Battlefield Technology Brainstorming

[Generalissimo]

I’ve been hearing dissatisfaction with about the current Battlefield Technology system.
How do we fix Battlefield Technology?
Some believe it’s broken but instead of whining about how bad it is we could project our grievances productively brainstorm possibly solutions!

[Generalissimo]

Last time I had an idea it wasn’t a particularly groundbreaking solution
My last thread advocated streamlining battlefield technology (http://forums.cybernations.net/index.php?showtopic=106328)
The idea didn’t take because of ‘lolteching’ abuses last time around
I’m not going to advocate the idea here

[Generalissimo]

We should probably begin by quantifying the problem.
I, personally, find it easier to develop solutions with knowing what the problem is.

[Mogar]

I'd just like to point out that those defending the current system are those who benefit from it the most, obviously that's expected, but I'm saddened that people even attempt to pretend they're doing everyone else a favor by helping themselves.

[King Timmy]

How about we bring in the 75% with out a valid CB rule so all of us that are more than 25% lower than the big nations don't have to worry about it.

[TheShammySocialist]

To be quite completely honest, there are times when the battlefield technology system on CNRP does send up some red flags with me. But in all honesty, I will say that a lot of times, the effort that is put into the roleplay of war in CNRP, can give the battle to someone who has a lower technology level, but "fights" harder. The fact of the matter is this; a lot of people don't put much thought into roleplaying war on here, "move troops to <insert town name here>". They don't put any thought into it, they just send them in all hokey-dokey, and think because they're going to win because they have a certain type of weapon system, or they just think that because they have a higher technology level, they're automatically going to win.

The problem that I've seen, in most roleplay wars, is that people do not take the time to read out what their opponents have done, nor do they put any real effort into strategy or anything like that. More often then not, a person with a higher technology level will win, either it be by OOC whining about their superior weapon system, or some other factor.

But in all honesty, even if you are a small nation with a lower technology level, on CNRP, you can still make it tough as nails to fight you. It is all about the effort and skill you put into the writing. Typically, I try to be as courteous in CNRP war as I can, and if my opponents need information on how I am fighting them, and with what (IE, the range of a certain missile), I just go about my way of giving them the information. I don't know how many other people do this, but that is how I go about doing it, yes, I use lots of acronyms in my writing, but if you just copy/paste it into Google, odds are you will find out what that acronym means, or you can just ask me.

Overall though, I think that people feel each of them are 'entitled' to a benefit, whether they be a lower or higher technology nation, even if they don't put the 'umph' into writing stuff out. This kind of behavior is one of the things that I find I have a problem with, when people constantly whine or rail about things OOCly. If people want to go to war in CNRP, they should be willing to put the effort into it, not just expect automatic wins because they have a higher technology. When I write my war posts, they tend to take me the better part of forty-five minutes to do, probably, because I'm checking maps, looking up information, and such, if people hate me for my walls of text, so what? I put the effort into it, because when I go to war in CNRP, I put that extra 'umph' into it.

I guess the just of my post here is this; and here is how I think and feel about the recent problems with battlefield technology; people need to put effort into their posts, instead of relying on just some really technological advantage. Strategy and tactics can be just as effective as technology, the Germans were able to blitz France with tanks that had no real advantages against French or British designs, the Germans won, basically because they had [b]superior[/b] close air support, advanced combined-arms [b]tactics[/b], as well as a [b]strategy[/b] that maximized the effectiveness of their armored units. Strategy and tactics in CNRP, however, has been marginalized by people relying on technology, and putting minimum thought into strategy and tactics, and personally, I feel that is sad.

Personally, I don't think that the technology system needs changing, I think [b]people[/b] need changing, I try to involve strategy and tactics in my war posts, but I will admit that I have used a purely technological approach to warfare. More effort needs to be put into strategy and tactics, and the [i]employment[/i] of technology, rather then the effort put into [i]statistics[/i].

Edit: This talk goes to players on both sides of the spectrum as well, I'm neither advocating higher tech or lower tech nations, because I see a lack of effort on both sides.

