DIscussion: Nerf Navies

[Mogar]

basically, the x2 on screen ships gives larger nations a massive naval advantage, could we remove that from people after a certain size, or put limitations for a "max navy" size?

[Zoot Zoot]

No, we already have a system which allowed states with no IG navy to have a Navy, so why should the bigger nations be punished for having larger navies?

[Zoot Zoot]

That said, I would very much like to put in place a system which allowed players to exchange ships for points to put towards other ships, for example, I have no need for 24 corvettes, but the points equate to six SSN's, something I desperately need to properly defend against submerged threats to my surface fleets.

 

Just used me as an example as this thread followed right on the tail of my GM's hall post.

[Mogar]

The entire concept of this RP originally was to nerf the massive statistical advantage that larger nations receive, so I perceive navys as something we've ignored, and based upon how they have been used as of late, it would certainly prevent the >50k nations from continuing to behave as they did in RP1.

[Zoot Zoot]

Hardly Mogar, it just presents under 50k nations with the opportunity to try and behave has the larger RP1 powers did.

 

RP2 as far as military statistics at the moment is at an excellent balance, the customization available, the tech ceiling, everything, its a finely tuned machine, but nerfing bigger players for having bigger navies isnt fair on them. Lets put it into perspective;

 

The US Navy has 290 combat vessels. I have 130, Lynneth has slightly more, as does Cent and Triyun.

The US Navy has 3,700 combat aircraft. I have 990 after losing 300,000 soldiers for my ground army, not sure how many Lynneth, Cent and Triyun have.

 

The limitations on ground soldiers limit how far one can project power Mogar. Like how i blockaded Sweden (ignore the fact I was nuked for a moment), the 114,000 soldiers I had wouldnt be anywhere near enough to invade and sieze the territories of Denmark and Norway, even with 95% of my entire navy supporting it and my entire air force (the last bit is an extrapolation on a senario).

 

The ships required to move that many men, limit any sort of expeditionary forces to the warships of a fleet, which is around 12,000 men per expeditionary force going of the same fleet composition I had.

 

If you have a small navy, build lots of anti ship defences and anti ship missiles for your airforce, and a good AA network to supplement your airforce in air defence.

 

If you have a big navy, you have no advantage other than you can put more firepower on a target from long range with minimal threat for a limited amount of time before munitions are expended and it must re-supply.

[Yerushalayim]

If the purpose of RP2 was to balance the divide between smaller CN nations and larger ones, so that larger nations do not have such a crushing advantage in the RP, then it does seem sensible that a cap would be put in place for navies. That said, our IG navies are pretty meh. I'd be down with swapping entirely to a points based system, with a cap on the total number of points that a nation can receive after a certain point (similar to how we treat soldiers), or a solid cap for all nations. This would let people have much more say in how their IC navies are developed, rather than players with nations of comparable infrastructure IG having identically composed IC navies.

[Evangeline Anovilis]

The entire concept of this RP originally was to nerf the massive statistical advantage that larger nations receive, so I perceive navys as something we've ignored, and based upon how they have been used as of late, it would certainly prevent the >50k nations from continuing to behave as they did in RP1.

I shall behave as I always do.

 

I'm currently able to field 16 corvettes, 8 landing ships, 8 battleships, 7 cruisers, 14 frigates, 12 destroyers, 6 submarines and 6 carriers. What I actually field though, is 16 corvettes, 12 frigates, 4 destroyers, 8 battleships, 6 submarines and 4 carriers. Mostly, because it is a pain to actually find befitting names and cruisers I actually feel like using. Also, because some of us just simply need no grand navy... If I could give those ships for anything other than ships, I'd actually do that...

[Mogar]

The United States is a superpower, if the intent was to remove the ability to BE a superpower, how is it logical to allow such a massive disparity in navy but have caps on everything else?

 

Eva I have told you multiple times I respect the way you play most of the time, but just because you are not a minmaxer does not mean other people also are not, just as simply because I believe character RP should be a more core part of this RP does not mean I can make other people do character RP.

Edited September 1, 2014 by Mogar

[Voodoo Nova]

If we remove the x2, remove it for everyone. By the way, I'm completely against removing the x2 for the specific ships that have it.

Edited September 1, 2014 by Voodoo Nova

[Captain Enema]

If the purpose of RP2 was to balance the divide between smaller CN nations and larger ones, so that larger nations do not have such a crushing advantage in the RP, then it does seem sensible that a cap would be put in place for navies. That said, our IG navies are pretty meh. I'd be down with swapping entirely to a points based system, with a cap on the total number of points that a nation can receive after a certain point (similar to how we treat soldiers), or a solid cap for all nations. This would let people have much more say in how their IC navies are developed, rather than players with nations of comparable infrastructure IG having identically composed IC navies.

 

Make some polling options along these lines and let's get a vote going ol' son. I'd vote yes for this.

[Mogar]

Someone would have to come up with specific numbers, but I do support Yeru's proposal.

[Captain Enema]

Polling options

 

 

a) no need to change

 

b) Yes change

 

C) if yes:

 

 

 

 

Now the if yes one is the dilly of a pickle. thoughts?

