Reformation Proposal for SDI

[TheShammySocialist]

In the spirit of proposals there seem to be here in CNRP, I'm making this proposal to close a loophole that I think needs to be addressed; the issue of SDI coverage not extending beyond ones' borders.

 

To take a leaf from my days in the Conservation Corps, my Wilderness First Aid trainer told us "they say there are no rattlesnakes in Maine, which is funny, because I've known people that have stumbled upon them". Not getting my point yet? Okay, my point is that missiles (including ballistic missile interceptors) don't know national borders, just like wildlife doesn't know state borders either.

 

I am proposing that we enforce a set amount of range outside of our border/shoreline, and those with an SDI can enforce a roll there if someone launches a nuclear strike against them. Currently, I am envisioning a range within 150 miles of ones' borders, to start out with as my proposal, but further discussion in this thread could change this. I believe this closes a glaring gap in cross border confrontations, where ones' SDI is completely nullified, even if they are one inch inside their borders. I see this as a loophole that should be closed for good.

 

If I see a good amount of support for this measure, I will put this to a vote within the next forty eight hours or so.

[Evangeline Anovilis]

If nuclear effects go over borders... yes.

[Captain Enema]

Don't SDI's count inside your territorial waters?

[Voodoo Nova]

Don't SDI's count inside your territorial waters?

 

I don't believe so. Territorial waters can be defined as anything ICly because there isn't an international body, that all nations agree with, to set those definitions.

[Zoot Zoot]

Everyone always seems to forget that nuclear effects are a choice to RP if a situation arises like if I nuke my border in peacetime, MGL or PD doesn't have to recognition the damage done by the nuclear weapon because it exploded inside my territory. Most people these days just RP the damage out because it gives them something to write about.

[KaiserMelech Mikhail]

I'm with Zoot and Eva here.  As long as nuclear blasts go a reasonable distance over borders, then SDIs can go a reasonable distance over borders.  Personally, I think 150 miles is far too much.  Remember that an SDI system logically wouldn't be placed on your border, but in the middle of the nation where it is safer, hence why we didn't make it go over the borders before.  Extending the range 150 miles would be like moving the SDI range from the middle of Iowa all the way up and 60 miles past the Minnesota border.  Bring it down to like, 50, and I'll support it.

Edited June 2, 2013 by KaiserMelech Mikhail

[TheShammySocialist]

I'm with Zoot and Eva here.  As long as nuclear blasts go a reasonable distance over borders, then SDIs can go a reasonable distance over borders.  Personally, I think 150 miles is far too much.  Remember that an SDI system logically wouldn't be placed on your border, but in the middle of the nation where it is safer, hence why we didn't make it go over the borders before.  Extending the range 150 miles would be like moving the SDI range from the middle of Iowa all the way up and 60 miles past the Minnesota border.  Bring it down to like, 50, and I'll support it.

 

Some ballistic missile interceptors have ranges of upwards of 270 Nautical Miles, I'm basing this on the fact that it wouldn't be too unlogical to base an interceptor upwards of 120 nautical miles inside ones' border. And there are longer-ranged ones than that.

 

I have no problem with supporting added radiation effects having to be RP'ed across ones' border as a way of balancing this out. I was going to propose it initially, but I wanted to start with the basics and work from there.

[Triyun]

Not really feeling this.  If we want to reform SDI it should be focused on bringing back in tactics and operational level factors.  Personally I'd rather return nuclear war fighting to the RP rather than spy rolls.  

I think nukes would be much more interesting if we allowed for rp of SDI effectiveness and different grades at different positions and different delivery systems. For example someone with only terminal defense would have lower effectiveness than one who has boost phase and mid course defenses for a geographic point as well. And for bombers and cruise missiles different defenses would be required etc.

Edited June 3, 2013 by Triyun

[TheShammySocialist]

Not really feeling this.  If we want to reform SDI it should be focused on bringing back in tactics and operational level factors.  Personally I'd rather return nuclear war fighting to the RP rather than spy rolls.  

I think nukes would be much more interesting if we allowed for rp of SDI effectiveness and different grades at different positions and different delivery systems. For example someone with only terminal defense would have lower effectiveness than one who has boost phase and mid course defenses for a geographic point as well. And for bombers and cruise missiles different defenses would be required etc.

 

As I said, I'm not against expanding the reformation further, my base proposal was to get discussion going. And I see the logic in what you're saying as well.

 

Much of my sentiment came about after seeing situations in this last conflict, where we have people not being able to send out interceptors beyond their borders, which I think is ludicrous. Especially when the nukes are coming down only a few miles over the borders.

[Lord Zephyr]

I would be fine with expanding the border of the SDI a little beyond the borders of the country. 50-100 miles sounds about right.

