CNRP OOC Thread

[LeVentNoir]

Then we should no have the 10x multiplier. Easy. Otherwise out comes my 6.67 million strong army.

Oh, and all it costs is 100k IG every ten days, due to swapping.

[Triyun]

I don't think as far as real nations go, 6 mil is a ridiculous amount.

[LeVentNoir]

Triyun, thats about four times the most troops ever held in a single nations military, and thats the 1.3 billion strong china, with a land army of 1.6 million.

6 million under arms is insane.

Edited December 28, 2008 by LeVentNoir

[Silhouette]

Yes, it is. Most militaries would be lucky to get 100,000 men.

[JEDCJT]

Triyun, thats about four times the most troops ever held in a single nations military, and thats the 1.3 billion strong china, with a land army of 1.6 million.

6 million under arms is insane.

Hm, really? The Soviet Union had much less population than that, and it still boasted an army of over 6 million. But of course, that was back in the 1940s, so...

Edited December 28, 2008 by JEDCJT

[Sumeragi]

On total troop number: 10X IG Max.

Effeciency is just a way of showing how well your soldiers fight. The camps should mean just more training, not recruiting.

[Triyun]

At full mobilization the Soviets had more than 6 million, so did the US. (This is WW II)

[Tahsir]

anyone saying large militaries never exists I direct them to these two wikipedia articles...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_War_II_casualties

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_War_I_casualties

remember thats just killed/wounded/missing. There are still MORE people alive and fighting.

6 million in a war ready army is beans.

[Stormcrow]

At full mobilization the Soviets had more than 6 million, so did the US. (This is WW II)

But it would have been impossible to continue that mobilization. Of course, you'd never mobilize that size of a force for great long spans of time, so you could still perhaps justify it, but it is something to consider before you put that out there. Besides that, I'm of the opinion that, unlike the rest of CN, there should always be a chance for the smaller nations to change things. With enough skill, a Player should be able to defeat a nation that might be stronger than him in numbers and tech but not roleplaying skill. I envision a CNRP where a determined fighter with skill can defeat a lumbering giant without.

These are suggestions, however; not demands. I'm readily enjoying the formatting ideas being put out here, even if I don't agree with all of them; its a sign of the communities interest in surviving, and that more then anything proves what we're all doing here is worthwhile.

Edit: Besides, I might want to rp alittle

[Lynneth]

At full mobilization the Soviets had more than 6 million, so did the US. (This is WW II)

The Soviet Union also had 200 million people in its nation, unlike most CNRP nations that, with a *100 modifier have 5-10 million. I'm using a *400 mod and still have less than 40 million people in my nation.

[Stefano Palmieri]

Heads up, Going to be Fairly inactive between now and January 20 due to hols. If you're going to invade me have fun

[JerreyRough]

Ok, I am now having issues with people having Battle-suited soilders. There are reasons why RL armies do not have them; one large reason is the cost. Infantry are damn cheap. If you give them power-armor, then they are damn costly and no longer damn cheap.

I mean, it's better for infantry & makes them more powerful, sure. But if you go into battle with 100,000 troops, thats over a dang trillion bucks. Yea. I found a good article on pro's/cons of future troopers here.

But, if you still want super-soidlers (and you got past 2008 tech), then here's an in-between point so then you don't have 5+ million troopers; use a negitive modifier, say -5, and you RP troops with battle-suits. There. My issues with battle-suits and the over-population of soidlers solved.

[Subtleknifewielder]

But it would have been impossible to continue that mobilization. Of course, you'd never mobilize that size of a force for great long spans of time, so you could still perhaps justify it, but it is something to consider before you put that out there. Besides that, I'm of the opinion that, unlike the rest of CN, there should always be a chance for the smaller nations to change things. With enough skill, a Player should be able to defeat a nation that might be stronger than him in numbers and tech but not roleplaying skill. I envision a CNRP where a determined fighter with skill can defeat a lumbering giant without.

These are suggestions, however; not demands. I'm readily enjoying the formatting ideas being put out here, even if I don't agree with all of them; its a sign of the communities interest in surviving, and that more then anything proves what we're all doing here is worthwhile.

Edit: Besides, I might want to rp alittle

Uh oh...

Ok, I am now having issues with people having Battle-suited soilders. There are reasons why RL armies do not have them; one large reason is the cost. Infantry are damn cheap. If you give them power-armor, then they are damn costly and no longer damn cheap.

