CNRP2 Nuclear Discussion

[The Zigur]

He has abdicated his "authority" over CNRP2 by his abuse of responsibility and lack of respect to fellow roleplayers. Henceforth his rulings have no binding effect on my nation or any other nation, until he is formally removed.

[Uberstein]

That isn't how it works, but feel free to kick and scream about it all you want.

 

We should get this thread back on topic.

[Captain Enema]

He has abdicated his "authority" over CNRP2 by his abuse of responsibility and lack of respect to fellow roleplayers. Henceforth his rulings have no binding effect on my nation or any other nation, until he is formally removed.

I think you need to go sit in your corner till you have a happy heart. 

[The Zigur]

It's exactly how it works, and if the rest of the GMs prove to be corrupt and acting against the will of the RP community, a provisional group of new GMs and rules may be established over CNRP2.

[Uberstein]

Good luck with that. Have fun starting CNRP3.

[The Zigur]

I would be quite content with new rules and game mods for CNRP2, should the will of the people rebel against the corruption and underhanded tactics of the current GMs.

[Uberstein]

I'm underhanded now? Fancy. Please though, bring this discussion over to the appropriate thread. This thread is for the discussion of nuclear rules.

[JEDCJT]

It's exactly how it works, and if the rest of the GMs prove to be corrupt and acting against the will of the RP community, a provisional group of new GMs and rules may be established over CNRP2.

 

Until they become corrupt depending on your narrow interpretation and you kick and scream for their removal, and barring that, their nonrecognition. And this continues ad nauseum until time collapses upon itself.

[The Zigur]

This thread was about nuclear rules until TBM attempted to kick me from the game because I wrote a formal protest to the rules.

[Beauty]

I'm underhanded now? Fancy. Please though, bring this discussion over to the appropriate thread. This thread is for the discussion of nuclear rules.

 

 

 

Until they become corrupt depending on your narrow interpretation and you kick and scream for their removal, and barring that, their nonrecognition. And this continues ad nauseum until time collapses upon itself.

 

Could you maybe not side-line and try to aggravate the already out-of-hand argument. You're not helping the situation progress and not committing and thing constructive to the discussion.

[Uberstein]

It's not side-lining to ask that things be discussed in the appropriate threads.

[Hereno]

Nothing stops you from attempting to bomb my nation with old fashioned dumb nukes, or arranging the missile spamming of my defenses with a large scale attack to distract my missile defense. AEGIS targets the delivery vehicle regardless of package, not the magical nuclear warhead that is afforded godmod protection. But you guys just want to be lazy and wipe out all my pages of strategic roleplay with a push of a button, then jack off afterwards while chanting "hurr durr where is your God now Tywin?"

LMFAO

Dude, you need to relax. There is actually a point worth discussing here if you'll wipe away the tears and let it shine through. The SDI rule with nukes and all wasn't actually ever voted on or discussed, it was taken straight from CNRP. Probably because people started launching nukes before we had a chance to discuss it, or maybe it just seemed like the only logical way to handle things from the GM perspective. There's no reason why we can't revisit it and perhaps alter it in some way to be nicer to noob nations, if that's what people want to do. And yes, other missiles can be shot down, and as far as I know, we don't have any rules in place for that. Or maybe we do - I do know that Kevin shot down some conventional missiles in the run-up to the China/Japan war. But let me be honest with you - the grandstanding ITT probably did a lot more to delegitimize your argument than anything else.

[The Zigur]

I dont care about whether arguments are legitimate or not, I only speak from the heart and want to protect not only my creation but the unique creations of every other small time, below 50k nation. I may suck at politics, but if so, it is only because I speak for what is right.

Our Nations, our Creations, have a right to sovereignty and realistic roleplay and wargaming. To be told your strategy is invalid because of a cherrypicked game rule, and to be leered over by people who think they can destroy your nation with the push of a button, solely because you have a massively smaller nation in game, is not right.

To be told you must recognize over 50k without discussion, is wrong.

To have your creation subjugated by a group of people who have no claim to your sovereignty, in the fashion of a government, is wrong.

It is above all else a thing of principle, that we all maintain the right to criticize our rules and the game mods without being socially excluded.

Every player has a right to begin with a minimum soldier count, regardless of in game status.

Every player has the right to periods of peace mode, if they wish to roleplay as part of the community in peace, or take a vacation.

Every player has the right to a reasonable defense, and to call the aggressor out and demand a "trial by wargame."

Every player deserves to enjoy the social aspect of our community without having to worry about their work being destroyed by a greedy 50k+ imperialist player.

Edited June 11, 2014 by Tywin Lannister

[Hereno]

I dont care about whether arguments are legitimate or not, I only speak from the heart and want to protect not only my creation but the unique creations of every other small time, below 50k nation. I may suck at politics, but if so, it is only because I speak for what is right.

