Missile Spam Problem

[Triyun]

So now that the war is wiped, and I spent 4 hours listening to the Arms Control Wonk podcast driving (as one does), I'm in the mood for some good old fashion arms limits.  I'm speaking of weapons that don't correlate to IG numbers or wonders in anyway.  In my opinion the idea of having any missile in numbers well beyond what it should be leads to a senseless arms race, which benefits no one, and only serves to help established players.  Additionally because there's no rule saying you CAN violate common sense it hurts the little guy.

 

I'd like to propose the following:

 

Point #1, this does not in any way restrict the armaments for ships or aircraft, those are counted under current rules.  Point #2 this does not in any way restrict the nuclear weapons delivery vehicles.  However neither can be converted to land or any other base of missile (looking at you club K) not counted.

 

I think any land based system which falls under the guidelines of the MTCR (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Missile_Technology_Control_Regime), should be restricted.  The sole exception should be unarmed drones (custom rules prohibit them from being armed anyway)

 

With weapons ranging from 300 kilo-1000 kilo I propose a hard cap of 1/10th Infra or Tech whichever's highest.

 

For weapons ranging from 1000-3000 kilo range I propose a hard cap of 1/20th Infra or Tech whichever's highest.

 

For weapons ranging from 3000+ kilo range I propose a hard cap of 1/30th Infra or Tech whichever's highest.

 

Additionally I propose a reasonable missile defense system

 

SDI covers nukes, but it can also be understood to provide radar coverage for traditional ICBMs and IRBM missiles

 

Missile Defense covers MRBM and below missiles as well as limited cruise.

 

Interceptor System covers cruise missile/ low flying low profile UAV defense comprehensively

 

Anti-Air Network covers IADs and limited BM/Cruise Missile Defense

 

By reducing the ability for people to pull missile and defense numbers out of their ass, we reduce a lot of OOC fighting of 'Mines better' 'No mine is' we have a comprehensive way of addressing things ahead of time.

 

Discuss.

[Mogar]

no.

 

You're putting forth a lot of effort into making a RP game more realistic, when realism should not be something we're striving for, the entire concept of CNRP is unrealistic.

 

Additionally, you're promoting even MORE benefits for nations above 50k, which goes against the concept of RP2 in the first place.

Edited November 2, 2014 by Mogar

[Triyun]

Saying I built [insert number] of weapons over x number of months is also benefitting people based on a tiered system, a system of time in CN RP 2 rather than CN also, only its a totally arbitrary number.  If you have an alternative put it up, but it also shouldn't be, based on being in CN RP 2 first you lock in a number for infinite missile spam.

[Kevin Kingswell]

Replace everything with medieval weaponry and make people fight the battles out in detail. Sorted. 

[Mogar]

I don't see a problem, and it appears the only problem you have is that you don't get to be #1 in a statistic.

[Kevin Kingswell]

The only problem I see with missiles spam is that most weapon systems that fire such missiles are the same ones used for defense so there is nothing to really stop one side launching a missile spam, the other side launching counter missiles and then the two sides swapping. That and the fact that the numbers used seem to be above what current fire control systems can handle.

[Evangeline Anovilis]

Replace everything with medieval weaponry and make people fight the battles out in detail. Sorted. 

I'd be down for following the ways of Michael the Brave and Vlad the Impaler!

[Mr Director]

I'd be down for following the ways of Michael the Brave and Vlad the Impaler!

You'd make a pretty good Elizabeth Bathory

[Mogar]

The only problem I see with missiles spam is that most weapon systems that fire such missiles are the same ones used for defense so there is nothing to really stop one side launching a missile spam, the other side launching counter missiles and then the two sides swapping. That and the fact that the numbers used seem to be above what current fire control systems can handle.

which evidently is the only way to prevent 99.8% accuracy

[Hereno]

this is definitely a problem but the solution proposed seems to be just as bad as the problem itself

[Markus Wilding]

Should we also impose a cap on how many bullets one can produce in a single week?

[Triyun]

The only problem I see with missiles spam is that most weapon systems that fire such missiles are the same ones used for defense so there is nothing to really stop one side launching a missile spam, the other side launching counter missiles and then the two sides swapping. That and the fact that the numbers used seem to be above what current fire control systems can handle.

In b4 Longbow Spam.

 

Cruise missiles and bullets are very different beasts, having more in common with drones and fighter jets (in fact it is a kamikaze drone) than bullets, that points asinine Markus.  

[Mogar]

I suggest we discuss the food our soldiers eat.

[Evangeline Anovilis]

I don't see a problem, and it appears the only problem you have is that you don't get to be #1 in a statistic.

Should we also impose a cap on how many bullets one can produce in a single week?

You people can pretent there's no problem or that this is just regulatory zeal, but I think we discovered last war that common sense is not so common and unless you want one side spamming stupid amounts of missiles, for the other side to spam stupid amounts of missile defense, it is actually something that should be adressed.

 

this is definitely a problem but the solution proposed seems to be just as bad as the problem itself

I guess your concern is that smaller people get less than larger nations.

 

I'd say for missiles:

 

0-100 km: unlimited

 

100-300 km: 10,000

 

300-1,000 km: 5,000

 

1,000-3,000 km: 500

 

3,000+ km: 100

 

Applicable for all surface-to-surface/air-to-surface missiles. Air-to-air is not limited. Nukes are not limited. Surface-to-air, I go with Triyun's concepts.

 

AADN for integrated air defenses and limited ABM and anti-cruise missile capabilities.

 

IMS against cruise missiles.

 

Ingame missile defense for ABM (so, against short range BMs, as is IRL).

 

SDI for nuke defence.

[Triyun]

I'm not super tied to one multiplier or another, but I do think being intelligent about this makes sense.

