Alert. It didn't have to depend on tank crews, but how sturdy the thing was. You're right about the ordinance part though... I'll definitely be RPing more of these babies being lost in air strikes, I mean, they can't be fast enough to dodge strafes like the Defender or Chapp.

NMI Sentinal Battle Rifle: Looks good, although I think it's based more off the HK416 due to the modular abilities of the rifle.

Nope,

NDII Thrasher: It isn't a tank as much as it is an anti-personnel, anti-aircraft vehicle. It wouldn't function as a tank well, but in regards to defenses against another tank, it's survivability wouldn't be as high as a light tank. The RPM could be toned down a bit to make it more reasonable with the larger round.

Yeah, my intention was to create an M1 Tunguska clone on the M247 Sergeant York concept. This would make it be a glorified Shilka with an ATADS strapped on either side of the turret. The survivability of this thing is comparable to the Chapp, as its based on it's chassis, extremely low. What would be a reasonable RPM for dual 40mm's intended to shootdown jet aircraft?

NDII Hunter: Looks good, although I cannot see how it would work well as an armored ambulance.

Well, the Cobra does it, so I assume the two to be identical

The Howitzer idea: It isn't wise to have a 4 barreled howitzer as that would be easy to take out. The way the M270 is set up, it would be difficult to use that type of system. The amount of crew to load all four barrels, aim them all, etc, would also be a waste of a system. Stick with single barreled howitzers and use the M270 set up as a rocket system.

I've got a pic to show exactly what I meant, I've got to find it first.

The plane: Until I see a fuller description, I can't rightfully comment on it.

Workin on it

[Voodoo Nova]

I noticed that it was the Modular M14 after I re-looked at the pics.

As for an appropriate RPM for a dual cannon 40mm; the Bofors 40mm gun L/70 goes 330 rpm with one gun. A RPM of about 630 would be appropriate for your gun, in my opinion.

[Executive Minister]

The Howitzer idea: It isn't wise to have a 4 barreled howitzer as that would be easy to take out. The way the M270 is set up, it would be difficult to use that type of system. The amount of crew to load all four barrels, aim them all, etc, would also be a waste of a system. Stick with single barreled howitzers and use the M270 set up as a rocket system.

I've got a pic to show exactly what I meant, I've got to find it first.

Basically... this is a Super Heavy Artillery system, supplemented by the already existing G6 SPH.

Built on the chassis of the NDII Defender heavy tank, this tank would contain an armoured box, each individual 155 mm (I can negotiate calibre size) howitzer is housed within, side-by-side. The box contains all the autoloading mechanisms to the rear with exhaust and shells ejected from those two rear nozzles.

I know the thing is unwieldy and would be extremely expensive, but im going for the notions that sometimes the NoN, being outnumbered most of the time, needs quality, not quantity. This thing would be built to fire an insane amount of shells (for my tech level of course) and then leave before counter battery measures could be taken against it. While the G6 can do this, its single barrel can't do nearly as much damage required and capable of the Quad system in the same time.

Being mounted on the lithe Defender chassis, this thing would also be capable of setting up an AH-DM... im sure the NoN would be well aware of the cost of such rare units, their vulnerability to enemy tanks, jets and mines but also need the firepower.

[Voodoo Nova]

See, theRPM for that particular weapons system wouldn't be that great. It doesn't look like the barrels are separated and can be used individually, in case you needed to. Such a system would need people inside of it because automation wouldn't work well for too long either due to reliability issues with shell feeding, etc.

[Executive Minister]

See, theRPM for that particular weapons system wouldn't be that great. It doesn't look like the barrels are separated and can be used individually, in case you needed to. Such a system would need people inside of it because automation wouldn't work well for too long either due to reliability issues with shell feeding, etc.

Nope, each barrel is firmly side by side... no individual aiming, just point at the general target, fire 5 rounds at varying trajectories per each barrel (aimed as a group), and end up with 20 shells landing together against a single target - all from a single unit.

[Voodoo Nova]

Nope, each barrel is firmly side by side... no individual aiming, just point at the general target, fire 5 rounds at varying trajectories per each barrel (aimed as a group), and end up with 20 shells landing together against a single target - all from a single unit.

