Jump to content

The GM's Court


Centurius

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 3k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

[quote name='Fizzydog' timestamp='1325963803' post='2894954']
What's wrong with MOBs?
[/quote]
Are they part of naval stats or just some independent thing, for starters, never mind that most likely a single ship would probably cost about an entire carrier fleet.

Edited by Kankou
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Kankou' timestamp='1325963979' post='2894957']
Are they part of naval stats or just some independent thing, for starters, never mind that most likely a single ship would probably cost about an entire carrier fleet.
[/quote]
Right, I wasn't sure what MOB stood for at first and now I see it's different then what I thought. I honestly do think we need to put some sort of strict limits on these things. I'm not good with this stuff but I would suggest a discussion of it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Kankou' timestamp='1325965514' post='2894977']
Malatose, Cochin, Centurius, Triyun at the minimum.
[/quote]
So, big-time players (one of whom is no longer in CNRP, not sure why you used him as an example) who have huge industrial and tech bases?

Not seeing a problem really.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A single MOB costs at least twice as much as a Nimitz-class to construct, with the an estimated operating/maintenance cost of at least $350 million without including the cost of planes (Nimitz-class cost around $100 million, but this figure includes maintaining the planes). What bothers me is that there seems to be no matching IG stats for the expensive MOB.

If we, say, make it so that one MOB = 2 Carriers or 1 Carrier + 3 Landship, then I'm all for it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You're ignoring some really fundamental issues with comparing a MOB to a Carrier rather than for example a normal naval base. It lacks the speed of a normal ship, can enter a lot less waters, lacks a serious offensive capability and most importantly isn't intended for a carrier role.

Militaries would use MOBs in areas where they do not have a base whereas a carrier is to project power and dominance over a very select nation or group of nations. Following all these things you'll notice that it is pretty much an artificial island or normal naval base however with the slight advantage of being able to move it somewhere else when it's needed. As such I do not believe it is beyond the realm of reason that highly developed nations could maintain a few(really only the most powerful nation in cnrp should have 3-4 at most) not t6aken from ig stats, or do you want to begin using ig stats for naval bases too?

Also that cost figure is just absurd.

Edited by Centurius
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Centurius' timestamp='1325973428' post='2895086']
You're ignoring some really fundamental issues with comparing a MOB to a Carrier rather than for example a normal naval base. It lacks the speed of a normal ship, can enter a lot less waters, lacks a serious offensive capability and most importantly isn't intended for a carrier role.[/quote]
That's pretty much sophism. The fact that it is able to project an air force in a place where there is no base serves the same function as a aircraft carrier in terms of power project. There is no difference in using a aircraft carrier as a base or as an offensive weapon. Following your logic, Project Habakkuk would have never been considered an aircraft carrier, when it is no different from the modern concept of a MOB.


[quote name='Centurius' timestamp='1325973428' post='2895086']As such I do not believe it is beyond the realm of reason that highly developed nations could maintain a few(really only the most powerful nation in cnrp should have 3-4 at most) not taken from ig stats, or do you want to begin using ig stats for naval bases too?[/quote]
Almost all cost-benefit calculations indicate that MOBs will always be inferior to conventional methods, and that's the reason why MOBs weren't built. Since we're resticting carrier numbers to IG stats, saying that MOBs should be constructed is really just an loophole to get over the carrier limit. [b]Now, there is the idea of using the Foreign Airbase wonder as the basis for MOBs, maybe limiting it to 10,000 infra for each additional MOB aside from the original.[/b]


[quote name='Centurius' timestamp='1325973428' post='2895086']
Also that cost figure is just absurd.
[/quote]
Trying reading a [url="http://www.dtic.mil/cgi-bin/GetTRDoc?AD=ADA387250"]study[/url] on this. I've done my research in a serious matter instead of relying just on regular web materials. For your reference, check page 146 (Table 50) for the construction costs of MOB models and page 150 (Table 51) for operating costs.

Edited by Kankou
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Kankou' timestamp='1325984574' post='2895203']
Actually, I revise my suggestion: A Foreign Air Force Base is needed to construct a MOB, and with every 7500 infra, a nation can have one additional MOB. It's similar to how the navy is done in the game.
[/quote]
I don't really mind that suggestion, it gives some meaning to a wonder that had lost the previous one years ago.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Zoot Zoot' timestamp='1326239622' post='2897084']
[IMG]http://i211.photobucket.com/albums/bb144/zoot_zoot/Spyrolls-2.png[/IMG]

Two rolls please, infiltrating two four man special forces teams into the Solar Kingdom. I will RP out their mission... rolls are simply for insertion via HALO
[/quote]

1-10 Lose
11-100 Win

43 37

Two wins, guv'nor.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hold up. Just FYI Without any sort of stealth or electronic warfare, if you're flying a big ass C-130 or something over his territory, detection is possible through conventional means, though not once they drop in. So please be sure to include that in HALO drop.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Triyun' timestamp='1326242931' post='2897111']
Hold up. Just FYI Without any sort of stealth or electronic warfare, if you're flying a big ass C-130 or something over his territory, detection is possible through conventional means, though not once they drop in. So please be sure to include that in HALO drop.
[/quote]


I was more thinking flying high enough near the border and then HALOing over the border. Wouldnt the height of the flight, combined with the ability to direct yourself and make yourself travel in a direction whilst HALOing, not to mention the different posiitons you can take to slow your descent make it pretty easy to insert teams over the border if deployed from my own side?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I could see both scenarios. The main thing I think is that if your flying a big plane at very high altitude in an area where you don't normally fly it in a pattern you don't normally fly it, if you at least tried that on a border like mine, you'd find an interceptor coming at you pretty fast. Also if you flew up and flew back. You'd have to be sure not to act overly suspiciously.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...