General RPing Guidelines

[Sumeragi]

Opinions:

*Your in-game (your actual CyberNations nation) citizen count will be multiplied by one hundred (100), and the subsequent number will be your CNRP (CyberNations Roleplaying) citizen count.

Can we change it the mulitplier to 1,000?

2) Multiply soldiers/tanks by ten and use that number. This is the most common variant, but not universal.

Given that even Russia has only 10,000 tanks in RL, I say we just keep tank multipier at 1.

[V The King]

Can we change it the mulitplier to 1,000?

The general citizen multiplier is 100x, why change the soldier one to 1,000x?

Not to mention many nations would have juggernaut armies (e.g. mine would be 60 Millions strong!)

[Sumeragi]

The general citizen multiplier is 100x, why change the soldier one to 1,000x?

Not to mention many nations would have juggernaut armies (e.g. mine would be 60 Millions strong!)

I'm saying that we should change the citizen multiplier from 100 to 1,000.

[JEDCJT]

The general citizen multiplier is 100x, why change the soldier one to 1,000x?

Not to mention many nations would have juggernaut armies (e.g. mine would be 60 Millions strong!)

I think he was referring to citizens...

[Manetheren]

Can we change it the mulitplier to 1,000?

I ignore the multiplier and have my population at about 18 million no matter what. Its pretty small for my nation being based on the west coast USA. I just assume nations like Turkey, Welsh Empire, Neo Japan, Triyun, J Andres ect. have pretty big populations because of their geographical location and how big populations are RL. It doesn't really affect anybody to have a big or small population in RP, and as long as its reasonable I say go for it.

Military should probably be restricted to a multiplier though, but it doesn't have to be so rigid.

[V The King]

I think he was referring to citizens...

Oh, I misread it. For some reason, I first read the bottom quote then what he wrote above. :<

In regards to the suggestion, I think it's pushing it a bit. I don't think there's a need to increase it.

[Subtleknifewielder]

I just came in here to say the same thing about nukes V the King. These nations are no where near the capability without a manhattan project for nukes. You shouldn't get a free pass because one nation chooses to hand them out like children's play toys. Regarding nukes in general unless you are basically way ahead of everyone else, you should try to keep a limited Arsenal. Having huge arsenal is pretty unrealistic unless you are massive, the nation in question selling them off hardly qualifies as such.

I refuse to acknowledge the possession of nukes by nations that do not have them IG.

I also do dot recognise the sharing the tech past 40% of the largest nations tech.

Would you view it as realistic for a nation that once had nuclear capability (such as myself) to purchase the Uranium to make the nukes themselves? Mark this...the only reason I don;t have the ability to make nukes IG is that I fell a little below the 5% mark.

[Sumeragi]

Would you view it as realistic for a nation that once had nuclear capability (such as myself) to purchase the Uranium to make the nukes themselves? Mark this...the only reason I don;t have the ability to make nukes IG is that I fell a little below the 5% mark.

Get a Manhatten Project, then.

[Subtleknifewielder]

Get a Manhatten Project, then.

I will...if you help me pay for it. Besides, I don't have the Uranium resource.

Edited September 23, 2008 by Subtleknifewielder

[Sumeragi]

I will...if you help me pay for it. Besides, I don't have the Uranium resource.

I don't see why we should restrict the possession of nukes RP if a country has the capability to make them IG (even without uranium).

[JEDCJT]

I will...if you help me pay for it. Besides, I don't have the Uranium resource.

That's what Trades are for.

Edited September 23, 2008 by JEDCJT

[Subtleknifewielder]

That's what Trades are for.

I don't cancel my membership in a trade circle on a whim, you know...

[Otto Verteidiger]

I don't cancel my membership in a trade circle on a whim, you know...

Temps?

[JEDCJT]

I don't cancel my membership in a trade circle on a whim, you know...

Oh...I wasn't aware of that fact.

[Uberstein]

I refuse to acknowledge the possession of nukes by nations that do not have them IG.