By individually, I meant if one barrel broke down, jammed, etc, it wouldn't work. With that image, I can see how it would work, however effectiveness and reliability will be no where near a single barreled howitzer.

[Executive Minister]

By individually, I meant if one barrel broke down, jammed, etc, it wouldn't work. With that image, I can see how it would work, however effectiveness and reliability will be no where near a single barreled howitzer.

How about a similar system where the howitzers and the mechanism were exposed, ie: no box.

[Voodoo Nova]

How about a similar system where the howitzers and the mechanism were exposed, ie: no box.

As self-propelled, with 2 barrels attached to the same chassis, maybe. The chassis needs to be wide enough, and the crew to work it would almost have to be double due to the second barrel being on the vehicle.

[Executive Minister]

As self-propelled, with 2 barrels attached to the same chassis, maybe. The chassis needs to be wide enough, and the crew to work it would almost have to be double due to the second barrel being on the vehicle.

Originally i envisioned that "box" section on the render I provided to be something similar to the Katyusha rocket launcher rails, where two howitzers would be on the bottom, and two on top. Each gun would fire after a delay, creating an almost constant rate of continuous fire, spaced seconds apart. The design would actually allow the individual actions of the cannons (recoil, shell casing ejection) to be seen.

When i found that render, I said, hey why not wrap the whole thing in armour! And who cares if instead of a 2x2 arrangement, you get a 1 x 4?

Edited September 22, 2009 by Executive Minister

[JerreyRough]

Hey, a question: are the vehicles in

possible to be used in CNRP? And at what approx. technology?

Notes:

-The machine gun/Gatling gun tank most likely would not be used, unless re-fitted for Anti-Air purposes.

-Same with the double barrel round tank "anti-bunker" vehicle (massive grenade launchers? ).

-Ignore the nuclear sign on the second artillery unit (in-game, it is a "nuclear powered artillery unit"; never needs to refuel >.<), which I think is out of the question (...as a nuclear powered unit, or anything to do with nuclear material for that matter).

Edited September 22, 2009 by JerreyRough

[Voodoo Nova]

Originally i envisioned that "box" section on the render I provided to be something similar to the Katyusha rocket launcher rails, where two howitzers would be on the bottom, and two on top. Each gun would fire after a delay, creating an almost constant rate of continuous fire, spaced seconds apart. The design would actually allow the individual actions of the cannons (recoil, shell casing ejection) to be seen.

When i found that render, I said, hey why not wrap the whole thing in armour! And who cares if instead of a 2x2 arrangement, you get a 1 x 4?

It's an interesting idea, just keep it reasonable with the statistics with it and I think you'll be fine.

[Voodoo Nova]

Hey, a question: are the vehicles in

possible to be used in CNRP? And at what approx. technology?

Notes:

-The machine gun/Gatling gun tank most likely would not be used, unless re-fitted for Anti-Air purposes.

-Same with the double barrel round tank "anti-bunker" vehicle (massive grenade launchers? ).

-Ignore the nuclear sign on the second artillery unit (in-game, it is a "nuclear powered artillery unit"; never needs to refuel >.<), which I think is out of the question (...as a nuclear powered unit, or anything to do with nuclear material for that matter).

The designs are fine, although I'll need to see information for the designs before I can say if it's possible to use them/not use them. Just based off of images alone, I'd say Modern/First World.

Edited September 22, 2009 by Voodoo Nova

[Voodoo Nova]

I was talking to Centurius earlier about Submarine Air Carriers and the possibility of them working, so I thought I would share what I told him earlier about them as some advice for you budding RP military equipment designers.

Submarine air carriers, while yes have existed at one point and have worked in the past, they are not feasible to have in any military. Mechanical issues, stability while on the surface, and defenses are three reasons why they would not be feasible. The salt water, as many of you know, would corrode much of the pneumatics and other various parts of the ship; constant maintenance would also be required for such a submarine. Stability while on the surface would also be an issue. The sub would roll and rock and be pushed around by the waves when the carrier is surfaced and receiving the planes. Defenses for the submarine would be minimal while it is submerging or rising, making it a sitting duck for aircraft and ship bombardment.

[Sargun II]

http://forums.cybernations.net/index.php?s...t&p=1643450

Could you look over the Naval Defense Platform for me? Thanks.