[Zoot Zoot]

I personally don't see what the issue is with the system how it is at the moment. Its clean and simple for those of us who are not familiar with theatre missile defences systems or how any of that stuff works.

[Triyun]

Then don't escalate to nuclear conflict  :awesome:

[Zoot Zoot]

Thats not the point. My point is that the present system works perfectly fine.

[Evangeline Anovilis]

Well, we cannot claim that we are constantly striving towards making things easy to understand. This is just one more missile system among the arsenal of SAMs, ASMs, AAMs, CMs, BMs, ABMs and all their subdivisions, from HARM to BVRAAM.

[TheShammySocialist]

I personally don't see what the issue is with the system how it is at the moment. Its clean and simple for those of us who are not familiar with theatre missile defences systems or how any of that stuff works.

 

I don't see how adding an extra hundred or so miles on an interceptor missile is "unclean" and "not so simple". And please don't tell me that doing so is beyond comprehension.

 

The only reason you see no reason to reform the system, is because you use it as a loophole tactic to tactically nuke people, Zoot. I'm not in your brain, so I can't really say that you're doing it intentionally or not, but its a loophole that I think should be closed.

 

If we can intercept ballistic missiles coming down, that are armed with conventional weapons, right across someone's border, which was done in the Cochin War, I think its safe to say that we should be able to intercept nukes right over someones' border.

[Zoot Zoot]

What loophole are you talking about? You mean making sure no nations are in between you and the target? Sometimes that's just how it rolls.

 

That extra hundred miles or so is going to cause a ton of arguments with people along these lines:

 

"SDI rolls please, the nuke passes inside the extended SDI range before it gets to X"

"Thats BS, it goes nowhere near it"

"I will show you the trajectory your nuke takes that puts it inside the extended range"

"I didnt fire it from where you are saying I fired it from then, this is where I fired it from".

"Thats conveniently the right angle to make sure it DOESNT go through the extended range"

"fuck this shit, to much bs, ill just retcon the whole thing"

 

et cetera et cetera.

[Evangeline Anovilis]

What loophole are you talking about? You mean making sure no nations are in between you and the target? Sometimes that's just how it rolls.

That's not the loophole. The loophole is that you nuke just as they cross the border, and even though one is just one centimetre over an imaginary line, the missile system fails for that very person, altough it is unrealistic. Just as it is unrealistic that a shockwave cares about the imagined boundary.

"SDI rolls please, the nuke passes inside the extended SDI range before it gets to X"
"Thats BS, it goes nowhere near it"
"I will show you the trajectory your nuke takes that puts it inside the extended range"
"I didnt fire it from where you are saying I fired it from then, this is where I fired it from".
"Thats conveniently the right angle to make sure it DOESNT go through the extended range"

This is an entirely different problem. Just because the field may be x₁ times x₁, instead of x times x large, arguiments about trajectories touching the field were already present before.

"fuck this shit, to much bs, ill just retcon the whole thing"
 
et cetera et cetera.

And that's not even nuke-related, it's just people starting trouble, then trying to take the easy retcon way out of it.

[Zoot Zoot]

No Evangeline it isn't, how do you think people are going to agree on what falls inside this 100 mile boundary? Do you want to be the person who has to do that job to make sure the SDI usage is legit?

 

As for the first point, its pretty common sense if a force gets nuked on the border that they fall under the expeditionary force SDI protection, least that was my understanding.

[Evangeline Anovilis]

Well, 100 miles is an objectively measurable distance which can be used to determine whether the location of the nuclear detonation is at most 100 km away. Not harder than drawing up trajectories.

 

Was my understanding too, but seemingly you need to explicitly RP the system being set up for expeditionary troops. At least what Cent in the channel said.

[Zoot Zoot]

Expeditionary Forces though assume its overseas and so would require RP, but a direct land border invasion? I know I wouldnt object to MGL for example, using his SDI for those bombs.

[Captain Enema]

I like the way the SDI system works now. The technology isn't debated, it is very black and white. A simple roll is done and it is either nuked or not nuked. I'm not opposed to expanding SDI coverage, but not at the expense of the simplicity of the system we have now. Expeditionary forces should be able to get SDI coverage providing the nation has an ingame SDI and providing they are specifically rping the deployment of SDI platforms, and not a pro forma reference on a factbook either for the inclusion of SDI units into large scale formations. A specific reference to the deployment of some sort of SDI platform, though probably wouldn't need to go into too much detail with naval units. 

 

Thinking more of land based units for that SDI reference.

 

However, the determination of success should still be done with a roll, no hollering and arguing and such, and the use should be limited to nukes fired at the specific expeditionary force, not anything flying overhead in space, that might come into range. 

[PresidentDavid]

I like this Shammy. This adds an element of realism that might actually not be ridiculous to implement.

 

I'm game.