Why did landships stop being part of the popular imagination?
Mortal Engines ruined it for everyone
>>88969043When I was making this thread, I almost decided to make a joke about Mortal Engines, but it's not like there was a rush to incorporate them into fiction before the movie got shat out
>>88969028Because most people came out of WW1 hoping for peace, and the ones who didn't would rather have working tanks and bombers.
>>88969720If that's why landships stopped being part of the popular imagination then how come war comics and alt history stories about nazis superweapons kept selling all the way into the 70s and 80s? fuck off with your pseud history.
>>88969043How so?
>>88969028I think that giant airplanes seem cooler.Like, this is my actual, "scholarly" opinion: I think that the advent of aircraft and the development of larger ones made giant land battleships seem kinda lame, especially since you see the "giant flying base" thing pretty often.
>>88969028For them to be stop being part of the popular imagination, they would have had to be part of it in the first place some time in the last century or so.
>>88969028https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F5PUYR0xwv
>>88969028They NEVER stopped being a popular fictional concept (See things like the technodrome for example).They stopped being seen as an engineering concept during WW2 because airplanes shat all over heavy tanks and Hitler went full retard on demanding super weapons which helped to demonstrate "Yeah, this shit isn't going to work" because they literally TRIED to make it work.
>>88969028How often do you plan to post landship thread over and over again?Because it's already tiresome and it's barely 4th one in a row
>>88971437>during WW1 because everyone became aware how unfeasible they are mechanicallyftfyAll sorts of heavy and super-heavy tank programmes that followed were just delusions of retards, usually done on direct order of some bigwig that couldn't be just said that it won't work.
>>88970430>I think that giant airplanes seem cooler.that's just a space base flying low
>>88971700>IS-2 was 46 tons>most modern MBTs are in the 60 ton rangeIf you had just said super-heavy tanks you would be right, but heavy tanks mainly just got replaced by the modern idea of main battle tank.
>>88970430We talking Spruce Goose, CL-1201, H-4 Hercules, or that goofy flying nuclear hotel that was spammed all over the news a bit ago?
Society just got less cool. If you want them back, bring them back, and I wish you the best of luck.
>>88975560Shit like this.
>>88978096that's not even an airplane, anon.
>>88969028Too based for this world
>>88978121https://www.theonion.com/brain-dead-teen-only-capable-of-rolling-eyes-and-texti-1819595151
How have/would you use land battleships in a game?
>>88978201Like all sufficiently large vehicles and various aspidochelone: they're effectively moving dungeons. I have several of various sizes I've included in hexcrawls, mostly massive walkers or treaded warmachines acting as a vanguard for slower mobile settlements.
>>88978201Like the other anon said, either as setpieces or as a mobile HQ for a hexcrawl. It's something the entire party owns and probably has a crew for, either serving as a base of operations (the PCs own a landship to operate out of to go delve dungeons or whatever) or is the core of the campaign (the PCs are landship crew who use their landship to accomplish objectives).
>>88969028Because I like them, so as with all other things I hold dear they had to disappear or be prostituted to the masses.
>>88978096my setting has some stuff similar to this but it breaks the laws of physics so the zepplins are adorned with sigils and black magick shit
>>88969028>Why did landships stop being part of the popular imagination?Because WWII happened and showed that a battleship can be destroyed with small bomb.Now we even have self-guided missiles, everything point out toward miniaturization, hitting the weak points, destroying the logistic, solving the socioeconomic issue at the root of everyone's problem preventing the war entirely and leading everyone toward a golden age for the newly unified mankind.
There LITERALLY was a video game that came out like a week ago about the concept of piloting a Giant battleship tank and blowing up regular tanks/nazis with it.(albeit said tank was designed with the idea of "What if we tossed children into a furnace to power its guns?" instead of something sensible)
>>88978128I wouldn't be surprised if the collateral damage is literally the only thing holding us back. The Bagger 288 exists, I don't doubt we could actually engineer landshipa
>>88984097We could do a lot of shit, but a single drone could disable the bagger 288.Bigger vehicles make bigger targets, and if you give them enough armor to not get easily wrecked its going to have about 10 minutes worth of gas on each fill up.