Edited December 2, 2011 by TheShammySocialist

[Triyun]

I largely agree with Shammy. My principle issue is when people claim advantages without actually RPing out any tactics or strategy. I think that you should respect your opponents technology as having some effectiveness, and they should respect yours as having some effectiveness. Neither should force huge amounts of insta damage on the other. The issue comes down to are people willing to type out how they are achieving success on the battlefield. I see a large lack of it often. I've said many times that people like Shammy and Malatose are people I consider much more challenging than larger nations who do not do what Shammy described. Nobody is entitled to win wars. You should put work into it, not just try to claim that your in game tech level or self perceived morality entitles you to victory.

[King Timmy]

Here's an idea. With a race, say Formula One, there's two distinct factors that affect the outcome. The skill of the driver and the car. A really good driver in a worse car might be as fast as a worse driver in a fast car.

However the better drivers almost always get the better cars and it leads to a boring race with those in the slower cars pretty much never standing a chance. Now if you give everyone the same car it relies simply on the drivers skill and it really does make a much better race.

Now I would say we have the same thing in CNRP. We have tech and RP ability. Now it goes much the same as racing. Low tech good RP vs good tech low RP etc etc.

Now while most of you will simply shoot this idea down without a second thought, why not take away any advantage anyone might have from holding more tech than another player does IG. Everyone is equal. Those that put a lot of effort into their RPs, both details of tech before and RP of their use during a war, will do better than those that have not put any effort into it at all and do very little during the war.

Now you might all be saying "but we have tech in game it makes sense for it to give us better equipment in RP" even though after a certain point IG all it does is give us more damage and more ships not super soldiers with full body armour, laser guns and 6th generation fighters. Now people might say "But I've put so much effort into my RP tech, I don't want to lose it all" but the point of my idea is that those with good RP don't lose it.

We can still have future tech, all we need is an upper limit. Those with the best RP of their detail can hit the limit. Those with little to no RP simply receive current day tech. The more they RP the details of their technology the higher up the tech scale they go, the amount of tech they can receive with their RP would be moderated by the GMs or something.

ANyhow, it's just an idea.

EDIT: And by details I don't mean lot's of numbers I mean full on descriptions.

Edited December 2, 2011 by King Timmy

[Triyun]

Don't we have an upper limit? Anyways as I said before I'm in favor with those with a lot of RP being able to build their nations over time to rival those with large ones in game.

[King Timmy]

Then let's do it!

[Captain Enema]

My solution:

Cap tech at 2011

Get rid of all the GMs.

Have a 1 or 2 people designated to do spy rolls.

[PresidentDavid]

[quote name='TheShammySocialist' timestamp='1322854065' post='2859509']
To be quite completely honest, there are times when the battlefield technology system on CNRP does send up some red flags with me. But in all honesty, I will say that a lot of times, the effort that is put into the roleplay of war in CNRP, can give the battle to someone who has a lower technology level, but "fights" harder. The fact of the matter is this; a lot of people don't put much thought into roleplaying war on here, "move troops to <insert town name here>". They don't put any thought into it, they just send them in all hokey-dokey, and think because they're going to win because they have a certain type of weapon system, or they just think that because they have a higher technology level, they're automatically going to win.

The problem that I've seen, in most roleplay wars, is that people do not take the time to read out what their opponents have done, nor do they put any real effort into strategy or anything like that. More often then not, a person with a higher technology level will win, either it be by OOC whining about their superior weapon system, or some other factor.

But in all honesty, even if you are a small nation with a lower technology level, on CNRP, you can still make it tough as nails to fight you. It is all about the effort and skill you put into the writing. Typically, I try to be as courteous in CNRP war as I can, and if my opponents need information on how I am fighting them, and with what (IE, the range of a certain missile), I just go about my way of giving them the information. I don't know how many other people do this, but that is how I go about doing it, yes, I use lots of acronyms in my writing, but if you just copy/paste it into Google, odds are you will find out what that acronym means, or you can just ask me.

Overall though, I think that people feel each of them are 'entitled' to a benefit, whether they be a lower or higher technology nation, even if they don't put the 'umph' into writing stuff out. This kind of behavior is one of the things that I find I have a problem with, when people constantly whine or rail about things OOCly. If people want to go to war in CNRP, they should be willing to put the effort into it, not just expect automatic wins because they have a higher technology. When I write my war posts, they tend to take me the better part of forty-five minutes to do, probably, because I'm checking maps, looking up information, and such, if people hate me for my walls of text, so what? I put the effort into it, because when I go to war in CNRP, I put that extra 'umph' into it.

