Register a SA Forums Account here!
JOINING THE SA FORUMS WILL REMOVE THIS BIG AD, THE ANNOYING UNDERLINED ADS, AND STUPID INTERSTITIAL ADS!!!

You can: log in, read the tech support FAQ, or request your lost password. This dumb message (and those ads) will appear on every screen until you register! Get rid of this crap by registering your own SA Forums Account and joining roughly 150,000 Goons, for the one-time price of $9.95! We charge money because it costs us money per month for bills, and since we don't believe in showing ads to our users, we try to make the money back through forum registrations.
 
  • Post
  • Reply
Kitfox88
Aug 21, 2007

Anybody lose their glasses?
They're perfectly acceptable bomb trucks to send to secondary objectives or places where poo poo might be risky and we don't want to throw one of our premier workhorses.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

simplefish
Mar 28, 2011

So long, and thanks for all the fish gallbladdΣrs!


I just wanna say that I am in favour of aircraft maybe not being available immediately after a mission. We have a lot of pilots so we need either a lot of losses or a lot of planes to get thrm all seats. I would prefer having a lot of planes. But then we need a lot of rotation, and yeah, maintenance (not that I want this to become Hangar Simulator 2017) is an important part in that. An abstract cooldown of x after y missions is good, a roll before planning if A or B not available due to mechanical failure - all good in my eyes

The alternative seems to be a cap on our fleet, either due to losses or just because, and I am not behind that idea unless we have a stupid number of planes.

Low cost options with low cost flight time and quick reuasbility is good, otherwise who wouldn't bring their A-game every time and leave nothing on the table? I don't care how arbitrary thpse figures are, I support the notion of them. The morning/afternoon/night mission cycles suggested earlier in the thread could be another way to achieve this, rather than an abstract "maintenance downtime". Whatever.

I just want to see us having to make compromises in what we send up without calculating minutae.

omegasgundam
Mar 30, 2010

Kitfox88 posted:

They're perfectly acceptable bomb trucks to send to secondary objectives or places where poo poo might be risky and we don't want to throw one of our premier workhorses.

Wouldn't send them us against anything nastier than an SA-17 though.

EDIT: Working on a fluff piece to explain how we move our fighters from theater to theater. If features Wacky Wally, "opportunistic acquisitions" from an ill prepared and overworked military scrapyard, and a bote that he REALLY needed to get rid of. "I'd say this was something that fell off the back of a truck, but let's be honest here. This literally the sort of thing that truck fall off of."

omegasgundam fucked around with this message at 07:57 on May 28, 2017

Yvonmukluk
Oct 10, 2012

Everything is Sinister


RandomPauI posted:

Can we legalese a way to quit without taking penalties? This is a hypothetical question right now. E.g. if the bosses are too insufferable.

Presumably our lawyers do have exit clauses in our contract. Right? Right?

Although I'm guessing there will also be noncompete clauses, so we can't just turn around and fly for Iceberg or BSNC after we leave.

SlightlyMad
Jun 7, 2015


Gary’s Answer

thatbastardken posted:

slightlymad, we need nose art. I suggest a bloody-mouthed koala in a straitjacket





How's that, dropbear? A quick job but I am no artist.

omegasgundam
Mar 30, 2010
And here we have part 3. I may or may not add cannons at some point, put it's not really relevant to the LP.

Guidance Abbreviations
None: Unguided
IR: Infrared Heat Seeker
Laser: Laser designated
Semi: Semi-active radar
Radar: Internal Radar guided
ARH: Anti-Radiation Homing
TV: Camera remote controlled
GPS: Global Positioning System
INS: Internal Navigation System, works when the GPS is debris
Comm: Command guidance, wire or radio

Damage Abbreviations
Frag: Fragmentation
HE: High Explosive
AP: Armor Piercing
SAP: Semi-Armor Piercing
HTP: Hard Target Penetrating
SC: Shaped Charge

Property Abbreviations
HoJ: Home On Jamming
BOL: Bearing Only Launch
TF: Terrain Following
SP: Search Pattern
Pre-Set: Pre-Briefed target only
Pop-Up: Terminal attack pattern is Pop-up
Random: Terminal attack pattern is Random
Re-Attack: Re-Attack capability
Memory: ARH Target memory
HOF: High Off Bore launching
LOAL: Lock-On After Launch