I also do dot recognise the sharing the tech past 40% of the largest nations tech.

Then I don't recognise your RP. :jihad:

Several of my nuke-capable allies said "Hey Uberstein, HERE, have a few nukes to help ward off enemies.", and they have remained in storage since.

Edited September 23, 2008 by BaronUberstein

[V The King]

Would you view it as realistic for a nation that once had nuclear capability (such as myself) to purchase the Uranium to make the nukes themselves? Mark this...the only reason I don;t have the ability to make nukes IG is that I fell a little below the 5% mark.

11.14% is quite far away from the nuke mark.

EDIT:

As far as game play allows, a nuclear capable nation is one that:

- Is in the top 5% OR owns a Manhattan Project

- Has at least 1,000 infra and 75 tech (any nation on top 5%, either way)

- Has access to Uranium

Edited September 23, 2008 by V The King

[Silhouette]

I do like the idea that nations who are not quite there yet can RP, responsibly, to be sure, small nuclear warheads fired from field guns, or ww2 style nukes delievered by planes, as when we talk about nukes we generally mean ICBM's, so what about less sophisticated types for those other people.

If you have to shoot me down over this, please do so kindly, i'm just snowballing an idea here.

[Tibet]

I do like the idea that nations who are not quite there yet can RP, responsibly, to be sure, small nuclear warheads fired from field guns, or ww2 style nukes delievered by planes, as when we talk about nukes we generally mean ICBM's, so what about less sophisticated types for those other people.

If you have to shoot me down over this, please do so kindly, i'm just snowballing an idea here.

It sounds like this debate could actually be RPed as a Non-Proliferation Treaty by the current accepted Nuclear capable nations.

Also, as a side note, in RL just because a nation has more than WW2 technology, it doesn't entitle them to nuclear weapons, there are plenty of advanced nations in Real World that are advanced but do not have nuclear weapons. Nuclear power is one thing, nuclear weapons is a different type of enrichment process altogether.

[Centurius]

It sounds like this debate could actually be RPed as a Non-Proliferation Treaty by the current accepted Nuclear capable nations.

Also, as a side note, in RL just because a nation has more than WW2 technology, it doesn't entitle them to nuclear weapons, there are plenty of advanced nations in Real World that are advanced but do not have nuclear weapons. Nuclear power is one thing, nuclear weapons is a different type of enrichment process altogether.

Yeah but they are able to maintain them especially if they actually have access to uranium.

Oh by the way the reason we made the sale public. We didn't buy them to fire them we bought them to make the Nuclear Enemy aware of the fact we can fire them back.

[Tibet]

Yeah but they are able to maintain them especially if they actually have access to uranium.

Oh by the way the reason we made the sale public. We didn't buy them to fire them we bought them to make the Nuclear Enemy aware of the fact we can fire them back.

Actually nukes can be maintained without access to uranium, I doubt the half-life of uranium should be the issue of the maintenance, not just the technology but procedures would have to be taught for saftey and procedures to maintain them as well.

As far as firing back, that's what treaties are for. And we haven't seen any of these treaties in CN or CNRP, as they are different in nature. A Nuclear Retaliation Treaty is a treaty that states that any nuclear attack on the nation will be retaliated immediately by nukes from the allied nation. I would love to give more details, but its still classified above Top Secret so I cannot point out much more than just the idea of it.

I am quite amazed that I haven't seen any of these treaties in CN yet...This way, there is no need to give a nation a nuke when they might change government and you could lose the ally and them still have the nuke. This treaty allows the nuclear capable nation to retain control and support their ally all in one step. Also, we need to consider distance. If a nation poses a threat to me, I want to have a NRT (Nuclear Retaliation Treaty) with a nation that is very close to my adversary, that way, I can be content that by the time their nukes are in orbit enroute to my nation, the shorter range nukes from my ally have already hit my adversary.