I guess the just of my post here is this; and here is how I think and feel about the recent problems with battlefield technology; people need to put effort into their posts, instead of relying on just some really technological advantage. Strategy and tactics can be just as effective as technology, the Germans were able to blitz France with tanks that had no real advantages against French or British designs, the Germans won, basically because they had [b]superior[/b] close air support, advanced combined-arms [b]tactics[/b], as well as a [b]strategy[/b] that maximized the effectiveness of their armored units. Strategy and tactics in CNRP, however, has been marginalized by people relying on technology, and putting minimum thought into strategy and tactics, and personally, I feel that is sad.

Personally, I don't think that the technology system needs changing, I think [b]people[/b] need changing, I try to involve strategy and tactics in my war posts, but I will admit that I have used a purely technological approach to warfare. More effort needs to be put into strategy and tactics, and the [i]employment[/i] of technology, rather then the effort put into [i]statistics[/i].

Edit: This talk goes to players on both sides of the spectrum as well, I'm neither advocating higher tech or lower tech nations, because I see a lack of effort on both sides.
[/quote]

I agree. We can have a perfect system but when two cocky nations/people get in a war we get two or three posts of movements and then "but" "but" "but" "but" "godmodding" "but" "but" "My aircraft can't be shot down" "but" "but" "why didn't you surrender yet?" "but but" "that isn't 2031 tech that is 2032 tech" "but" "but" "but" "but".

Gentelmen, I agree with Shammy. The system is not broken, the whiners in war are the ones that disrupt the spirit of the RP. This problem simply can not be fixed.

[PresidentDavid]

[quote name='Tidy Bowl Man' timestamp='1322865919' post='2859649']
My solution:

Cap tech at 2011

Get rid of all the GMs.

Have a 1 or 2 people designated to do spy rolls.
[/quote]

If you put a tech limit at 2011 then no one could RP, just for fun, underwater facilities or nations in the South Pole etc. I think we should look into a [b]MILITARY[/b] Cap Tech of 2011.

EDIT: Look into means we actually consider all of the consequence first before implementing a system which might not work. But again... The problem is more of the people than the system.

Edited December 2, 2011 by PresidentDavid

[Aggressivenutmeg]

Get rid of the tech scale completely, let people do whatever they want. Only rules are nothing is invincible and things have to obay the laws of physics.

[Kaiser Martens]

Screw everything, use a scale from 1945 or 1938 to present day. (Updated every year)

[KaiserMelech Mikhail]

We used to have a really good log-based tech scale, but the fact that 90% of the people in CNRP are liberal arts majors, anything math based was doomed to fail.

[Triyun]

I was a East Asian Studies and International Politics major. You damn kids these days are just lazy!

[Captain Enema]

I work fulltime bucko. Well in china that means less than 20 hours a week, but I assure you.. these are 20 mildly strenuous hours a week as well.

[KaiserMelech Mikhail]

[quote name='Tidy Bowl Man' timestamp='1322876610' post='2859753']
I work fulltime bucko. Well in china that means less than 20 hours a week, but I assure you.. these are 20 mildly strenuous hours a week as well.
[/quote]
Do you do [url="http://www.cnn.com/2010/BUSINESS/06/29/china.rent.white.people/index.html"]this[/url]?

[PresidentDavid]

[quote name='KaiserMelech Mikhail' timestamp='1322873976' post='2859708']
We used to have a really good log-based tech scale, but the fact that 90% of the people in CNRP are liberal arts majors, anything math based was doomed to fail.
[/quote]

You are being very funny..... I am suspicious

[Executive Minister]

Hm... seeing as we're not all aeronautic or mechanical engineers with degrees in battlefield science, I wonder what constitutes this 'proper RPing tactics and strategy' quota i've been seeing hurled around. Words like 'effort' and 'skill' seem to be treated as a given should someone have one or the other.

