LOCKMART@sh.itjust.works to NonCredibleDefense@sh.itjust.worksEnglish · 12 days agoBattleship reformers are unironically more fanatical and non-credible than A-10 reformerssh.itjust.worksexternal-linkmessage-square43fedilinkarrow-up1142arrow-down12
arrow-up1140arrow-down1external-linkBattleship reformers are unironically more fanatical and non-credible than A-10 reformerssh.itjust.worksLOCKMART@sh.itjust.works to NonCredibleDefense@sh.itjust.worksEnglish · 12 days agomessage-square43fedilink
minus-squarenickwitha_k (he/him)@lemmy.sdf.orglinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up16·12 days agoBut does it go “brrrrrrrrrrt” ?
minus-squareFisting for Freedom@sh.itjust.worksMlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up4·11 days agoPlus the 16" guns can fire nuclear shells. It’s like the Davy Crockett’s big brother.
minus-squareooterness@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up2·11 days agoImma let you finish, but a gatling gun made of 16" guns is strictly better than a regular 16" gun. See also: This unit from Supreme Commander
minus-squareoptional@sh.itjust.workslinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up2·11 days agoWhat about a gattling gun using 16" guns as ammo, then?
minus-squareooterness@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up1·10 days agoSomebody get DARPA on this, stat.
minus-squareDroechai@lemm.eelinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up1·edit-210 days agoWouldn’t you want the Explosive* payload be nuclear rather than the shell? Seems dangerous for the crew Edited forgotten word to make it clearer
But does it go “brrrrrrrrrrt” ?
Scale it up.
KABOOM > brrrrrrrt
Plus the 16" guns can fire nuclear shells. It’s like the Davy Crockett’s big brother.
Imma let you finish, but a gatling gun made of 16" guns is strictly better than a regular 16" gun.
See also: This unit from Supreme Commander
What about a gattling gun using 16" guns as ammo, then?
Somebody get DARPA on this, stat.
Wouldn’t you want the Explosive* payload be nuclear rather than the shell? Seems dangerous for the crew
Edited forgotten word to make it clearer