Mailbox

[Walter]

What if you just the front half of the float and use it as both the front and the rear end?

[Logi]

Like this?

[Walter]

Whoops! I meant the original front end (which you use as rear). The pointyness would make it more streamlined.

[Logi]

So like this?

[Walter]

Yes, something like that.

[Walter]

According to the latest report, you're researching Light Armor 1910 and you have a 1906 armored car design, but according to the Current Technology, you have the 1905 tech on hold. So I believe you made a mistake there. Also, back then the RRC was part of the MK, and as far as I can remember, the MK did not have the light armor tech back then so it seems extremely unlikely that that armored car design of yours would be from 1906. The design would more likely be from the year when you researched the light armor tech.

[Walter]

"Hey, if we can make a tank why can't we remove the armour and slap on a bigger gun?"

Uhm... Cause you need the Motorization tech for that and not the Heavy Armour tech? :)

[Logi]

Ah crap, I thought I digested that already.

I also forgot to put it on the waiting list in my sim reports: Double bad.

[Logi]

Uhm... Cause you need the Motorization tech for that and not the Heavy Armour tech?

Hmm... I don't know... Seeing as the Gun Carrier created just after the Mark I tank as a Mark 1 Tank without the armour.

It doesn't use wheels, it uses tank treads.

[Walter]

Well, the tech does state

Motorization
1910:  Motorized HQ, Artillery units; improved tactical mobility

But you do have a point. Perhaps both techs are necessary for such a weapon?

[Logi]

I have talked with the mods and been granted that such a device requires some form of motorization technology and heavy tank technology. It was agreed upon by the mods that I talked to (2 of 3) that such a vehicle's effectiveness depended upon the heavy tanks' technology rather than the motorization.

Therefore I can build it, although it suffers the same problems as the other experimental tanks.

[Walter]

I think it is a bit too early for the introduction of the Wurfrahmen 40. ;)

[Logi]

I don't think its a big leap in imagination. Remove the machine guns and slap on some already existing rocket crates. Put on some more armour to protect from the warhead explosion, heck. I reckon this method of shooting rockets is safer to the crew than doing it without armour between the two.

The big difference is the type of rockets being used, They have good stable rockets with advanced propellants, I don't.

And you can tell from the picture? I thought since its a vack picture, it would look like the tank I mentioned! :D

Say, on another note: What's your SP Artillery based on (in your thread)?

[Walter]

And you can tell from the picture?

Yes. Those crates are a dead giveaway... and I know the Wurfrahmen 40... from a Tamiya catalogue. Japanese intelligence at work, my friend. ;D

Say, on another note: What's your SP Artillery based on (in your thread)?

Crap! Good thing you said, cause I usually add it in small print.
Canon de 194 mle GPF (Grand Puissance Filloux - High-Power Filloux). Not sure about the year though as I can't find that.

[Logi]

Ah, the Canon de 194 mle GPF, i remember I looked at it and noted to add it to the database. But I could find it again after I closed the tab ;)