>>88978201dystopian wars40k epicland ironcladsprobably a bunch more I'm not aware of. It's certainly a thing even if it's a bit obscure
>>88984114Maybe use a nuclear reactor (or several) to power it? But yeah fair enough the bigger they are the harder they fall. Maybe a lot of point defense could make it a bit more survivable though I could imagine bullets becoming as big a bottleneck as fuel
Some anons and I have been working on a /tg/ spawned wargame about trains in a post apocalyptic world. Started as a joke so don't take too seriously; we know it's ridiculous already. Not quite landship sized but in a similar vein.
>>88984492Where’s the current edition? I haven’t checked for a long while.
>>88984593Rules are pretty much set, just doing some minor post-playtesting tweaks while we wait on art and mini assets. In the meantime, we're trying to put together a narrative solo/co-op campaign. We haven't posted here in a while as it's getting close to "shilling" which we don't condone or wish to partake in.
>>88978128Oh, cool, didn't know it was actually a thing
>>88969028They always were sort an element of something else, and keep being that. If you outside of fiction, it's like other anons said: they tried to make it work, but WW2 bombing onwards made them nothing but potential wastes of resources.>>88978128The closest thing we had to that madness were the Vietnam tree-crushers. If I ever make an Ork army I'm including them.>>88984492I'm actually proud of what you guys have accomplished. And this comes from someone which understands how it wouldn't work in real life.
>>88984085People who hate Nazis do love tossing children into furnaces so it checks out.
>>88985880Thanks anon. It's been a blast to be a part of /tg/ getting shit done. I too know how absurd it is working in rollingstock engineering
>>88969028Change of tank designs. When landships were strongest tanks had multiple turrets or even sponsons, designs and sizes caried so much that one could even compare them to battleships, cruisers, and destroyers.Nowadays fantastical tanks are often similar to modern tanks with four sets of tracks or dual cannons or something.
>>88975464It’s really more a case of merging of roles as capabilities advance.>Battlecruisers and battleships both exist>Eventually propulsion technology exists so you can make a fully armoured battleship as fast or faster than a battlecruiser so people stop building lightly armoured battleships>Medium tanks and heavy tanks exist>Eventually technology advances so you can make tanks with the gun of a heavy tank and the mobility of a medium tankThe idea that the MBT came about in the late 40s or 50s is just wrong, all great powers used both heavy tanks and “main battle tanks” at the same with the US, USSR, and UK using the M103, T-10, and Conqueror respectively. You don’t see true MBTs until guns matching or surpassing those of heavy tanks are implemented universally with the rise of tanks like the Chieftain and T-62.Put simply a heavy tank with modern technology would just be an Abrams.
>>88969028They seem kind of implausible unless it's a huge desert or something, there'd be too many obstacles. A huge desert with landships would be cool though.
>>88978128God the idea of dozens of these things careening around at 100 fucking miles per fucking hour is the funniest thing ever, could you even imagine? Actual insanity.
>>88969028we invented flight
>>88984097>>88984347Past a certain size the very ground itself becomes your biggest enemy, never mind someone shooting at you. Drive over anything even remotely softer than 'rock hard' and suddenly your battleship becomes a fort, and good luck digging something that weighs a gorillion tons out of the pit it's made for itself.
>>88984031Could you please learn English before posting, thank you.
>>88969028Modern warfare's reliance on "guerilla tactics" and drones is fucking pussy shit designed by weak cowardly menImagine if all conflicts were settled by each powers' flexing of their industrial and scientific might putting all their effort into a handful of awe-inspiring titans of steel bristling with so much weaponry that the sheer sight of one sends nearby cities into a panic and every engagement each single one is involved in makes international headlines
>>88969788World War One, you're thinking WW2 annon.Also german generals kept writing about how awesome their tech was, and so did their proppaganda. So it had a pop culture impact.But uh... they were technologically behind most of the time. It's just that nobody else wanted to do wars, and thus didn't invest until the war started.