[Hereno]

None of you are actually interested in getting rid of any advantage you have because of your CN stats. The big nations are interested in making sure that big nations are the best, whereas the mid-tier nations want the mid-tier nations and big nations to be more or less the same. Literally every single argument we have on these forums is between a bunch of self-interested sophists who couldn't care less about the wider effects of what they're doing as long as it means that they get an advantage, which means that the only way you're ever going to achieve your parity with the large nations is to give up your advantage over the smaller nations. Until you're prepared to do that, the smaller nations will always vote to give the larger nations an advantage over you because regardless of what happens, the smaller nations will be at a disadvantage anyway, and so they might as well let the big nations reign supreme and then just ally and/or kowtow to them.

Or, in other words, until you're all ready to stop being such transparent cretins and design an egalitarian RP system divorced from CN game stats entirely, this discussion will never lead to anything worthwhile. I can't wait to hear the arguments about how giving everybody a cookie cutter nation build based on CN stats is the way to allow maximum customizability, or how giving big nations advantages but calling it a points system somehow changes the way things are now. No, they don't, and you know they don't, and none of you deserve any bonuses in this RP based on how long you've been playing CN, and furthermore, the idea of a RP based on arbitrary CN stats is stupid given we've already seen what happens over the course of several years. Not to mention that CN stats themselves are bunk and only roughly tied to their RL usefulness.

[Captain Enema]

words

 

 

You let me down Hereno, I've depended upon you for great polling options in the past and you feed the fires of a big bawww fest with your honking and bleeting.

 

Check yourself before you wreck yourself.

 

GET ME polling options. 

 

Damn kids these days.

[Lynneth]

Yeru's proposal sounds interesting. Keep the base points for everyone, but turn IG ships into points along the lines that the points system is going already.

 

And make carriers hilariously expensive to keep their numbers low. :V:

 

If y'all have the patience to wait a day I'll try to come up with something reasonable tomorrow, if I find the time.

 

 

I'll probably be going for "Your number of IG ships times this arbitrary number is your points limit."

[Hereno]

You let me down Hereno, I've depended upon you for great polling options in the past and you feed the fires of a big bawww fest with your honking and bleeting.
 
Check yourself before you wreck yourself.
 
GET ME polling options. 
 
Damn kids these days.

If you want me to design you a poll, then make it one where there is a possibility that we won't have to revisit it in a month when we realize that nothing has actually changed.

[Evangeline Anovilis]

Honestly, I don't give much of a damn, as long as I am not left with almost the same number of screens to capital ships. So, just removing the modifiers is the worst "solution" to the "problem", when I end up with 8 battleships, but only 7 frigates to protect them...

 

And noone can say I'm just interested in my own gain here...

[Voodoo Nova]

If we're shifting to points, here was my suggestion regarding the ability to swap ships out, which is fairly relevant to the discussion:

 

http://forums.cybernations.net/index.php?/topic/122264-the-discussion-bus/?p=3299811

[Captain Enema]

Voodoo, the entire premise of a point system is that you spend them how you see fit. 

[Captain Enema]

If you want me to design you a poll, then make it one where there is a possibility that we won't have to revisit it in a month when we realize that nothing has actually changed.

 

Can't promise that. Sorry. 

[Voodoo Nova]

Voodoo, the entire premise of a point system is that you spend them how you see fit. 

 

Well, yes. It was something some asked of me a while ago, so I brought it into this discussion as well. The values of the ships is more what I was gearing towards with it, but how points are determined is another issue altogether.

[Zoot Zoot]

TBM, the points are great, but limiting as you cannot remove ships you dont want, for example, an spare carrier or two, perhaps a few battleships, corvettes and hell, I have 24 landing ships. I dont need 24 landing ships.

 

Ide rather swap 10 of them out, along with my 24 corvettes, 1 carrier and 1 battleship and get more points to spend on SSN's and perhaps a few frigates/destroyers.

 

I won't lie that Im opposed to any restriction placed on +50k players at this point so late in the game because I like my navy, but I would like it better if i could actually use the ships I dont need in exchange for points for stuff I actually need.

[Captain Enema]

I say this.. the problem here as I see it is implementing a system that is easy to use. I know people are preaching realism but honestly cnrp2 is the most unrealistic expression of in real life anything.

 

Keeping it simple keeps it easy to use, easy to monitor, easy to discuss with people who make mistakes with it.

 

 

Over 100k should get 15000 points

 

over 50k should get 10000 points

 

over 25 k 7500

 

under 3250

 

Or something like the above.

 

Keep it simple guys and as Voodoo expressed, you spend them HOW you want to spend them.

[Captain Enema]

TBM, the points are great, but limiting as you cannot remove ships you dont want, for example, an spare carrier or two, perhaps a few battleships, corvettes and hell, I have 24 landing ships. I dont need 24 landing ships.

 

Ide rather swap 10 of them out, along with my 24 corvettes, 1 carrier and 1 battleship and get more points to spend on SSN's and perhaps a few frigates/destroyers.

 

I won't lie that Im opposed to any restriction placed on +50k players at this point so late in the game because I like my navy, but I would like it better if i could actually use the ships I dont need in exchange for points for stuff I actually need.

 

Don't vote yes for any proposal that you don't like. Put in a poll that reflects your interests. However, it's a vote, you may well not get what you like. That's the rub and you'll live with it like everyone else.

 

The point system allows you to spend your points how you see fit. If you don't want 10 corvettes, don't spend the points.

[Captain Enema]

And btw, the system I propose doesn't account for ingame ships at all. You get no points for those ships and they don't count in cnrp2. 

 

which is why I think the point tiers need to be significant enough for all of the levels to make it worth it.

 

and you'll need to have a very accurate factbook showing how you've spent your points. Show your work kids, your teacher will be checking.