 

The only problem I see with missiles spam is that most weapon systems that fire such missiles are the same ones used for defense so there is nothing to really stop one side launching a missile spam, the other side launching counter missiles and then the two sides swapping. That and the fact that the numbers used seem to be above what current fire control systems can handle.

 

Also what do you mean here.  There are some paranoid russians that think our plans for anti-ballistic missile interceptors in Europe are a trojan horse for super duper secret IRBMs to assassinate Putin at the beginning of a first strike, but that's not backed up by any actual evidence other than Russian conspiracies after too many bottles of methonal tainted cheap vodka (also known as regular vodka in Russia).

[Mogar]

You people can pretent there's no problem or that this is just regulatory zeal, but I think we discovered last war that common sense is not so common and unless you want one side spamming stupid amounts of missiles, for the other side to spam stupid amounts of missile defense, it is actually something that should be adressed.

It will happen no matter how many missiles are launched, people don't want to RP fairly, they want to win.

[Kevin Kingswell]

I'm not super tied to one multiplier or another, but I do think being intelligent about this makes sense.

 

 

Also what do you mean here.  There are some paranoid russians that think our plans for anti-ballistic missile interceptors in Europe are a trojan horse for super duper secret IRBMs to assassinate Putin at the beginning of a first strike, but that's not backed up by any actual evidence other than Russian conspiracies after too many bottles of methonal tainted cheap vodka (also known as regular vodka in Russia).

 

Is it not that on ships the same tubes that launch the tomahawk missiles are also used to launch anti air missiles? I could and likely am wrong as I know next to nothing about this sort of stuff. 

[Evangeline Anovilis]

It will happen no matter how many missiles are launched, people don't want to RP fairly, they want to win.

Well, how about if you can't work on fixing it, you don't whine when others at least try? Would be much appreciated.

 

Is it not that on ships the same tubes that launch the tomahawk missiles are also used to launch anti air missiles? I could and likely am wrong as I know next to nothing about this sort of stuff. 

Is the case with the Mk. 41 VLS and its improved version, I think Mk. 57.

Edited November 3, 2014 by Evangeline Anovilis

[Mogar]

You are correct that they are both in the VLS tubes.

[Mogar]

Well, how about if you can't work on fixing it, you don't whine when others at least try? Would be much appreciated.

Is the case with the Mk. 41 VLS and its improved version, I think Mk. 57.

There is a pretty easy solution, people actually try to collaborate and not force ultrarealism. :)

[Triyun]

Only on ships are they VLS tubes.  That's a force composition decision right?  That's the same argument as how you outfit missiles on a plane.  But neither planes or ships would be effected by this.  What we're talking about is ground launchers which people just make up a number.  We're talking about ground based launchers, and whether someone should be able to say, 'I have 10000, vs. I have 500.'  This is not a problem on ships because we know 1 ship has x number of slots, which can be outfitted a certain number of ways.

[Evangeline Anovilis]

There is a pretty easy solution, people actually try to collaborate and not force ultrarealism. :)

<=accurate depiction of how I feel reading this...

[Hereno]

You people can pretent there's no problem or that this is just regulatory zeal, but I think we discovered last war that common sense is not so common and unless you want one side spamming stupid amounts of missiles, for the other side to spam stupid amounts of missile defense, it is actually something that should be adressed.
 
I guess your concern is that smaller people get less than larger nations.
 
I'd say for missiles:
 
0-100 km: unlimited
 
100-300 km: 10,000
 
300-1,000 km: 5,000
 
1,000-3,000 km: 500
 
3,000+ km: 100
 
Applicable for all surface-to-surface/air-to-surface missiles. Air-to-air is not limited. Nukes are not limited. Surface-to-air, I go with Triyun's concepts.
 
AADN for integrated air defenses and limited ABM and anti-cruise missile capabilities.
 
IMS against cruise missiles.
 
Ingame missile defense for ABM (so, against short range BMs, as is IRL).
 
SDI for nuke defence.

the discriminating against small nations was one of my problems, but the bigger problem is that it's complicated as $%&@

i could spend hours just figuring out the intricacies of what missiles go where and how they're used

it makes me never even want to war because i'll end up spending a week just to !@#$@#$ make one post

the alternative, of course, being to just !@#$%^&* some !@#$ out and not even bother, like you and i were doing when we "fought" before i got nuked into oblivion back in the day Edited November 3, 2014 by Hereno

[Evangeline Anovilis]

Well, the numbers mostly just regulate surface attack missiles. and only the kind that flies further than 100 km. Which actually isn't that many.

 

AA meanwhile is regulated with the wonders/improvements, so that people who have those, can have the associated capabilities.

 

This regulation will mean, we'll have to count, whenever we spam missiles like Tomahawks or Harpoons, but given you don't spam those every post, it's not too hard to keep track. Also, due to the limited amount of missiles, you also can't go and abuse a nation's lacking missile defense forever, because you'll just use up missiles. Of course, in these regards, 5,000 long-range missiles is a bit generous, but well. One could cut it to 2,000.

[Hereno]

Well, the numbers mostly just regulate surface attack missiles. and only the kind that flies further than 100 km. Which actually isn't that many.
 
AA meanwhile is regulated with the wonders/improvements, so that people who have those, can have the associated capabilities.
 
This regulation will mean, we'll have to count, whenever we spam missiles like Tomahawks or Harpoons, but given you don't spam those every post, it's not too hard to keep track. Also, due to the limited amount of missiles, you also can't go and abuse a nation's lacking missile defense forever, because you'll just use up missiles. Of course, in these regards, 5,000 long-range missiles is a bit generous, but well. One could cut it to 2,000.

says who