NATO SAMs
MANPADS Section: 3 teams
pre:
Name                   Range  Guide CEP  PK   Dam   Weight Type  RoF Shots Properties
FIM-92F Stinger RMP:   3 nm   IR    -    65%  1.05  15 kg  Frag  5   2     -
Starstreak II          4 nm   IR    -    75%  0.94  20 kg  Frag  5   2     British
RB 70 Bolide           8 nm   S-L   -    65%  0.38  15 kg  Frag  5   2     Swedish


Vehicle Platoon: 3 launchers
pre:
Name                   Range  Guide CEP  PK   Dam   Weight Type  RoF Shots Properties
MIM-77G Chaparral      4.5 nm IR    -    65%  4.38  87 kg  Frag, 5   4     -
RB 98 IRIS-T SLS       6 nm   IR    -    95%  3.99  87 kg  Frag, 2   4     German
Tamir [Iron Dome]      8 nm   Radar -    95%  4.38  90 kg  Frag, 2   20    HoJ, Israeli
MIM-120B NASAMS:       16 nm  Radar -    85%  2.7   154 kg Frag, 6   6     HoJ, Norwegian
MIM-120C-7 NASAMS:     20 nm  Radar -    95%  2.7   154 kg Frag, 6   6     HoJ, Norwegian


Battery: 6 launchers
pre:
Name                   Range  Guide CEP  PK   Dam   Weight Type  RoF Shots Properties
MIM-23E/P I-HAWK ELM:  22 nm  Semi  -    70%  19.6  635 kg Frag  3   3     -
MIM-23K I-HAWK ELM:    22 nm  Semi  -    75%  19.6  635 kg Frag  3   3     -
MIM-104F PAC-3 ERINT   40nm   Radar -    95%  1     320 kg AP    2   8     HoJ
MIM-104B Patriot       55nm   Semi  -    85%  31.8  900 kg Frag  2   4     -
MIM-104D Patriot GEM   55nm   Semi  -    90%  29.4  900 kg Frag  2   4     -
MIM-104E GEM+          55nm   Semi  -    95%  29.4  900 kg Frag  2   4     -
MIM-104F PAC-3 MSE     40nm   Radar -    95%  1     320 kg AP    2   8     HoJ



Oddball Unites: varies
pre:
Name                   Range  Guide CEP  PK   Dam   Weight Type  RoF Shots Properties
Python 6 SPYDER-MR (2) 10 nm  IR    -    95%  3.99  105 kg Frag  2   8     HOB, Israeli
Akash(4)               15 nm  Semi  -    70%  19.6  720 kg Frag  2   3     Indian, Complete poo poo
Derby SPYDER-MR (2)    18 nm  Radar -    95%  4.38  118 kg Frag  2   8     HoJ, Israeli
Aster 30 SAAM-FR (4)   60 nm  Radar -    95%  13.6  450 kg Frag  2   9     HoJ, LOAL, French



USSR SAMs
MANPADS Section: 3 teams
pre:
Name                   Range  Guide CEP  PK   Dam   Weight Type  RoF Shots Properties
SA-14 Gremlin          3 nm   IR    -    45%  0.38  11 kg  Frag  5   2     -
SA-16 Gimlet           3 nm   IR    -    50%  0.7   11 kg  Frag  5   2     -
SA-18 Grouse           3 nm   IR    -    50%  0.88  11 kg  Frag  5   2     -


Vehicle Platoon: 2 vehicles
pre:
Name                   Range  Guide CEP  PK   Dam   Weight Type  RoF Shots Properties
SA-13 Gopher           4 nm   IR    -    45%  1.75  42 kg  Frag  5   8     -
SA-19 Grisom           4 nm   Semi  -    70%  3.15  60 kg  Frag  2   8     -
SA-15a Gauntlet        9 nm   Semi  -    80%  5.25  167 kg Frag  2   8     -


Buk Platoon: 3 vehicles
pre:
Name                   Range  Guide CEP  PK   Dam   Weight Type  RoF Shots Properties
SA-11 Gadfly           25 nm  Semi  -    75%  24.5  685 kg Frag  5   4     -


S-300P- Battery: 6 launchers, choice
pre:
Name                   Range  Guide CEP  PK   Dam   Weight Type  RoF Shots Properties
SA-10a Grumble         40 nm  Semi  -    75%  45.5 1480 kg Frag  2   4     -
SA-10b Grumble         50 nm  Semi  -    80%  45.5 1470 kg Frag  2   4     -
 