>>88969694Aw yeah!.jpg
>>88989974It helped that German "wunderwaffe" tended to be big and impressive and highly visible, while a lot of the Allies' superior technology was in areas like computing and radar. Incredibly important for helping to win a war, but not exactly the kind of things that capture the imagination in the same way that a massive tank or devastating long-range missile does. The Germans were also desperate and threw everything they made into the fight while the Allies were winning just fine so they were comfortable putting extremely tight restrictions on when and where their shiny new jet fighters could be used, which is why hardly anyone has heard of the Meteor but everyone knows about the Me 262.
>>88989943Blame Hitler. If he wasnt such a size queen wouldnt have spurred the paradigm of not needing a bigger tank, just a tank that can hold a bigger cannon and get the first shot.
>>88969028Because they were tried irl, and didn't work. Idk why that doesn't apply to things like cyborgs and robots, but it do.
>>88989943Doesn't quite solve the problem that one man on foot with a Stinger can destroy it, however.
>>88990124Loosers study tactics, winners study logistics.Same reason we don't use walkers and mecha. We got the tech for them, but one guy with an old timey grenade put in a sock then dipped in axel grease thrown onto a knee joint means you've lost a unit. One that's really high tech, expensive. and finicky. Also the crew's probably dead, so you gotta find more men and train them for that as well.In the case of landships these behemoths could only run on flat terrain such as central africa, the steppes of asia, or the great plains of north america. They'd also be followed by an entire convoy to meet their fuel and matiance requirements. Regardless of what they're burning.Similarly while the sherman's not a death trap the fact that it's built so the crew would survive and the parts are easily replicable means if hanz disables one unless he tripple taps it and hunts down the fleeing crew. Some engineering truck from behind the lines is going to come in, drag that fucker back to the depot weld it, replace it's parts, and it'll be back on the road in a few days.You hit most panzers? Even without penetrating it you'll knock out bolts, gears, and electronics. Which means they have limp home order new parts from the factory in Kurglepltaz, then wait on delivery. This is compounded by every other unit screaming at them for parts, and the high command screaming at them to pump out more tanks and stop wasting time making spare parts.This is assuming hanz, and his tank survived the encounter, and Kurgleplatz isn't staffed by slaves.Fantasy lets us ignore logistics and go for pure rule of cool.It just also happens that fascism, and authoritarianism more generally run on that same fantasy/myth logic.Because anyone who tries to say to the regime's leader or his underlings "I'm sorry sir we can't do that." is gunna get shot and/or thrown out the window along with his expense reports.For more modern examples, look to how china and russia operate.
>>88990821>winners study logisticsIt also helped that America at the time could literally build ships and vehicles and weapons faster than the Axis could destroy them.In the first four months of 1943, for example, America built more tons of merchant shipping than Japan did from 1939 to 1945.
>>88991051Go argue that shit on /his/ and /pol/ dude. I'm explaining why we don't get big ol stonkin landships.Logistics says no, logistics wins wars, hence people who want to win at war don't build landships in the real world.Autocratic states tend to do whatever whacky shit the autocrat has in mind, because those saying "no the expense reports say we can't..." get defenestrated.Then the autocrat actually does his idea, it fails, and his opponents kick him in the nuts for it.if you want more than WW2 as an example of this. You have all the whacky shit Kaiser Willy, and some of the british gentry wanted to do in WW1. You have the crazy shit the chinese do whenever they invade vietnam, and you have uncle vlad's wonderful ukranian adventure going on right now. Where a 3 day operation is in it's second year.
>>88991188Not him but I maintain logistics only wins wars because people pull punches.You're not supposed to kill enemy generals and leadership.I bet those who venerate individual valor and skill in warfare over the industrial grinder could totally win a war with ease if instead of doing the weird half-assed logistics industry thing against people who will devote wholly to it, they instead made use of assassination squads that ran around doing command decapitations.The frontline is just for defending, not trying to take territory.The real fighting is behind the lines, killing the officers and politicans at home, slaughtering business magnates and blowing up factories, duking it out with the police and leaving before any real army can get there. Essentially partisans but you're doing it in their country, imagine how shitty that would be to deal with.You cause enough problems they start moving their army back home too to fight with you, less resources you have to deal with on the frontline.A defensive is just an industrial meatgrinder though, and if people continue to fight wars in that manner, it won't be long before meat drones are replaced with the metal ones.