Our Nations, our Creations, have a right to sovereignty and realistic roleplay and wargaming. To be told your strategy is invalid because of a cherrypicked game rule, and to be leered over by people who think they can destroy your nation with the push of a button, solely because you have a massively smaller nation in game, is not right.

To be told you must recognize over 50k without discussion, is wrong.

To have your creation subjugated by a group of people who have no claim to your sovereignty, in the fashion of a government, is wrong.

It is above all else a thing of principle, that we all maintain the right to criticize our rules and the game mods without being socially excluded.

Every player has a right to begin with a minimum soldier count, regardless of in game status.

Every player has the right to periods of peace mode, if they wish to roleplay as part of the community in peace, or take a vacation.

Every player has the right to a reasonable defense, and to call the aggressor out and demand a "trial by wargame."

Every player deserves to enjoy the social aspect of our community without having to worry about their work being destroyed by a greedy 50k+ imperialist player.

 

You are free to RP by yourself and use whatever set of rules you wish. If it is your desire to have a long, intricate RP where you and you alone make the rules, perhaps RPing alone would be the best solution for you. However, if you want to RP with others, you must accept that you may be required to compromise or RP by rules or standards you disagree with that reflect the wants and wills of the community.

 

You do not have a right to dictate to 30+ people what the rules will be. Neither do the GMs. We have all agreed to discuss things as a community and vote accordingly; we have also all agreed to recognize a commonly-agreed upon set of rules and the limited authority of all elected GMs. This helps us keep the RP stable and agreeable, as well as providing a mutually-agreed upon system for resolving disputes between players.

 

If you want to openly discuss rule changes with the rest of us, nobody is trying to tell you that you can't. However, I am telling you as a fellow RPer that you're wasting your time with these weird pseudo-populist platitudes. You can take my advice or leave it, but don't be surprised when things don't end up going your way if you refuse to cooperate and be reasonable.

Edited June 11, 2014 by Hereno

[Mogar]

I dont care about whether arguments are legitimate or not, I only speak from the heart and want to protect not only my creation but the unique creations of every other small time, below 50k nation. I may suck at politics, but if so, it is only because I speak for what is right.

Our Nations, our Creations, have a right to sovereignty and realistic roleplay and wargaming. To be told your strategy is invalid because of a cherrypicked game rule, and to be leered over by people who think they can destroy your nation with the push of a button, solely because you have a massively smaller nation in game, is not right.

To be told you must recognize over 50k without discussion, is wrong.

To have your creation subjugated by a group of people who have no claim to your sovereignty, in the fashion of a government, is wrong.

It is above all else a thing of principle, that we all maintain the right to criticize our rules and the game mods without being socially excluded.

Every player has a right to begin with a minimum soldier count, regardless of in game status.

Every player has the right to periods of peace mode, if they wish to roleplay as part of the community in peace, or take a vacation.

Every player has the right to a reasonable defense, and to call the aggressor out and demand a "trial by wargame."

Every player deserves to enjoy the social aspect of our community without having to worry about their work being destroyed by a greedy 50k+ imperialist player.

CNRP1 was far worse at being destroyed by a much larger nation, you can think im awful with my 640k troops, I'd love for you to have to fight lynneth with his full 3.2 million troops in CNRP1. you do not have an SDI, as such you do not have acess to SDI type technology, which the AEGIS's ballistic missile defense falls under.

 

We discussed it for almost three weeks total, maybe you should pay attention.

 

This is a collaborative RP, and I doubt anyone would just completely wipe another player from the map, make you change to a more palatable government? sure.

 

Actually criticize the rules maturely, you have done nothing but whine because you want the rules to change, rather than actually propose a discussion about changing the rules, you simply say they should changed to benefit you without any actual proposal.

 

No, every player has a right to not constantly get themselves on ZI lists, the rules shouldn't be changed simply because one person can't keep themselves out of war for more than 12 hours.

 

Sure, but don't antagonize your neighbors and then expect to be given an LOL PEACE MODE option. This entire rage of yours is because you are afraid I'm going to nuke you, which was more of an OOC warning that maybe you shouldn't be antagonizing your large neighbor by claiming they are actively genociding islands they have less than 50 people on, else I might actually decide to attack you. I have explicitly stated my leader is quite irrational at the moment and you're pretty much instigating me into going to war with you by claiming islands right next door to me, making documentaries labeling my nation as evil, and generally doing whatever you can to paint me as evil.

 

Reasonable defense sure, but you are not going to get some special protection just because you're smaller than me, you have been antagonizing me for the past week and now you suddenly want protection because I can actually do something about it now.