S-300V Battery: 4 launchers, 2 of each
pre:
Name                   Range  Guide CEP  PK   Dam   Weight Type  RoF Shots Properties
SA-12a Gladiator       45 nm  Semi  -    80%  150  3490 kg Frag  2   4     -
SA-12b Giant           60 nm  Semi  -    80%  150  5805 kg Frag  2   2     -
Russian SAMs
MANPADS Section: 3 teams
pre:
Name                   Range  Guide CEP  PK   Dam   Weight Type  RoF Shots Properties
SA-24 Grouse           3 nm   IR    -    50%  0.88  12 kg  Frag  5   2     -
SA-25 Verba            3.5 nm IR    -    50%  0.88  12 kg  Frag  5   2     -


Vehicle Platoon: 2 vehicles
pre:
Name                   Range  Guide CEP  PK   Dam   Weight Type  RoF Shots Properties
SA-13 Gopher           4 nm   IR    -    45%  1.75  42 kg  Frag  5   8     -
SA-15e Gauntlet        9 nm   Semi  -    80%  5.25  167 kg Frag  2   16    -
SA-22 Greyhound        10 nm  Semi  -    70%  7     90 kg  Frag  2   12    -


Buk Platoon: 3 vehicles
pre:
Name                   Range  Guide CEP  PK   Dam   Weight Type  RoF Shots Properties
SA-17 Grizzly          40 nm  Semi  -    80%  24.5  720 kg Frag  3   8     -


S-300PM-1 Battery: 6 launchers, choice
pre:
Name                   Range  Guide CEP  PK   Dam   Weight Type  RoF Shots Properties
SA-20a Gargoyle        80 nm  Semi  -    80%  52.5 1780 kg Frag  2   4     -
SA-20b Gargoyle        110 nm Semi  -    80%  52.5 1800 kg Frag  2   4     -


S-300V4 Battery: 4 launchers, have both
pre:
Name                   Range  Guide CEP  PK   Dam   Weight Type  RoF Shots Properties
SA-23a Gladiator       80 nm  Semi  -    80%  150  3490 kg Frag  2   4     -
SA-23b Giant           120 nm Semi  -    80%  150  5805 kg Frag  2   2     -


S-400 Battery: 8 launchers, choice. Also excuse me if I find the missile weights WAY too low.
pre:
Name                   Range  Guide CEP  PK   Dam   Weight Type  RoF Shots Properties
SA-21a Growler         135 nm Semi  -    80%  123  1800 kg Frag  2   4     -
SA-21b Growler         215 nm Radar -    80%  43   1800 kg Frag  2   4     HoJ
FREAKEN LASERS
Both of the 10 nm will have been in service for several years by the time of the LP.
pre:
Name                   Range  Guide CEP  PK   Dam   Type  RoF Shots Properties
HELLADS 10 kw          3nm    Laser -    90%  2.4   Laser 7   100   -
HELLADS 60 kw          4nm    Laser -    90%  2.4   Laser 7   100   -
LaWS                   10 nm  Laser -    90%  2.4   Laser 15  100   -
Tamir [Iron Beam]      10 nm  Laser -    90%  2.4   Laser 15  100   Israeli

omegasgundam fucked around with this message at 05:57 on Jun 11, 2017

Groggy nard
Aug 6, 2013

How does into botes?

omegasgundam posted:

FREAKEN LASERS
Both of the 10 nm will have been in service for several years by the time of the LP.
pre:
Name                   Range  Guide CEP  PK   Dam   Type  RoF Shots Properties
HELLADS 10 kw          3nm    Laser -    90%  2.4   Laser 7   100   -
HELLADS 60 kw          4nm    Laser -    90%  2.4   Laser 7   100   -
LaWS                   10 nm  Laser -    90%  2.4   Laser 15  100   -
Tamir [Iron Beam]      10 nm  Laser -    90%  2.4   Laser 15  100   -

I would like to restate my declaration to vote for a laser bote.

omegasgundam
Mar 30, 2010

Groggy nard posted:

I would like to restate my declaration to vote for a laser bote.

Good luck with that. The Iron Beam is Israeli, and best of luck getting a set out of them. The LaWS is USN, and I think they would pay particularly close attention to ships that have it installed. The damage and refire rate are rather lovely against jets, but handle the anti-ordinance role just fine. I'd rather get another I-HAWK battery as well as an Iron Dome set before we do a lot of branching out.

