Kankou Posted April 22, 2011 Report Share Posted April 22, 2011 (edited) I propose the following as the updated version of the tech scale. Third World Nation (0~49.99 tech) (~1970) Your technology level is very low, and are developing your own way in the world. You have Vietnam War technology*, and any tech you receive from other nations (weapons, aircraft, etc.) is not easily maintained without help. It's much like what buying tech from other nations is now IRL. You may design items appropriate to the period. Developing Nation (50~1499.99 tech) (1970~1980) Having reached a critical point, you can now start developing relatively advanced weapons. Your tanks are in their second generation, which jet fighters are third generation. Modern Nation (1500~2999.99 tech) (1980~1995) Your technology has made it into the information age, and you can now start building precision weapons. Having enough firepower to obtain air superiority over developing nations are now within your hands First World Nation (3000~4999.99 tech) (1995~Current) Your technology has reached a modern level, and you can build anything military-wise that currently exists*. You may design items appropriate to the period. Future Nation (5000+ tech) (Current~15 years from current) Inventions start coming from your nation, and you can build anything that is believed to be capable of being developed within 15 years. You're still limited to IG levels of soldiers, tanks, nukes, CMs, etc. Now, beyond this your tech level still matters for your army efficency, but a lot less. Design statistics will matter less as there is an efficiency formula for your armies. Basically, the reason for this is that allowing future tech to be developed starting from 1500 tech seems outdated in the current world, where most countries have more than 1500 tech. Therefore I believe that by following the above scale, we can cut down on the number of nations firing away with railguns or attempting to develop laser guns and the like. The rest of the tech rules, such as Technological Efficiency and Technological Trade, will be discussed separately if there seems to be any oppositions to them. Edited April 22, 2011 by Kankou Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aggressivenutmeg Posted April 22, 2011 Report Share Posted April 22, 2011 ...nah Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lynneth Posted April 22, 2011 Report Share Posted April 22, 2011 Eh. This may actually be a decent suggestion, though I'd like to keep people above vietnam war levels in technology. Maybe remove the lowest tier. Also a typo, >>First World Nation (1500+ tech) (1995~Current) Should be 3000+ tech. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kankou Posted April 22, 2011 Author Report Share Posted April 22, 2011 The lowest pier is really something I haven't figured out yet. Quite a few countries still use Vietnam era stuff (such as the updated versions of the McDonnell Douglas F-4 Phantom II), but then, most probably don't even know what the F-4 even is, given the rather biased focus on 3rd/4th generation fighters. Basically, I would say that people really shouldn't oppose the highest tier in the name of balance. However, the lowest tier is still open to discussion. So, what do you say: Kill it or substain it? BTW, unless you are a tech dealer, there is no reason why you cannot reach the second tier in two days when you have around 2000 infra. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aggressivenutmeg Posted April 22, 2011 Report Share Posted April 22, 2011 (edited) I am a tech seller, and i dont want to re-do all my IC military equipment, but other than that it seems okay Edited April 22, 2011 by Chernarussia Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sargun II Posted April 22, 2011 Report Share Posted April 22, 2011 It's "tier", not "pier" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zoot Zoot Posted April 22, 2011 Report Share Posted April 22, 2011 Next suggestion please. Stop trying to fix a system that aint broke, your as bad as Karl Martin. Oh wait.. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kankou Posted April 22, 2011 Author Report Share Posted April 22, 2011 [quote name='Zoot Zoot' timestamp='1303474929' post='2696461'] Stop trying to fix a system that aint broke [/quote] It is broken, it's just that there has neverf been the chance for any "equal" battles, causing any actual broken things to hide. For example, in the rare case Korea and England goes to war, we're going to have the situation where I'm fighting against a nation half my tech with [i]railguns[/i], which I don't plan on developing until I reach 5000 tech. Yet, according to current rules, I'm supposed to be easily killing you off with my far superioir tech. Personally, I think you're the one that's broken. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lynneth Posted April 22, 2011 Report Share Posted April 22, 2011 After thinking a little more about it, I do think that the current tech scale might need some improvement. This new scale might actually be an improvement to what we currently have. More 'tiers' might look more complicated, but it evens the techcurve, and playing field. makes things more gradual and all, and there aren't all that many people in CNRP with more than 5,000 tech, afaik. And it's not like the superstrong like me get any further advantages. People between 1,500 and 5,000 tech get weakened. People below 1,500 get, comparatively, strengthened somewhat. People above 5,000 stay the same basically. A toay or two more, but nothing that would change the battlefield much. Yeah. This suggestion might fr once be worthwhile. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zoot Zoot Posted April 22, 2011 Report Share Posted April 22, 2011 Im just gonna say this right out loud. Absolish the bloody tech system. Nobody what so ever uses TE anyway because its considered bad RP. I cannot rememeber the last time time TE was seriously put forward in a war because I dont count Rotavele as an RPer. As for railguns, Sumer, theyre ship mounted railguns and they arnt full on cannonades of them. Its a single deck gun on my destroyers, nothing more. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kankou Posted April 22, 2011 Author Report Share Posted April 22, 2011 [i]Absolish[/i] the tech system? So you mean let every damn ants RP super stealth and all that stuff? A railgun by itself is too powerful a weapon for anyone to have. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zoot Zoot Posted April 22, 2011 Report Share Posted April 22, 2011 Yet they are in existance and testing phases right now. In CNRP, I only ever did the R+D, I have never actually deployed them. No, not abolish the tech system in that sense, of course we need guidelines and within those guidelines are always gonna come restrictions with technology. Modern of First world will almost always win a cold war nation et cetera, thats just common sense and normality. But I meant to say the tech efficiency, my bad for getting it wrong. Nobody uses it what so ever and like I said, wars are fought with RP and techno talk, not TE. The present teir system isnt broken, its fine for its purpose and further complicating it isnt productive, but the TE needs to go. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Centurius Posted April 22, 2011 Report Share Posted April 22, 2011 Kankou, I appreciate the work you put into this and I can see this is a well thought out suggestion which would be reasonable in itself. However we also have to look into fairness, the simple fact is most modern technology would utterly annihilate older systems, like putting a F-22 against a F-4. As such I propose the tech scale as you give it is bumped to s slightly higher era, roughly starting around 1980. So in essence drop the lowest tier. This would make it more even and not change too much from how it works currently. I do also agree that the highest tier should not be a fixed year but Current+X years considering the system as it was proposed in 2009 and we're in 2011 now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael McBride Posted April 22, 2011 Report Share Posted April 22, 2011 Eh, the F-4 is still one hell of a fighter if used correctly. No, it won't win in a dogfight against an F-22 or even an F-16, but Wild Weasels can still be used to knock out SAM/Radar sites and a Phantom will still give ground forces a bad, bad day. It's the best thing that flies the US has ever made, bar the F-15. And yes, I am actually in favor of this proposal. No matter where current IG events drop me or my tech. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AironthFlamewing Posted April 22, 2011 Report Share Posted April 22, 2011 I say nay... obviously because it would drop me from first world tech down to 1980-1995, its a load of crap really. Why are you punishing the smaller nations and rewarding big nations? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shadowsage Posted April 22, 2011 Report Share Posted April 22, 2011 [quote name='graniteknight' timestamp='1303488975' post='2696673'] I say nay... obviously because it would drop me from first world tech down to 1980-1995, its a load of crap really. Why are you punishing the smaller nations and rewarding big nations? [/quote] I don't see a reward. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
king of cochin Posted April 22, 2011 Report Share Posted April 22, 2011 I find this proposed tech scale to be worthy. Also Zoot, this is a proposal to correct tech scale and not the TE. different things entirely Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kankou Posted April 22, 2011 Author Report Share Posted April 22, 2011 Okay, I've changed the Third World Nation so that a NORMALLY playing nation would be at least Developing Nation. I think this would just about fix any possible objections. GMs, if you believe that is enough support for this after we here more comments, please start the voting. Thank you. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HHAYD Posted April 22, 2011 Report Share Posted April 22, 2011 Looks reasonable. However, I might have to redo some of my planned RP developments as portions of them are based on 2016-2021 tech. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AironthFlamewing Posted April 22, 2011 Report Share Posted April 22, 2011 Once again I still say nay... why are you punishing midmajor IG nations who may not have that much tech by limiting what they can have IC if they've already been established as having one set of equipment in CNRP I would lose every peace of tech I have that my military uses if this scale is adopted. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zoot Zoot Posted April 22, 2011 Report Share Posted April 22, 2011 Cochin, I know this, but I was raising the point anyway. For the record I am fully against this. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Centurius Posted April 22, 2011 Report Share Posted April 22, 2011 http://forums.cybernations.net/index.php?showtopic=101212 Official GM poll. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fizzydog Posted April 22, 2011 Report Share Posted April 22, 2011 This is ridiculous. I'm not redoing my entire nation's military to something much worse. It's bad enough that larger nations annihilate everyone. Now you want to give them more power? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KaiserMelech Mikhail Posted April 23, 2011 Report Share Posted April 23, 2011 [quote name='Fizzydog' timestamp='1303509667' post='2697035'] This is ridiculous. I'm not redoing my entire nation's military to something much worse. It's bad enough that larger nations annihilate everyone. Now you want to give them more power? [/quote] Wah wah wah your problems. I like this idea. I already have a similar (although much more complicated) tech scale that I alone use. Right now I'm at 1973. Bellbottoms for all! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fizzydog Posted April 23, 2011 Report Share Posted April 23, 2011 [quote name='KaiserMelech Mikhail' timestamp='1303521594' post='2697272'] Wah wah wah your problems. I like this idea. I already have a similar (although much more complicated) tech scale that I alone use. Right now I'm at 1973. Bellbottoms for all! [/quote] And you alone can use that tech scale. Don't enforce it on the rest of us. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.