jeff744 Posted January 17, 2013 Report Share Posted January 17, 2013 (edited) Fully agree with Voodoo and Triyun, cap at 2013 but allow prototypes with about the same stats as a currently deployed weapon. Edited January 17, 2013 by jeff744 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Captain Enema Posted January 17, 2013 Author Report Share Posted January 17, 2013 I consider the tech scale too low though. I mean really, who wants to rp a bunch of crappy 1965 weapons when they can rp a bunch of crappy 1975 weapons? Oh wait.. Well then, I'll just be quiet about the bottom, but I do think the top ought to be brought downwards a fair bit. It was based on Lynneth's tech level back in the day and seems to have been made to benefit mostly him when he designed it. I'd say bring the top level down to like 7500 tech. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kankou Posted January 17, 2013 Report Share Posted January 17, 2013 How about just bumping Voodoo's scale by ten years? 2024~2025 is really within predictability. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Captain Enema Posted January 17, 2013 Author Report Share Posted January 17, 2013 NO WAY JOSE, 2013 and it must be deployed. I'm tired of all these stupid debates and even the I doubt this will stop the debates, but at least they ought to be ruled on a bit easier. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sarah Tintagyl Posted January 17, 2013 Report Share Posted January 17, 2013 If we do that, we might as well keep it the same. I still say 18th Century or Fantasy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Captain Enema Posted January 17, 2013 Author Report Share Posted January 17, 2013 [quote name='Sarah Tintagyl' timestamp='1358396012' post='3077846'] If we do that, we might as well keep it the same. I still say 18th Century or Fantasy. [/quote] I'm just saying, but the 2035 stuff seems mostly magical and fantastical to me as is, not sure how fantasy would be much of a change. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sarah Tintagyl Posted January 17, 2013 Report Share Posted January 17, 2013 I could stomach their arguments, because there's no 'credible' source about magic. Even if you think there is one...there's not. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vidarr the Terrible Posted January 17, 2013 Report Share Posted January 17, 2013 I actually like the idea of just leveling the playing field with tech. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Captain Enema Posted January 17, 2013 Author Report Share Posted January 17, 2013 I beg to differ, I have emails to prove that magic is real. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sarah Tintagyl Posted January 17, 2013 Report Share Posted January 17, 2013 Well do something...cause I'd love to have less studying and more adventure in my life. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Captain Enema Posted January 17, 2013 Author Report Share Posted January 17, 2013 [quote name='Vidarr the Terrible' timestamp='1358396303' post='3077852'] I actually like the idea of just leveling the playing field with tech. [/quote] That's great for small nations, but why should large nations pay a penalty? No.. I think this is what I'd do.. Drop the 2013 level down from 11,000 or whatever it is that voodoo propose to something like 7500. Move 2009 to 4000 tech. But.. Make the modifiers for infra apply to airplanes, tanks, ships and so forth. The bigger the nation's infra the more toys they get. That way you have nations like the USA and then nations like France. They both have cool toys, but the USA just has way more of them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Centurius Posted January 17, 2013 Report Share Posted January 17, 2013 (edited) [quote name='Tidy Bowl Man' timestamp='1358396590' post='3077858'] That's great for small nations, but why should large nations pay a penalty? No.. I think this is what I'd do.. Drop the 2013 level down from 11,000 or whatever it is that voodoo propose to something like 7500. Move 2009 to 4000 tech. But.. Make the modifiers for infra apply to airplanes, tanks, ships and so forth. The bigger the nation's infra the more toys they get. That way you have nations like the USA and then nations like France. They both have cool toys, but the USA just has way more of them. [/quote] I do like this idea. Edited January 17, 2013 by Centurius Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MostGloriousLeader Posted January 17, 2013 Report Share Posted January 17, 2013 (edited) I like TBM's idea but if I could make another possible suggestion. Get rid of the tech scale entirely and level the playing field for that and cap it at the present day. A larger nation inherently has advantages in being... well... larger. More of pretty much everything for the most part. I'd personally rather see more emphasis on roleplay than statistics and techno-babble and I feel that if we can cut out the focus on technology that is emphasized in many cnrp wars then we might be able to have better actual roleplay when war comes around rather than trying to browse the web for theoretical work on some weapons project or concept. On the other hand nations with very high tech levels have worked a long time to grow their ig nations so perhaps something should be done to recognize that if we completely level the playing field. Perhaps a special tech multiplier could be used. For every 1,000 tech a nation has it gets a x 0.1 size bonus to an ig military category. EX: You have 1,000 tech, you get to give a x 0.1 bonus to your soldier count, tank count, airforce, navy, etc. If you have 10,000 tech you have ten x 0.1 bonuses to distribute among the different categories as you see fit (evenly distributed or put them all into one). Obviously you'll have to declare what categories and can't just switch them up in a war. I know the math might sound crappy but I feel it could be a workable way for higher tech nations to retain something of the advantages they've enjoyed out of some form of fairness plus it can add a little flavor as to how your military works. Also, on the matter of strictly going with what's been deployed. I feel we should allow for some wiggle room in that area so we aren't using the same damn things for every nation. Making custom equipment based on stuff irl should be allowed. That all being said I really don't care all too much about how we go about this as I'm fine with the current scale or a new scale or get rid of it or whatever. The only things I'd really be opposed to are magic and a really messed up tech scale ( like civil war or WWI tech). I'm actually on the fence with magic, it might be kind of cool but I feel that it is much more open to abuse than tech as its not really as verifiable as technology is. Edited January 17, 2013 by