>>88991460>bro just kill a bunch civilians in their homes and they'll totally surrender!What a creative and unique plan that nobody has ever tried before and absolutely 100% works.
>>88991460>Literally intelligence services.But that's sorta the point. The actual purpose of war in the real world is politics through other means.These massive national or international slugging matches are slowly just becoming less and less effective in getting you what you want.Imagine if, for example vladdy had made the russian federation into a more attractive trade partner through reforms, destroying corruption, and improving the economy, then capitalized on the shared cultural ties between russia and ukraine in order to bring them into the federation.Like how the US is slowly absorbing mexico right now.Instead he shouted OOORAH, invaded, and all he's accomplished is cementing ukraine as an independent nation, increasing america's standing on the world stage, and giving it's military contractors a nice infusion of cash from uncle sam while loosing share in the arms market.Imperialisim isn't done with metal and gunships anymore, it's done with economics and diplomacy. Which is less badass and glorious, but works out better because you know...We have nukes now and can just delete each other's cities, or entire formations of men with the flip of a switch.
Maybe you could have landships if they had forcefields that aren't stable on smaller, faster vehicles like jets or drones. But then you have to deal with the implications of that in your setting, like asking why cities don't have forcefields too, how close to the ground they go, how they get projectiles out but keep them from getting in (one-way, turn it off when doing a salvo). And forcefields kind of wreck the retro-ironclad aesthetic, though they'd probably be alright for futuristic vehicles.
>>88990277>Idk why that doesn't apply to things like cyborgs and robots, but it do.Because we're still in the "experimenting" stage of cyborgs and robots. Cybernetic tech is hampered by BIOLOGICAL tech, as it doesn't matter how fancy a robot arm you make, the important part is connecting it to your nerve endings and interfacing with the brain.We've also yet to figure out an answer to the fact that cybernetic implants cause microscopic sized scares constantly just from tiny movement/interactions with your nerves.
>>88991460>lol, just run around blowing shit up and killing the generals, because you TOTALLY will be able to just jet around without getting caught if you leave before "the army" shows up!you are literally retarded.
>>88994762See what I said about fantasy concepts. D&D adventurers can do the ol scry-n-die on a bunch of motherfuckers. But here in the real world. Even if you're some commando super badass chad with abs you could cut diamonds on. You're probably just gunna die if Chongus the 300lb guard at the front desk manages to squeeze iff a few rounds of 9mm at you.
>>88989276Please fuck off if you have nothing to contribute to the thread.
>>88986171How much time do you have to spend on 4chan to be this out of touch?
>>88991507It's the "real communism" of edgy war fanboys, real brutality has never been tried
>>88991460>Not him but I maintain logistics only wins wars because people pull punches.World powers don't pull punches, they just pretend toEvery major country is 100% evil
>>88994388easy, the warships are old world tech from before the water vanished, the treads are new additions post apocalypse to make use of the forcefield/military tech people no longer understand enough to re-install on new structures.
>>88991188Yeah Anon I wasn't disagreeing with you, I was intended to supplement your point. There's a reason why I referenced merchant shipping, i.e., the thing that allowed America's logistical mastery to even be put into play in World War II, since those were the ships that needed to carry all those supplies.
>>88991460>they instead made use of assassination squads that ran around doing command decapitations. There's always going to be another general, and killing one particular general doesn't do much to affect the abilities of the tens of thousands of soldiers under his command. You also run into the problem that the nations likely to launch wars of conquest and territorial expansion in the modern era - the ones run by dictators and autocrats - tend to hand out genrealships as rewards, meaning that they've got plenty of spare generals.Don't get me wrong, assassination definitely has its place, but...well, let's use Russia and American as an example. America today maintains a global military network to safeguard its vast reach. It has about 600 generals and admirals in total to run this military network.Russia is an armed gas station that's only about 1/2 the size of America in terms of population and has nothing remotely resembling the military reach or capabilities, nor the need for one. Yet it has over 2,000 generals and admirals.Even worse, since generalships are handed out as a reward and where those generals go is based on the whim of the autocrat, you don't really have a good idea of which generals are actually good at their jobs. Just because General Ivanko Sunoffavich is now commanding area X, you can't be sure if it's because he's considered competent and will get the job done, or if it's a punishment for some slight (real or imagined), or if it's just blind chance.