Quinntan
Sep 11, 2013

sparkmaster posted:

So you're saying we should steal a cruise ship? This is a good idea, and I endorse.

I'm saying we should buy Crete and then start up an airbase/tourist attraction. Imagine how much we could charge old American tourists for backseat rides in the Phantoms!

Yvonmukluk
Oct 10, 2012

Everything is Sinister


I don't know why people think Crete is for sale. Didn't the Yugoslavians buy all of Greece's debt?

Jimmy4400nav
Apr 1, 2011

Ambassador to Moonlandia

Yvonmukluk posted:

I don't know why people think Crete is for sale. Didn't the Yugoslavians buy all of Greece's debt?

I think its more people doing thought experiments than anything else, kind of like how people kept going in abiut how we should invade Iceland.

power crystals
Jun 6, 2007

Who wants a belly rub??

Any island purchase had better come with our own arms manufacturer so we don't need to worry about severing our own supply lines.

omegasgundam posted:

Operating costs have been removed. They didn't add anything to the LP, and were tedious and unfun.

I'm not sure where you're getting this. We don't explicitly pre-purchase ammunition anymore (because yeah that sucked), but we still pay to replace it and I'm pretty sure we still pay for sending planes into the air even if they don't fire a shot. Unless you're counting things like pure maintenance, or other base-only operations expenditures, in which case as I understand it they never were a thing in the first place because while I'm sure some of this crowd would love to play Plane Mechanic 2023, it would detract from the point of the LP.

Crazycryodude
Aug 15, 2015

Lets get our X tons of Duranium back!

....Is that still a valid thing to jingoistically blow out of proportion?


Yeah I still think that our various planes cost X dollars for every hour we fly them to represent fuel and maintenance and everything in one easy to calculate package.

Also, I don't get what the "opportunity cost" is of keeping the AMX's around. Again, it's not like we can only own 60 planes total or whatever so what does getting rid of them do? Add a pretty negligible few million to the bank account?

Quinntan
Sep 11, 2013

Crazycryodude posted:

Also, I don't get what the "opportunity cost" is of keeping the AMX's around. Again, it's not like we can only own 60 planes total or whatever so what does getting rid of them do? Add a pretty negligible few million to the bank account?

Selling them and the Mirages would have added $46m to our current $36.2m. That means we could buy more of Wacky Willie's aircraft, perhaps a PS-1 to go along with the Shackleton people are after.

xthetenth
Dec 30, 2012

Mario wasn't sure if this Jeb guy was a good influence on Yoshi.

Quinntan posted:

Selling them and the Mirages would have added $46m to our current $36.2m. That means we could buy more of Wacky Willie's aircraft, perhaps a PS-1 to go along with the Shackleton people are after.

I don't think anybody but me is demented enough to want a Shackleton.

Quinntan
Sep 11, 2013
I'd like a second AEW bird, and even a lovely one is better than none. Same with the MPAs.

glynnenstein
Feb 18, 2014


I think in general we should not sell planes that are not severely limited in capability. Even then, I think we'll have a mission or two where stuff we collect can shine/burn before we move it on. Lets wait and see what the next procurement actually looks like before we decide we don't have enough money for it.

Quinntan
Sep 11, 2013

glynnenstein posted:

I think in general we should not sell planes that are not severely limited in capability. Even then, I think we'll have a mission or two where stuff we collect can shine/burn before we move it on. Lets wait and see what the next procurement actually looks like before we decide we don't have enough money for it.

I'd argue the opposite. As the general quality of our fleet improves, the gap between the average quality and the more limited stuff becomes more apparent. In the ground attack role the gap between the AMX/Mirage F1 and our Tornadoes is pretty glaring in terms of payload, range of armaments, flight radius and countermeasures. This isn't aided by them being so limited in number, with only a pair of either of them. They both impose their own substantial additional complications to planning ops while adding little to no additional capabilities.

Groggy nard
Aug 6, 2013

How does into botes?

omegasgundam posted:

Good luck with that. The Iron Beam is Israeli, and best of luck getting a set out of them. The LaWS is USN, and I think they would pay particularly close attention to ships that have it installed. The damage and refire rate are rather lovely against jets, but handle the anti-ordinance role just fine. I'd rather get another I-HAWK battery as well as an Iron Dome set before we do a lot of branching out.

