OOC: RP Navies

[Lord Frost]

well ironically enough the AT-AT and Martens PAnzer wagon seem highly likely with technology at your levels (over 2000). Of course Id change it so that it seems more plausible (i mean really an AT-AT?).

but yes, mechs like the ones Triyun uses (corea deleted). crazy stuff. Even when I reach those levels i dont intend to rp mechs.

[Lavo]

Of course Id change it so that it seems more plausible (i mean really an AT-AT?).

It uses normal weapons, not lasers and stuff. That and I don't have many of them. Their appearance is their biggest feature, as it scares the **** out of people.

[Lord Frost]

It uses normal weapons, not lasers and stuff. That and I don't have many of them. Their appearance is their biggest feature, as it scares the **** out of people.

ah, well, all right then. Its a stretch but i can take that

[JerreyRough]

Actually, you could use lasers. Not video-game lasers, but real-life lasers. There ARE laser-weapon's; they jsut are very bulkey, and the airbourne laser cannon cost's 200mil or something. And the prototype PLANE (laser is made!!!) will be ready by the end of this year. The fired is 20-inches in diameter; used to destroy tanks. Oh, and b/c its a laser, it dang moves at the speed of light, its deadlier than missiles.

The only 2 things in common with modern-lasers and game-lasers is that they are the only weapon used within the future, and they are uber effective. Now, a picture of the laser on the plane:

Laser's could be the thing that people with tech' equivilent to 5 years from now & a whole ton of money (infra) can have (infra finally does something in RP!! ).

FOr those with super-high tech, would you RP this warship of tomorrow?

Yea, only RP ships that you can get. I won't be able to get those monster's for a long time.

Edited July 7, 2008 by JerreyRough

[Justinian the Mighty]

Mechs are dumb... that's all I have to say about that.

[V The King]

Mechs are dumb... that's all I have to say about that.

That's pretty much my stance as well.

[+Zeke+]

I going to RP my frigate taking out a battleship.

Yeah, maybe if I snuck in while everyone on the battleship was drunk and nerved gassed them all.

[nc1701]

I going to RP my frigate taking out a battleship.

Yeah, maybe if I snuck in while everyone on the battleship was drunk and nerved gassed them all.

Actually that's pretty plausible.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SMS_Szent_Istv%C3%A1n#Sinking

tl'dr in WW1 an Italian battleship was sunk by two torpedo boats which were basicaly nothing more than a small hull, an outboard motor, and a torpedo tubes. Modern Frigates not only have several torpedo tubes, but also anti-ship missiles, and high power repeating guns.

If I were a battleship I think I'de steer clear of a modern FFG.

[USNA]

OOC: The only modern battleships are the US's Iowa class which were modernized by Reagan. The problem is that they are very vulnerable in the missile age because unlike WWII where gun sizes usually settled battles now it's guided missiles that will cause immense amount of damage to whatever it hits. Nowadays a anti-ship missile is the same coming from an aircraft, frigate, destroyer, corvette or any other ship.

RP: My navy is currently attempting to develop a nuclear powered battleship

[Vedran]

No, the 100x is only for citizens, not any other part of your nation.

Well, finally we got the citizen thing cleared up. Now I won't have to be so vague about my population anymore.

But will we treat our population as being just our citizen count times 100 or our total supporters x100? Because soldiers are people too =(

Also, if I keep my soldiers at my ingame level, that means I will only have about 40,000 soldiers (maximum) to protect 7.1 million people.

[USNA]

Why don't we multiply citizen count x100 and soldier count x10. That way we wouldn't have extremely large or small militaries in proportion to our citizens. I would have 4,154,800 citizens with a protecting force of 300,000 soldiers. Not extremely out of proportion for a nations military. I'm not too sure about tanks but my current force of 3100 tanks seems proportional to the multipliers.

Side Note: Does anyone know the approximate amount of tanks in an armored division? I've always thought it was around 300 but could someone confirm this.

[Uberstein]

Mechs are dumb... that's all I have to say about that.

Yeah, I am personally going to stop building them. I will keep the unweildy thingamagiggers I have right now, but yeah.

Now what IS a good idea isn't a mech, but a tank with legs so it can walk on any terrain. It would just fail in sand.

[Lavo]

Now what IS a good idea isn't a mech, but a tank with legs so it can walk on any terrain. It would just fail in sand.

Nah. It wouldn't fail in the sand. I already have legged Tank Destroyers/Arty and the AT-MC, so I'm fine in that regard.

[Subtleknifewielder]

Navies? Awesome!

Why don't we multiply citizen count x100 and soldier count x10. That way we wouldn't have extremely large or small militaries in proportion to our citizens. I would have 4,154,800 citizens with a protecting force of 300,000 soldiers. Not extremely out of proportion for a nations military. I'm not too sure about tanks but my current force of 3100 tanks seems proportional to the multipliers.

Side Note: Does anyone know the approximate amount of tanks in an armored division? I've always thought it was around 300 but could someone confirm this.

Hmm, those multipliers seem pretty fair to me.

As for your side note--not a clue.