>>88991460>I bet those who venerate individual valor and skill in warfare over the industrial grinder could totally win a war with ease if instead of doing the weird half-assed logistics industry thing against people who will devote wholly to it, they instead made use of assassination squads that ran around doing command decapitations.LMAO what is this fucking warhammer? Look up how many assassination attempts were made against Castro, now imagine instead of Castro your targets numbered in the hundreds or thousands (every officer O6 and higher)>The frontline is just for defending, not trying to take territory.Good luck defending it when you can’t properly supply your soldiers with ammo, fuel, and medical supplies. Also static fronts in modern warfare is the sign of military incompetence. Focusing on entrenched positions against a competent enemy gets you Iraq in 1991, overwhelmed by an enemy with more initiative and better logistics. Fun fact the British in 1940 nearly crippled the entire German invasion of France with a minor counterattack before it was stopped and the Iraqis’ only major counterattack in the gulf war nearly killed a marine general.>The real fighting is behind the lines, killing the officers and politicans at home, slaughtering business magnates and blowing up factories, duking it out with the police and leaving before any real army can get there.Anywhere the police can be the army can be, do you think that soldiers physically cannot enter Washington DC or NYC? Also how are you blowing up factories?>Essentially partisans but you're doing it in their country, imagine how shitty that would be to deal with.Partisans work because you have countless people fighting against a nation. Would Russia smuggle 100,000 men into America to wage their guerrilla war? These perfect infiltrators who not only speak perfect English but also have no Russian accent and enough understanding of American culture to not get found out.
>>88989130Widen your tracks and lengthen your hull bro. If your 650 ton tank has a 40 meter long hull and 4 meters of track width its ground pressure is 1/4ths that of a person standing on his feet.
>>88994388Agreed - I think the strongest logical "argument" for landships in fiction is the existence of some game-changing technology that simply can't be miniaturized to fit on a smaller platform. Whatever machinery maintaining the field might simply necessitate a massive platform to mount it on, which could then form the core of the landship.Depending on the setting, you could also reflavour force fields as advanced direct-energy defenses, massive EW arrays, etc.For older settings, maybe some kind of Tesla Death Ray-esque device?
>>88994388>why cities don't have forcefields tooThey would have them, landship is just the mobile military application of it.
>>88994388if they work on Dune rules (ish) then landships don't become so dominant that they erase all other means of open combat. You'd still need smaller vehicles to get in through the shield, maybe boarding parties. What if the shield actually had a pretty big radius, enough to for example let another landship of the same size drive in a tight circle around it? Then you'd have to have escorts and such if enemies broke through, but no getting cruise missiled from over the horizon.
>>88994388I don't see why you need to focus much on justification, how much do mecha wargames justify the use of mechs? The only factor of importance is the technological era to determine if your landship is an AI supercomputer controlling a tank firing shells made of compressed metallic hydrogen or the HMS Dreadnought on a set of tracks.
>>88986399>>88975464And even then, MBTs constantly get flak for being too heavy for their jobs and struggling to make it across difficult terrain, hence a return to tanks in the 30 ton range like the Mobile Protected Firepower program, historically the weight of the last generation of medium tanks like the T-55.
>>88969028because they're objectively retarded and tanks were invented about 12 minutes later.
>>88978096What is the reasoning behind having carrier runways be diagonal to the body of the ship. Modern US aircraft carriers do this but all over countries just have theirs be parallel.
>>88998805Modern tanks aren't too heavy in most situations, integrated combat engineering support with stuff like armoured bridge layers as well as snorkel kits mean that even in a shithole country with no good bridges you can generally just make your own or drive across it, and wide tracks combined with a high power to weight ratio makes the Abrams faster and more mobile than the M60 was.As for lighter replacements they never do nor are they intended to replace tanks outright, they are utilized either as reconnaissance assets or (in the case of the US) integrated fire support into mechanized infantry formations.