This may all be true but listen to this

laser bote

Beer4TheBeerGod
Aug 23, 2004
Exciting Lemon

Quinntan posted:

I'd argue the opposite. As the general quality of our fleet improves, the gap between the average quality and the more limited stuff becomes more apparent. In the ground attack role the gap between the AMX/Mirage F1 and our Tornadoes is pretty glaring in terms of payload, range of armaments, flight radius and countermeasures. This isn't aided by them being so limited in number, with only a pair of either of them. They both impose their own substantial additional complications to planning ops while adding little to no additional capabilities.

Precisely. Given our current theater they seem even less useful and I would much rather have the reserve funds to take advantage of what may come.

Loel
Jun 4, 2012

"For the Emperor."

There was a terrible noise.
There was a terrible silence.



omegasgundam posted:

Good luck with that. The Iron Beam is Israeli, and best of luck getting a set out of them. The LaWS is USN, and I think they would pay particularly close attention to ships that have it installed. The damage and refire rate are rather lovely against jets, but handle the anti-ordinance role just fine. I'd rather get another I-HAWK battery as well as an Iron Dome set before we do a lot of branching out.

This is a step in the right direction, but ...

SA-21. SS-26. :D

Dance Officer
May 4, 2017

It would be awesome if we could dance!

omegasgundam posted:

Good luck with that. The Iron Beam is Israeli, and best of luck getting a set out of them. The LaWS is USN, and I think they would pay particularly close attention to ships that have it installed. The damage and refire rate are rather lovely against jets, but handle the anti-ordinance role just fine. I'd rather get another I-HAWK battery as well as an Iron Dome set before we do a lot of branching out.

The Israelis have always been happy to sell modern equipment to anyone who isn't involved in being a threat to the Jewish State of Israel. I don't see why they wouldn't sell

glynnenstein
Feb 18, 2014


Beer4TheBeerGod posted:

Precisely. Given our current theater they seem even less useful and I would much rather have the reserve funds to take advantage of what may come.

Well, lets see a mission or two before we decide that. In any case, we will probably be able to sell planes at the same time as we are making purchase decisions anyway. No need to rush to turn planes to money before we can spend it.

Brovine
Dec 24, 2011

Mooooo?
As a pilot who is yet to get a plane, I vote in favour of keeping everything. Otherwise we'll not have enough seats for all the pilots for ages!

RA Rx
Mar 24, 2016

Yeah, it's just the optimization lobby trying to push their win further by eliminating sub-optimal planes we already bought step by step up in quality until we're all flying F-22s into space on Saturn rockets.

Which would be awesome. But the purging is unnecessary.

We can do that and still let the people who want to fly Migs, Super Tucanos and whatever that thing we didn't sell is, especially if they've already been voted in and brought onboard. It's just a few million.

PS. Also, some day there's going to be a need for a whole load of cheap bomb trucks to stop some massive wave of primitive ground units (or commit war crimes on pedestrians) and we're going to find that the optimization lobby doesn't have an extra 20 dusty planes running around to drop cheap cluster munitions and strafe.

RA Rx fucked around with this message at 18:25 on May 28, 2017

Galaga Galaxian
Apr 23, 2009

What a childish tactic!
Don't you think you should put more thought into your battleplan?!


Excuse me, but Saturns are Cold War relics, we want flashy modern Falcon 9s from our buddy Musk. :colbert:

RA Rx
Mar 24, 2016

Galaga Galaxian posted:

Excuse me, but Saturns are Cold War relics, we want flashy modern Falcon 9s from our buddy Musk. :colbert:

Oh right, they should be ready by now! Maybe he'll even have some massively improved budget version if he's managed to keep his... aggressive timeline.

RA Rx fucked around with this message at 18:24 on May 28, 2017

Quinntan
Sep 11, 2013

RA Rx posted:

Yeah, it's just the optimization lobby trying to push it one step further by eliminating suboptimal planes step by step up until we're all flying F-22s and Saturn rockets.

Not in the slightest. There aren't many aircraft suited for somewhere like the Bering Sea, but the F1 and AMX are really going to struggle. They can beat up on unescorted fishing boats, but it's unlikely we're going to get that opportunity in this theatre all that often.