IC: Peace be with you

Edited September 23, 2008 by Tibet

[Centurius]

Actually nukes can be maintained without access to uranium, I doubt the half-life of uranium should be the issue of the maintenance, not just the technology but procedures would have to be taught for saftey and procedures to maintain them as well.

As far as firing back, that's what treaties are for. And we haven't seen any of these treaties in CN or CNRP, as they are different in nature. A Nuclear Retaliation Treaty is a treaty that states that any nuclear attack on the nation will be retaliated immediately by nukes from the allied nation. I would love to give more details, but its still classified above Top Secret so I cannot point out much more than just the idea of it.

I am quite amazed that I haven't seen any of these treaties in CN yet...This way, there is no need to give a nation a nuke when they might change government and you could lose the ally and them still have the nuke. This treaty allows the nuclear capable nation to retain control and support their ally all in one step. Also, we need to consider distance. If a nation poses a threat to me, I want to have a NRT (Nuclear Retaliation Treaty) with a nation that is very close to my adversary, that way, I can be content that by the time their nukes are in orbit enroute to my nation, the shorter range nukes from my ally have already hit my adversary.

IC: Peace be with you

Hmm I actually like this idea, but I didn't even know those existed

[Lynneth]

Actually nukes can be maintained without access to uranium, I doubt the half-life of uranium should be the issue of the maintenance, not just the technology but procedures would have to be taught for saftey and procedures to maintain them as well.

As far as firing back, that's what treaties are for. And we haven't seen any of these treaties in CN or CNRP, as they are different in nature. A Nuclear Retaliation Treaty is a treaty that states that any nuclear attack on the nation will be retaliated immediately by nukes from the allied nation. I would love to give more details, but its still classified above Top Secret so I cannot point out much more than just the idea of it.

I am quite amazed that I haven't seen any of these treaties in CN yet...This way, there is no need to give a nation a nuke when they might change government and you could lose the ally and them still have the nuke. This treaty allows the nuclear capable nation to retain control and support their ally all in one step. Also, we need to consider distance. If a nation poses a threat to me, I want to have a NRT (Nuclear Retaliation Treaty) with a nation that is very close to my adversary, that way, I can be content that by the time their nukes are in orbit enroute to my nation, the shorter range nukes from my ally have already hit my adversary.

IC: Peace be with you

Interestingly, I've thought of doing exactly that in the REPO-treaty. lol. I'm one of the few in there with the ability to build nukes (aside from needing uranium which I'll get IC.)

[Tibet]

Hmm I actually like this idea, but I didn't even know those existed

They do, but between whom is classified information. Honestly, I'm only mentioning the general details due to what it could bring us in RP, but I will not get into any further detail as to not get close to the limits of the classified information, after all this is just a game...LOL...I think the idea is all we need anyway.

in addition, using these NRTs should be a simple way of coming to a compromise of who can have RP Nukes as well. If someone can't have a nuke, but can get an NRT with an ally, they would be more willing to accept the Nuke RP Guidelines.

Edited September 23, 2008 by Tibet

[Centurius]

They do, but with whom is classified information. Honestly, I'm only mentioning the general details due to what it could bring us in RP, but I will not get into any further detail as to not get close to the limits of the classified information, after all this is just a game...LOL...I think the idea is all we need anyway.

Yeah only the idea caused the first one to be signed.

[Subtleknifewielder]

Temps?

Uh, not sure what you mean by that...

Oh...I wasn't aware of that fact.

Tsk tsk tsk...you should know I'm a man of my word.

11.14% is quite far away from the nuke mark.

EDIT:

As far as game play allows, a nuclear capable nation is one that:

- Is in the top 5% OR owns a Manhattan Project

- Has at least 1,000 infra and 75 tech (any nation on top 5%, either way)

- Has access to Uranium

Yes, but I used to be in the top 5%, and I'm a lot closer now than when I did fall below the mark originally. In RL, those who have the ability to build and maintain nuclear weaponry don't magically lose it if other nations become stronger than them. Am I right?