NationStates

Grays Harbor wrote:

Lemonius wrote:This ban on spacecraft is unfair and illogical as far as I can see...

No, not really. This is for "wet" navy contrasts and comparisons. Much like the armoured vehicle thread where tanks couldn't be compared to 'video game' mechas, and where they had seperate threads, it is impossible to compare a death star to a destroyer. Kinda like trying to compare a dreadnaught to a trireme. If you want an FT space navy thread, then make one.

but i haz a deathstar. DEATHSTAR! and it counts as part of our water navy
even though it has problems fitting in the water..........at least it can move and float

Lemon Cheese wrote:

Grays Harbor wrote:No, not really. This is for "wet" navy contrasts and comparisons. Much like the armoured vehicle thread where tanks couldn't be compared to 'video game' mechas, and where they had seperate threads, it is impossible to compare a death star to a destroyer. Kinda like trying to compare a dreadnaught to a trireme. If you want an FT space navy thread, then make one.

but i haz a deathstar. DEATHSTAR! and it counts as part of our water navy
even though it has problems fitting in the water..........at least it can move and float

I am not even gonna talk about how stupid that really sounds.

Lemon Cheese wrote:

Grays Harbor wrote:No, not really. This is for "wet" navy contrasts and comparisons. Much like the armoured vehicle thread where tanks couldn't be compared to 'video game' mechas, and where they had seperate threads, it is impossible to compare a death star to a destroyer. Kinda like trying to compare a dreadnaught to a trireme. If you want an FT space navy thread, then make one.

but i haz a deathstar. DEATHSTAR! and it counts as part of our water navy
even though it has problems fitting in the water..........at least it can move and float

IGNORE phasers set to kill.

Saurisisia wrote:

Lemon Cheese wrote:
but i haz a deathstar. DEATHSTAR! and it counts as part of our water navy
even though it has problems fitting in the water..........at least it can move and float

I am not even gonna talk about how stupid that really sounds.

what its modern tech and 2012 what more could you want?
i built this with TOP secret modern tech

Lemonius wrote:

Lemon Cheese wrote:
but i haz a deathstar. DEATHSTAR! and it counts as part of our water navy
even though it has problems fitting in the water..........at least it can move and float

IGNORE phasers set to kill.

*deploys shields*
Firing SUPER LAZER!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!1
*destroys france for some reason*

Not going to decend into flame/spam..

But continue along this path and you will be ignored across the entire community.
IGNORE phasers set to kill.
Luckily, they can go through any shields and annihilate everything.

Anyway, to anyone else - return to the topic at hand..

Switzstoniaberanyland wrote:i use the Ottoman class Supreme carrier
over three times as large as a nimitz class it is the best (non god mode) aircraft carrier ever made
using 800 aircraft and 200 helicopters it is a terifying foe
defensive systems are classified and it has a highly trained crew

Don't use superlatives in NS. It's not a good idea, especially if your design is pretty bad.

BTW, the Nimitz can hold roughly 85 aircraft. It can only send a fraction of them out at one time.

Increasing the ship's size by three-four isn't going to make it capable of holding a thousand aircraft; this is physically impossible. Additionally, it will only slightly increase the amount of planes you'll be capable of operating at the same time, which means you gain a massive liability for virtually no gain.

The Grand World Order wrote:

Switzstoniaberanyland wrote:i use the Ottoman class Supreme carrier
over three times as large as a nimitz class it is the best (non god mode) aircraft carrier ever made
using 800 aircraft and 200 helicopters it is a terifying foe
defensive systems are classified and it has a highly trained crew

Don't use superlatives in NS. It's not a good idea, especially if your design is pretty bad.

BTW, the Nimitz can hold roughly 85 aircraft. It can only send a fraction of them out at one time.

Increasing the ship's size by three-four isn't going to make it capable of holding a thousand aircraft; this is physically impossible. Additionally, it will only slightly increase the amount of planes you'll be capable of operating at the same time, which means you gain a massive liability for virtually no gain.

im sure he god moded

Eventyrslot wrote:

The Grand World Order wrote:
Don't use superlatives in NS. It's not a good idea, especially if your design is pretty bad.

BTW, the Nimitz can hold roughly 85 aircraft. It can only send a fraction of them out at one time.

Increasing the ship's size by three-four isn't going to make it capable of holding a thousand aircraft; this is physically impossible. Additionally, it will only slightly increase the amount of planes you'll be capable of operating at the same time, which means you gain a massive liability for virtually no gain.

im sure he god moded

He sure did,plus the weather would make mince-meat off his ship due to the length of it

Saurisisia wrote:

Lemon Cheese wrote:
but i haz a deathstar. DEATHSTAR! and it counts as part of our water navy
even though it has problems fitting in the water..........at least it can move and float

I am not even gonna talk about how stupid that really sounds.

1: sigging for awesome

2: On a more serious note, I do not have pictures or a full write up for my primary ship (or flagship), so rather than give you a picture of the Battleship Bismarck and quickly typed up notes, I'll give you what I do have. Of course, there were issues with the term "primary".