MostGloriousLeader Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Captain Enema Posted January 17, 2013 Author Report Share Posted January 17, 2013 Well, I think alot of us do CN these days just to play CNRP. If you take the tech completely out of the equation you end up screwing up a lot of work people have put into buying tech. Besides, I like the idea that a country can develop over time. Further, if you go with 2013 being 7500 tech and 2009 being 4 or 5000, that leads me to conclude that the ability of developing nations to field 2013 systems isn't that far behind. Meaning, the whole idea of a new nation fielding advanced systems with a bit of technical support becomes more realistic. Given we have so much of our stuff outsourced these days the ability to produce systems isn't so much the issue, it is the ability to develop them that becomes the struggle. You follow me? You get a nation like Iraq that went from just being able to produce sniper rifles, to going all the way to producing its own chemical weapons, assault rifles, helicopters, jet planes, and so forth. Mind you these weren't anywhere near up to par with the US and allies technological plethora, but I think it serves as a useful frame of reference that developing nations can produce a wide array of sophisticated products, they just suck balls at developing it. So providing you can get someone to supply the technical know how, I don't see why a developing nation with 50 to 500 tech can't produce modern day equipment, though there should be something in there about quality. At least this is what I'm thinking, I'll leave it to the tech geeks to apply the translation protocols between real life and CNRP life. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tanis777 Posted January 17, 2013 Report Share Posted January 17, 2013 TBM, you're on the right path. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kankou Posted January 17, 2013 Report Share Posted January 17, 2013 I'll just say whatever. As long as it reduces completely stupid technobabble based on half-baked notions, completely wrong ideas, failed projects, or fantasy BS, I'll be up for change. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Captain Enema Posted January 17, 2013 Author Report Share Posted January 17, 2013 (edited) Well how about this for a tentative proposal... Tech is capped at what is deployed as of the current day. The tech scale runs from.. 1980 - 0 tech and up 2005 - 4000 tech 2013 - 7500 tech Your infra will determine your modifiers for all planes, tanks, ships (those ships that get a modifier) up to 10,000 infra. Anyone over 10,000 Infra I don't know what to tell you, but I think we'd be wise to cap it somewhere. Now, these are just suggestions, I'm not really sure what would be fair, so the numbers certainly should be negotiable. If enough people like the idea, in general, maybe we can come up with a few different scales and do a community vote on them? and yes, current conflicts will not be changed, providing that conflict someone doesn't enter into the conflict aggressively. Meaning, if I were to get a bug up my butt and attacked Triyun, I'd be widening the conflict and he could slap me up with his 2034 tech. If he came after me, he'd be doing so with 2013. Edited January 17, 2013 by Tidy Bowl Man Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Poseida Posted January 17, 2013 Report Share Posted January 17, 2013 4000 tech just to get to 2005? :/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PresidentDavid Posted January 17, 2013 Report Share Posted January 17, 2013 [quote name='Tidy Bowl Man' timestamp='1358432253' post='3078010'] Well how about this for a tentative proposal... Tech is capped at what is deployed as of the current day. The tech scale runs from.. 1980 - 0 tech and up 2005 - 4000 tech 2013 - 7500 tech Your infra will determine your modifiers for all planes, tanks, ships (those ships that get a modifier) up to 10,000 infra. Anyone over 10,000 Infra I don't know what to tell you, but I think we'd be wise to cap it somewhere. Now, these are just suggestions, I'm not really sure what would be fair, so the numbers certainly should be negotiable. If enough people like the idea, in general, maybe we can come up with a few different scales and do a community vote on them? and yes, current conflicts will not be changed, providing that conflict someone doesn't enter into the conflict aggressively. Meaning, if I were to get a bug up my butt and attacked Triyun, I'd be widening the conflict and he could slap me up with his 2034 tech. If he came after me, he'd be doing so with 2013. [/quote] I followed you until the last paragraph. I'm not sure if I totally understand. If the tech cap is 2013 then how could Triyun use his 2034 tech? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vidarr the Terrible Posted January 17, 2013 Report Share Posted January 17, 2013 I'm down with TBM's idea. Makes infra useful, and makes the tech scale a whole lot simpler. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kankou Posted January 17, 2013 Report Share Posted January 17, 2013 PD, he means that the current conflict (AUP vs anti-AUP) will still have the old scale, and if anyone joins that conflict then that person would have to follow the old scale. If Triyun attacks TBM for whatever reason, that would not be considered part of the current conflict and thus follow the reformed scale. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MostGloriousLeader Posted January 17, 2013 Report Share Posted January 17, 2013 Yeah, I'm mostly liking what TBM has suggested. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Centurius Posted January 17, 2013 Report Share Posted January 17, 2013 Not at all a fan of the proposal, if we got with scales it should be one of the log ones proposed by iKrolm. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Evangeline Anovilis Posted January 17, 2013 Report Share Posted January 17, 2013 I do not like this modern tech. I do not like not to be able to design my own ships, rifles and tanks. This will be a pain to RP. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vidarr the Terrible Posted January 17, 2013 Report Share Posted January 17, 2013 You will still be able to design your own tech, but with the technology and mechanics that are available today. And Cent, why do the log scales matter? Technology is basically the same scale that TBM said. There's 80's tech, 2005 tech, and then modern tech. That's the way it works in the real world, having a log scale for tech just makes it difficult for people to exactly judge what they have, as they have to look up the precise year something came out, and have the exact amount of tech for that year. The years that come out in the log scale are also really arbitrary. 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.