We know this isn't the case. Some people, try as they might, will not realize why they can't airdrop M1 Abrams tanks, or why their 20 or even 30mm CIWS guns can't shoot down ballistic missiles. Some people don't follow the latest news from DARPA or sinodefenceforum.com or heck, even popular mechanics - why one must be able to immediately consult with these in order to come up with a post that can counter someone's latest 'all-aspect' stealth (industry term, of course) pig fart powered cruise missile in order to be given credence with their defensive RPs is something I cannot answer. This level of technical detail was something that used to be optional to RP with.

I do not advocate tech as the sole determinator in CNRP conflicts - that would be a broken system. But if we allow a system that ensures only those with a firmer grasp on military jargon and its utilization will prevail, it will be a broken system that is just as bad, but benefiting a different kind of rper.

We need moderation (not more GMs, bless their souls no), and we also need cooperation between warring parties. War in CNRP has become purely a competition, we do not have intelligent, or interesting wars unless they are done with at least a base sense of mutual respect for the other's desires for RP, or are done in advance between consenting/affiliated OOC parties. Most wars are done IC with a desire to punish the other RPer in some capacity OOC - this most often than not ultimately manifesting itself as the loss of a losing RPers land to the winning side.

I remember when I foolishly decided to yell 'come at me bro' to SOM and TBM when i was under 10k ns, barely a sprout of an RPer with maybe a month of existence after his DoE to my name. Rather luckily, SOM contacted me early on and said that they'd most likely let me stay where I was, since they liked my rp. That war went extremely well in my opinion, and helped me develop as an Rper from the get go. I do not think that had I been a few more months, or even years older i'd have felt differently.

So do we remove the threat of loss of OOC control over our heads during war times? Im not sure - i am sure that butt-loads of people would disagree with my assessment. But i'd prefer seeing wars with the defenders and aggressors concluding the war thread TOGETHER over seeing the sole winning side settling down in a new thread and brooding over his or her newly acquired winnings any day of the week.

Edited December 3, 2011 by Executive Minister

[Captain Enema]

[quote name='KaiserMelech Mikhail' timestamp='1322877091' post='2859763']
Do you do [url="http://www.cnn.com/2010/BUSINESS/06/29/china.rent.white.people/index.html"]this[/url]?
[/quote]

Lol, no.. though I do know a guy who does.



The more I think about this.. the more it becomes clear to me.

The biggest problem in CNRP are the OOC grudges that have formed up over the last year or so.

People have gotten so polarized that this latest war is a good thing imo. This war is going to cause some people to quit. Sad yes, but.. with them go part of the OOC grudges.

Now... hopefully those of us left behind can all grow up a bit and get back to preplanning our wars, being more open to alternate outcomes, and being patient with other rpers.

Mostly, we need to break up the traditional bloc of good ol' boys. No offense those who are in it, but really.. yall booooring.

Liven things up a bit.. take on some new allies you normally wouldn't. It'll do you some good.

[Captain Enema]

[quote name='Executive Minister' timestamp='1322887617' post='2859861']




I do not advocate tech as the sole determinator in CNRP conflicts - that would be a broken system. But if we allow a system that ensures only those with a firmer grasp on military jargon and its utilization will prevail, it will be a broken system that is just as bad, but benefiting a different kind of rper.




[/quote]

Yar this for real...

[Generalissimo]

[quote name='Executive Minister' timestamp='1322887617' post='2859861']I do not advocate tech as the sole determinator in CNRP conflicts - that would be a broken system. But if we allow a system that ensures only those with a firmer grasp on military jargon and its utilization will prevail, it will be a broken system that is just as bad, but benefiting a different kind of rper. [/quote]Thirded – so what are we going to do about it?

[KaiserMelech Mikhail]

[quote name='Tidy Bowl Man' timestamp='1322887813' post='2859865']
Lol, no.. though I do know a guy who does.
[/quote]
I'd like that job. Not forever, but maybe for like 6 months.

[quote]Mostly, we need to break up the traditional bloc of good ol' boys. No offense those who are in it, but really.. yall booooring. [/quote]
But that would require the big people to create someone who could actually take them in a fight! Cochin was the last big holdout who wasn't part of the "let's get every powerful nation in cahoots" alliance (UFE, Athens, Germany, Slavorussia, Rebel Army).

[quote]
Liven things up a bit.. take on some new allies you normally wouldn't. It'll do you some good.
[/quote]
Yoohoo, oh boys!