Besides, I'm all about maximising the bang for our bucks. I'm pretty ok with the Kfirs and Phantoms, maybe we look at upgrading the Phantoms to the Terminator spec if we get more A2A fighters, as it stands right now the Peace Icarus Phantoms are the weakest BVR A2A machines we have. As Terminators they'd lose their A2A armament but they'd get longer range glide bombs, ALCMs and more reliable Paveways. If the Moroccan upgrade for our F1s came along I'd say yes to that too.

glynnenstein posted:

Well, lets see a mission or two before we decide that. In any case, we will probably be able to sell planes at the same time as we are making purchase decisions anyway. No need to rush to turn planes to money before we can spend it.

Don't think we've had an opportunity to sell aircraft mid-theatre before even when we've been able to buy stuff in.

glynnenstein
Feb 18, 2014


Quinntan posted:

Don't think we've had an opportunity to sell aircraft mid-theatre before even when we've been able to buy stuff in.

I don't actually think we have an opportunity right now, either. We just voted to not sell 3 days ago.

Crazycryodude
Aug 15, 2015

Lets get our X tons of Duranium back!

....Is that still a valid thing to jingoistically blow out of proportion?


Purge the optimizers and buy 20 billion Super Tukes, imo.

Would be hilarious if nothing else.

Crazycryodude fucked around with this message at 18:11 on May 28, 2017

RA Rx
Mar 24, 2016

Crazycryodude posted:

Purge the optimizers and buy 20 billion Super Tukes, imo.

Would be hilarious if nothing else.

If we ever take over the world with Musk we should split the thread into warring factions.

Which would be unwieldy and undoable, but a man can dream. :allears:

Loel
Jun 4, 2012

"For the Emperor."

There was a terrible noise.
There was a terrible silence.



RA Rx posted:

Yeah, it's just the optimization lobby trying to push their win further by eliminating sub-optimal planes we already bought step by step up in quality until we're all flying F-22s into space on Saturn rockets.

I mean

RA Rx
Mar 24, 2016

Loel posted:

I mean

I'm just saying, we can lob Reaper drones and Fairey Swordfishes after it, doesn't all have to be killbots.

We can have all of the above!

Edit: Word. Might need to get past the moon Nazis first though.

RA Rx fucked around with this message at 18:18 on May 28, 2017

Loel
Jun 4, 2012

"For the Emperor."

There was a terrible noise.
There was a terrible silence.



I just want to end with orbital space death planes and also a secret base on mars

Night10194
Feb 13, 2012

We'll start,
like many good things,
with a bear.

If we get to fight moon nazis this will be the best LP ever despite any misgivings or thread strife.

Yooper
Apr 30, 2012


I have returned and the mosquito's did not carry us away. I'll count votes later this afternoon and we'll get into mission planning.

Also, the employer will be comically insufferable but not in a way that we'll want to gently caress off. Think Office Space more than Toyota.


Night10194
Feb 13, 2012

We'll start,
like many good things,
with a bear.

Seriously how would we stat up moon nazis.

I need this.

Added Space
Jul 13, 2012

Free Markets
Free People

Curse you Hayard-Gunnes!
Moon Nazis are surprisingly dull.

There is some conspiracy claims that the Nazis jacked a few UFOs and used them to build a moon base. Thing is, these UFOs didn't have any weapons on them. So, for the last 70 years, the Nazis have dedicated themselves to trolling the free world by buzzing radar sites and abducting hapless rural folk. I couldn't find any claim they've taken military action or plan to in the future.

Moon Nazis in game would be an anomalous radar contact that flew towards the north pole at mach ten for a few seconds before disappearing.

Dreamsicle
Oct 16, 2013

Added Space posted:

Moon Nazis are surprisingly dull.

There is some conspiracy claims that the Nazis jacked a few UFOs and used them to build a moon base. Thing is, these UFOs didn't have any weapons on them. So, for the last 70 years, the Nazis have dedicated themselves to trolling the free world by buzzing radar sites and abducting hapless rural folk. I couldn't find any claim they've taken military action or plan to in the future.

I think he means Iron Sky moon Nazis.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Davin Valkri
Apr 8, 2011

Maybe you're weighing the moral pros and cons but let me assure you that OH MY GOD
SHOOT ME IN THE GODDAMNED FACE
WHAT ARE YOU WAITING FOR?!
Wouldn't theoretical moon Nazis be horribly outclassed by literally everything in the modern database?

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • Post
  • Reply