 

You can enjoy the social aspect without constantly spouting off about how Japan is evil, you seem to believe I should not be able to react to your goading, and rather than just attacking you as most people would do, I have expressed to you that if you continue on such a path we will find ourselves at war, because OOCly I'm perfectly content letting you RP whatever the $%&@ you want, but once it starts having a negative impact upon my RP is when you will find my RP having a negative impact upon yours.

 

 

while on the topic of Aegis Ballistic Missile Defense System, from the wiki page.

 

On June 13, 2002, the second successful ALI intercept occurred during the FM-3 flight test mission. Initial Aegis BMD success may have contributed to President George W. Bush's decision to deploy an emergency ballistic missile capability by late 2004.

unless you want to use highly experimental missiles that had a 20% accuracy(which fits hereno's idea), there was no AEGIS system in place in the tech year you are in.

Edited June 11, 2014 by Mogar

[JEDCJT]

Given your list of grievances, you would love CNRP1, Tywin.

 

As for the "right to periods of peace mode, if they wish to roleplay as part of the community in peace, or take a vacation", I think players should have the right to request a lock in an appropriate thread if they would be away for a while, like in CNRP1 (with the understanding that it would not prevent your nation from being wiped for inactivity). But peace mode shouldn't be used by players to insulate themselves from other players' actions. When rping in an collaborative RP community like CNRP2, you take risks when interacting with other players.

Edited June 11, 2014 by JEDCJT

[Zoot Zoot]

Ok so a discussion on IRC has led to this post.

 

Here is my proposal for nukes.

Using Herenos proposal as a base for megatonnage limitations, I suggest we keep nukes as 20/25 nukes (25 with hidden silo), directly based from the IG situation. A WRC grants a replenishment of 2 nukes per day, without, 1 nuke per day, as it is IG.

 

So in short, total cap of 25 nukes with a replenishment of max, 2 nukes per day with the relevent IG wonders.

 

As for SDI's, I believe only nations with SDI wonders IG, should be afforded SDI protection in RP. Thats just me.

 

For our older members, they may recognise this as the old nuke rules for CNRP1, with the additon of Herenos idea.

[Lynneth]

Ok so a discussion on IRC has led to this post.

 

Here is my proposal for nukes.

Using Herenos proposal as a base for megatonnage limitations, I suggest we keep nukes as 20/25 nukes (25 with hidden silo), directly based from the IG situation. A WRC grants a replenishment of 2 nukes per day, without, 1 nuke per day, as it is IG.

 

So in short, total cap of 25 nukes with a replenishment of max, 2 nukes per day with the relevent IG wonders.

 

As for SDI's, I believe only nations with SDI wonders IG, should be afforded SDI protection in RP. Thats just me.

 

For our older members, they may recognise this as the old nuke rules for CNRP1, with the additon of Herenos idea.

 

I would say that with the right RP, a nation could get up to 10 or 20% nuke killan (must be backed up though), and that SDI cannot be shared with other nations. Because reasons.

[Yerushalayim]

I'm on the opposite side from Lynneth. I see no reason not to allow for nations to share their SDI (or, rather, to use it on someone else's behalf). It should have RP consequences (they did just take an active hand in a war, after all), but I don't think it should be barred on an OOG level.

[Hereno]

Sharing is a good idea, but we have to keep it from becoming gamey. Zoot suggested that we give it limited effectiveness, and I think that's fair when you're taking an entire anti-ICBM defense and just shipping it over to some backwater. You can have a 60% SDI for your own nation, or split it between two for 30% each. It's simple, realistic, and reasonable.

As for people like Tywin, I think something like 15-20% is fair if they give a lot of good RP to back it up, even without the wonder. That said, it just seems like it's gonna be one of those things where everybody immediately RPs it, like they did with anti-submarine measures after the nukes flew in east Asia. Even so, 15% is paltry... you're gonna hit it most times, but they might get lucky and block one by accident. Just fire two and be safe about it.

edit: Actually, I don't really care what we do for nations without an SDI. I do like my 30/30 split for SDI sharing, though.

Edited June 12, 2014 by Hereno

[Yerushalayim]

We should also figure out a range that SDIs can fire in. For example, without leaving my own territory (and thus degrading my own SDI rates), I should be able to take shots at nukes coming in at my neighbors, like Axum.

[Captain Enema]

SDI range is within your borders. If it passes overhead, its you can shoot at it.

[bones wizard]

Sharing is a good idea, but we have to keep it from becoming gamey. Zoot suggested that we give it limited effectiveness, and I think that's fair when you're taking an entire anti-ICBM defense and just shipping it over to some backwater. You can have a 60% SDI for your own nation, or split it between two for 30% each. It's simple, realistic, and reasonable.

I like the idea.

[Dillon1102]

We should all be able to have some sort of SDIs

[Markus Wilding]

Out of curiosity, if we RP having missiles that are designed to stop missiles (like Patriot batteries) does that constitute an SDI or does that fall under something else?