>>88999008It allows for the carrier to launch and recover aircraft at the same time.The launching aircraft use the straight deck, while the landing aircraft use the angled one.It's also not an exclusively American thing; France, Russia, China and even Brazil have carriers with angled flight decks. It's a common design feature amongst most larger carriers operating fixed-wing aircraft - not sure why you think only the US has them.
>>88978201Habitable outer surface of a Dyson sphere. Massive open tracts of land larger than the surface area of entire planets. Rogue defense system attacks aircraft over a certain size/altitude, save one tiny area used as only port of entry. Surface too large for rail system to be viable, too long to lay track, only working solution is enormous land vehicles to move people and materials as sphere becomes more and more popular place to settle since it's safe from orbital attack and has infinite free energy from the star inside.
>>88970396aggressively mediocre movie. Fun to look at though, good for aesthetic inspiration.
>>88990277>>88998810Yes because God forbid a game have anything not realistic. Fucking retards.
>>88996428In a D&D world, anyone worth protecting is going to have anti-scrying/teleportation safeguards setup to avoid that kind of thing.
>>88996925What about the nukes? I would count ‘not doing it because it destroys the things I want’ as pulling punches.
>>88969028The two big problems with that design, beyond it just being a bigass set of wheels stuck to a battleship, is that the engine would have to be made much more enormous to move those wheels as well as the fact that all of a battleships armor and guns are on the upper part. It's basically designed to attack forward, which it's too tall for on land, while being vulnerable from troops below and bombs and artillery from above. Now, mole-mecha on the other hand
At this hour I find the mortal coil exhausted, and the mind bereft of wisdom worthy of contributionSo I'll dump a couple pics and head to bed
>>89008834
>>89008842
>>89008858
>>89008880Oh, if anyone here plays Battletech, it has rules for making and operating Mobile Structures like pic related in Tactical Operations, but they're pretty absurdly expensive, even for the setting
>>89008905Heavy Gear has landships too, but they're Maglev+Gev things, not crawlers
>>89008921
>>89008929
>>89008938
>>89008905They also only make sense if you got mega bunkers to roll them in and out of. Because that's all their mobility is good for.
>>89008948One could also make absurdly large starship sized land vehicles using Traveller Mongoose 2e Vehicle Handbook + High Guard rules
>>89008960
>>89008967
>>89008970
>>89008975
>>89008986
The problem with landships is always that even if they were possible, in practice they wouldn't be able to maneuver anywhere.The only place where one might maneuver aren't worth such vehicle and your effort will be better spent using the same mass of metal and fuel to build thousand of units who aren't single-point failure.
>>89009231Once all highways are at least ten lanes wide, land battleships will have plenty of room to maneuver.
>>88984085>we tossed children into a furnace to power its gunsSounds perfectly sensible to me>Verification not required.
>>88996925It only counts as evil if you loose.
>>88969028Landships are worse than mechs. Mech is bad at its job, but atleast it has job to do. What purpose does the landship serve? You have a massive mobile bunker, so you want to put it as close to front as possible. On the other hand you have massive siege cannons that you want to put behind lines.
>>89006539Don't need nukes. WWII US incendiary bombing killed far more people than the two nukes put together. Plus the invasion plans considered that each side would also lose a lot more people, and you couldn't pull off a Normandy trick because both sides knew the few points a huge amphibious landing could happen. The total death count would be millions.The Japanese themselves killed far more people than the nukes using bullets, bayonets, swords and, not joking, their dicks. Pic related. .Even the nukes aren't optimized to kill people, but to destroy. The moment someone actually* creates a nuke designed to turn sea salt into Na-24 and spread it through a tsunami, then you may weep at the loss of life.*Some rulers have a rhetoric resembling this, but I know of no actual signs of them indeed doing so. At least in one case, he wouldn't ever do this because it would derail his internal intrigue.