[Void Indigo]

OOC: The only modern battleships are the US's Iowa class which were modernized by Reagan. The problem is that they are very vulnerable in the missile age because unlike WWII where gun sizes usually settled battles now it's guided missiles that will cause immense amount of damage to whatever it hits. Nowadays a anti-ship missile is the same coming from an aircraft, frigate, destroyer, corvette or any other ship.

RP: My navy is currently attempting to develop a nuclear powered battleship

I do not believe a guided missile could punch 16" of nickel alloy steel that the Iowa class had in high probability impact areas. then add in the Phalanx systems on fully auto and it would be a tough nut to crack.

Edited July 8, 2008 by Void Indigo

[JerreyRough]

Meh, missiles might not be used soon as much in the future; with lasers, the missile will be flying towards a plane when ZAP! a laser kill's it (or makes it a dud somehow). Then there's "The Trophy Active Defense System", which destory low-tech ammunition coming for the tank/tank location (eg bazooka, slower missiles, rocket-propelled grenades, etc.).

And then theres the rail-gun.

That non-explosive hunk of metal carries as much destructive force as a Tomahawk missile! And, the finished product can hit a 5-meter target from 200 nautical miles away.

OOC: lolz, they're making frisbee's that have explosives on them; well, they are sorta like drone's.

"Sent airborne from a modified skeet launcher, the drones can either fly automatically or be piloted remotely from the ground. They'll be packed with armor-piercing explosives and can be set to detonate all at once or to disperse their payload over a range. "

[nc1701]

I do not believe a guided missile could punch 16" of nickel alloy steel that the Iowa class had in high probability impact areas. then add in the Phalanx systems on fully auto and it would be a tough nut to crack.

You realize they were all decommissioned and the US navy had entirely new (far more expensive) DDGs built to replace them right?

They have antiquated fire control systems, and have been little better than floating artillery support for Marines since 1941. In fact the last time a battleship was used as an anti-ship weapon was 1944, when American battleships and torpedo boats sank two Japanese battleships in the Philippines. Battleships look great on paper, but in reality are just great big floating targets.

[USNA]

I do not believe a guided missile could punch 16" of nickel alloy steel that the Iowa class had in high probability impact areas. then add in the Phalanx systems on fully auto and it would be a tough nut to crack.

As mentioned above the Iowas are not "modern" in the sense of new missile destroyers and frigates. They were merely upgraded with new weapons systems and radar. While they still have uses (especially shore bombardment) the gun's will never be used in ship on ship combat. The phalanx systems are a last ditch defense system and I really wouldn't want to rely on them to intercept a swarm of incoming missiles. They don't have a viable anti-aircraft weapon (so like carriers they must be protected by other ships). I'm not saying battleships are totally useless. They would perform very well in executing shore bombardment in support of an amphibious invasion (like they were meant to do). They should add a bonus to ground battles like the amphibious transport and give a special 2x their strength in NS to simulate the prestige and overall pride of having a battleship owned by a nation. Every major naval power has always tried to build bigger battleships not only to combat the enemy but as a show of that nation's naval supremacy.

[America]

As mentioned above the Iowas are not "modern" in the sense of new missile destroyers and frigates. They were merely upgraded with new weapons systems and radar. While they still have uses (especially shore bombardment) the gun's will never be used in ship on ship combat. The phalanx systems are a last ditch defense system and I really wouldn't want to rely on them to intercept a swarm of incoming missiles. They don't have a viable anti-aircraft weapon (so like carriers they must be protected by other ships). I'm not saying battleships are totally useless. They would perform very well in executing shore bombardment in support of an amphibious invasion (like they were meant to do). They should add a bonus to ground battles like the amphibious transport and give a special 2x their strength in NS to simulate the prestige and overall pride of having a battleship owned by a nation. Every major naval power has always tried to build bigger battleships not only to combat the enemy but as a show of that nation's naval supremacy.

Gentlemen, I suggest you move your thread to the Boiler Room, where I have started a topic just for this discussion. There is no need to clog up the work space with discussions on warships.

[Riyzar]

2: You have RP citizens equal to 100x your normal citizens.

I disagree with this, with this rule the top nation would have only 21,585,100 citizens. To contrast the United States is about 300 million, and isn't even close to the most populated country.

I think you should multiply your citizens by 1,000. This would make the top nation have 215,851,000 citizens which I think is pretty spot on.

[LeVentNoir]

Riyzar, do you even rp?

The biggest rping nation is Rebel Army with 130k citizens. a 100x multi plier moves that to 13mil, an intelligent number..

Edited July 8, 2008 by LeVentNoir

[Lavo]

The biggest rping nation is Rebel Army with 130k citizens. a 100x multi plier moves that to 13mil, an intelligent number..

Actually, TRE is the biggest RPing nation, not me. Though, he isn't that much bigger population wise.

[LeVentNoir]

I though you were at 10k infra and he was at 8.5k....

[Manetheren]

I RP my nation as have more or less 18 million citizens. I have 7.5k infra.

Why do I RP it like that? It is realistic for a nation of my size to have about that many people in RL. Its actually quite small if you take the RL populations of the area my nation is located.

[LeVentNoir]

I think 6 million is an intelligent amount for my islands. NZ currently has 4 mil, and a low density, while the pacific islands are horribly under developed.