The most numerous vessel in our navy is the Morgawr Class Frigate...
Carrier Escort, Anti-Submarine Warfare, Littoral Warfare (Frigate. Armed with 1 20mm Autocannon, 2 Torpedo Launchers, 1 VL-1.)
60 of such vessels are in service.

For capital scale ships we have...
Intrepid Class Carrier—Fleet Carrier (Nuclear Fleet Carrier. Armed with 2 VL-1s. Fighter Complement 80+Helicopters.) 3 are in service and they are, tIntrepid, Endeavor, Enterprise

Hound of Cullann Class Dreadnought—Ship Killer, Coastal Bombardment (BBX Battleship. Armed with 4 300mm Railguns [two turrets in pairs], 12 Modified M1 SAM Launchers (48 cells) 2 VL-1s, 12 CRGPSGM Launchers (48 cells), 40 CRWGM Launchers (160 cells), 18 Torpedo Launchers.) 1 in Service: Hound of Cullann

and the Indomitable Wrath class, details of which are unknown (I haven't written them up). The VL-1s are LASER weapons, yes they're not MT, no I don't play MT, this is PMT.

Lemon Cheese wrote:

Saurisisia wrote:
I am not even gonna talk about how stupid that really sounds.

what its modern tech and 2012 what more could you want?
i built this with TOP secret modern tech

Saying something is "Top secret modern tech" just so you can put FT stuff in an MT world makes... no sense. Why not just give people in the 1700s ICBMs and say it's "Top secret PT"?

Lemonius wrote:This ban on spacecraft is unfair and illogical as far as I can see...

This entire thread is unfair and illogical, with the exception of a few people who actually had some idea of what they are talking about, and I feel sorry for them, as they waste their thought and effort comparing actual designs they came up with to the cheese death star, the godmode battlebrick, and renamed pictures of the arsenal ship and the Bismarck.

Maltropia wrote:

Lemon Cheese wrote:
what its modern tech and 2012 what more could you want?
i built this with TOP secret modern tech

Saying something is "Top secret modern tech" just so you can put FT stuff in an MT world makes... no sense. Why not just give people in the 1700s ICBMs and say it's "Top secret PT"?

DONT GIVE MY COUSIN IDEAS!

Sea wolf class destroyer
Displacement: 3,000 tonnes
Length: 92m
Beam: 9 m
Draught: 3.5 m
Speed: 29 knots (54 km/h)
Range: 6,000 nautical miles
Complement: 230

Armament:

2 x Anti-air missile launchers (armed both with medium and short ranged missiles)
2 x torpedo tubes (with anti submarine capacity)
5 x 120 mm khönunga naval cannons

Fegeleinland wrote:

Maltropia wrote:
Saying something is "Top secret modern tech" just so you can put FT stuff in an MT world makes... no sense. Why not just give people in the 1700s ICBMs and say it's "Top secret PT"?

DONT GIVE MY COUSIN IDEAS!

GREAT IDEA!
*activates time machine*

That would be the HS Haydn:


It is so powerful we named it after our nation. That picture was HS Haydn in 1944, when we regained our colonies Java and Borneo from the Japanese. That picture of it was when it was patrolling in the Java Sea. It is still in use today in the Imperial Haydanian Navy, but much more upgraded guns, weapons etc.

Anywho,

RAW NATION thinks guns are for girly men. And the bigger the gun, the more girly!

That is why we use the TRNNNS The Rock!



It can bodyslam any other ship.

Khorsun wrote:renamed pictures of the arsenal ship and the Bismarck.

There is no "the arsenal ship." Arsenal ships are a concept for a classification of a ship. What you've said is roughly equivalent to saying "the aircraft carrier."

I think you meant to say the Zumwalt-class destroyer.

The fleet carrier Yamamoto is the flagship of the Imperial Anglo-Nihonese Navy, with a new form of hull and deck armor followed by new technological and navigational systems.

1930s: The primary, most numerous warship of the Inutoland Naval Forces is the Mosquito-class Destroyer:

Raw Nation wrote:Anywho,

RAW NATION thinks guns are for girly men. And the bigger the gun, the more girly!

That is why we use the TRNNNS The Rock!

(Image)

It can bodyslam any other ship.

You know that is a mobile crane ship, right? Top speed about 6 knots?

While our Aircraft Carriers, Cruisers, Destroyers and Frigates are indeed the eyes, ears and fist of the fleet, the true "backbone" is our replenishment and combat support ships because no warship, however marvelous the design, can accomplish its mission without ammunition, food or fuel.

Grays Harbor wrote:While our Aircraft Carriers, Cruisers, Destroyers and Frigates are indeed the eyes, ears and fist of the fleet, the true "backbone" is our replenishment and combat support ships because no warship, however marvelous the design, can accomplish its mission without ammunition, food or fuel.

While this is quite well put, I would have to point to the topic title saying warship and not supply vessel.

Post War America wrote:

Grays Harbor wrote:While our Aircraft Carriers, Cruisers, Destroyers and Frigates are indeed the eyes, ears and fist of the fleet, the true "backbone" is our replenishment and combat support ships because no warship, however marvelous the design, can accomplish its mission without ammunition, food or fuel.

While this is quite well put, I would have to point to the topic title saying warship and not supply vessel.

They are part of the naval establishment, with naval crews. They count.