>>89009296You need a better joke, limiting a vehicle to highway... you might as well just build it on rails.
>>89010717>WWII US incendiary bombing killed far more people than the two nukes put together.It's not for lack of trying but for a lack of the supplies required to give it a fair shot.
>>89008905>>89008959>They also only make sense if you got mega bunkers to roll them in and out of. Because that's all their mobility is good for.What about a Mobile Mech Repair Base?>>89010648>On the other hand you have massive siege cannons that you want to put behind lines....Or large Anti-Orbital Rail Guns you'd want to be able to move?
>>89012592Yeah, in Battletech they can be used as mobile Logistics Hubs, Mech Bays and fighter hangars can be installed on them just like a Dropship, but as other anon mentioned, they move at very slow speeds, so one would probably just use a dropship for those roles instead.The Mobile Structure rules also include large seagoing ships and airships, either of which is often more practicalPic unrelated
>>88997007>you don't know which general is competent vs incompetentthis isn't that bad because if you kill incompetent officers they still have to go through the trouble of finding a replacement, which could backfire if the replacement is more competent, could be great if they're even more incompetentregardless, you'll work your way down the list of experienced personnel eventually and cause people to become increasingly reluctant to join the officer corpsRussia would actually be one of the best places to do my doctrine because of how incompetent and corrupt it is, you probably wouldn't have to work your way down to the civilians and their police forces, while probably heavily armed comparative to most, are unlikely to be more competent than the military forces they're sending into UkraineAnd the russian military forces in Ukraine regularly lose generals on the FRONTLINES
>>88969043All that movie did was affirm what a retarded idea it is to begin with. Not even Hugo Weaving could make that shitboat float (hah).
cool awe-inspiring architecture and technological feats are verboten in the post ww2 world orderall we have in their stead are more money for them programs
>>88971437Everyone under Hitler knew it was retarded and wouldn't work. They were just feverdream retardation concocted by a methhead who nobody dared say no to.
>>89010717>Even the nukes aren't optimized to kill people, but to destroy.Look up "neutron bomb".
>>89010717So they are pulling punches. Since the nukes are just sitting around there, aging, and nobody uses them. Maybe the stigma is too big and the retaliation would become worse because your opponents, too, are pulling punches, or maybe you don’t want to get rid of all that infrastructure the nukes would destroy.
>>88969028because that picture you post there was a deliberate attempt to create confusion among the enemy lurking within the british public that defense was actually creating tanks in the background? by giving a notion that a battleship on tracks was being developed during WWI, this created a degree of misguided attention towards the axis armies.
>>88988546http://www.youtubemultiplier.com/609fdbcdb4ed6-pov-inside-the-gyro-electric-destroyer-as-it-appro.phpSadly one of the videos is now private but you can just open up more war ambience in another tab.
>>89014878I spotted a classic "you" problem.
>>89014878>the elite wasting our money on gigantic monuments to their vanity is good actually>this doesnt happen anymoreI know you just wanted to jerk off about the oh so horrible present and the great past, but this shit still happens and i hope it didnt.
>>89018626NTA but those projects have a lot of good examples going for them.The highway systemand Autobahn are one of those.The Hoover Dam is one of those.The flag that Armstrong planted on the moon is one of those.The massive flood prevention system in my city that saved hundreds of millions in damages is one of those.Many famous tourist attractions fit that bill, and serve as uniting focuses for what were once nations instead of sterile post-national states.
>>88984114>if you give them enough armor to not get easily wreckedI am going to point out that it is basically impossible to give a moving vehicle enough armor to not get wrecked. the little dark bit on the side of the water plume here is a battleship.
>>88969028Air force and the Space Age...
>>88971330On my honour I cannot watch something with>rise of theIn the title
>>89002178I was such a big fan of the first few books but I keep forgetting to look this up on streaming.
>>89008544The biggest problem is a battleship is reliant upon buoyancy to reduce shear strain on the hull
>>88969043fpbp
The Ratte would have been close to that at 1000 tons it would have been the size of a small warship.The main thing is that it is entirely impractical, uneven ground would put massive stress on the hull and most bridges couldn't support it.