I mean, it's better for infantry & makes them more powerful, sure. But if you go into battle with 100,000 troops, thats over a dang trillion bucks. Yea. I found a good article on pro's/cons of future troopers here.

But, if you still want super-soidlers (and you got past 2008 tech), then here's an in-between point so then you don't have 5+ million troopers; use a negitive modifier, say -5, and you RP troops with battle-suits. There. My issues with battle-suits and the over-population of soidlers solved.

Hmm, that sounds like an excellent compromise.

[HHAYD]

But it would have been impossible to continue that mobilization. Of course, you'd never mobilize that size of a force for great long spans of time, so you could still perhaps justify it, but it is something to consider before you put that out there. Besides that, I'm of the opinion that, unlike the rest of CN, there should always be a chance for the smaller nations to change things. With enough skill, a Player should be able to defeat a nation that might be stronger than him in numbers and tech but not roleplaying skill. I envision a CNRP where a determined fighter with skill can defeat a lumbering giant without.

These are suggestions, however; not demands. I'm readily enjoying the formatting ideas being put out here, even if I don't agree with all of them; its a sign of the communities interest in surviving, and that more then anything proves what we're all doing here is worthwhile.

Edit: Besides, I might want to rp alittle

Um, uh...

*HHAYD imagines what will happen if a CN moderator starts RPing here...*

[Sargun II]

He's probably going to claim a nation and RP like everyone else.

OH NO EVERYBODY PANIC

[Lord Frost]

He's probably going to claim a nation and RP like everyone else.

OH NO EVERYBODY PANIC

*sirens are heard throughout the world as people begin looting and locking their doors, running to nearby shelters or bunkers, or hurling themselves from 10 story buildings. Children are crying as trucks carrying soldiers hurtle pass on the streets, the soldiers desperately trying to reach their destinations. Aircraft take off as naval ships deploy; mountains erupt and the waves mount. Tornadoes form as glaciers move once more*

[HHAYD]

He's probably going to claim a nation and RP like everyone else.

OH NO EVERYBODY PANIC

My guess is that Stormcrow would use his or her ban powers to ban our nations' troops, tanks, air crafts, incoming nukes and missiles, ships, and other military equipments or vehicles until we have no more military and then take over us. At the end, you see "Banned" labels on all of our military troops, equipments, missiles, and vehicles.

Just joking...

Edited December 28, 2008 by HHAYD

[LeVentNoir]

Stormcrow, Brick please, aim here

[Sumeragi]

I have a question on nuke numbers:

Do we use IG numbers, multipliers, or just RP?

[JEDCJT]

I have a question on nuke numbers:

Do we use IG numbers, multipliers, or just RP?

IMO, we use IG numbers, but we should also RP that.

[Sargun II]

In-game, period.

[Sumeragi]

IMO, we use IG numbers, but we should also RP that.

We do have a case of 60-something warheads being used.

I'm neither for or against, I just want to know what standard we use before I think of buying a MP.

[Sargun II]

We do have a case of 60-something warheads being used.

I'm neither for or against, I just want to know what standard we use before I think of buying a MP.

I used twenty, everyone used twenty for the South American war (most recent example), and for Shan's case I have no idea because I didn't watch. If he used more than twenty I expected somebody to blow a whistle.

[LeVentNoir]

I have twenty missiles / bombs, and some have more than one warhead. I RP the ability to gain an extra 2 per RP day. (WRC ftw)

[JerreyRough]

Ok, I am now having issues with people having Battle-suited soilders. There are reasons why RL armies do not have them; one large reason is the cost. Infantry are damn cheap. If you give them power-armor, then they are damn costly and no longer damn cheap.

I mean, it's better for infantry & makes them more powerful, sure. But if you go into battle with 100,000 troops, thats over a dang trillion bucks. Yea. I found a good article on pro's/cons of future troopers here.

But, if you still want super-soidlers (and you got past 2008 tech), then here's an in-between point so then you don't have 5+ million troopers; use a negitive modifier, say -5, and you RP troops with battle-suits. There. My issues with battle-suits and the over-population of soidlers solved.

So, what are your guy's opinions?

Whenever I suggest things, its always drowned out....

Nukes? IG numbers is the best. We don't want anyone getting 2,000 nukes, now, do we?