Lord Frost Posted December 30, 2008 Report Share Posted December 30, 2008 really, now? Did you even bother to read Lynneth's post? If you just say all your nukes are 10 MT, then you have 20. Simple. I did read his post, and my stance still...stands. 1 IG nuke = 1 RP nuke. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sumeragi Posted December 30, 2008 Report Share Posted December 30, 2008 I did read his post, and my stance still...stands. 1 IG nuke = 1 RP nuke. Define RP nuke. Warhead or ICBM? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Frost Posted December 30, 2008 Report Share Posted December 30, 2008 Define RP nuke. Warhead or ICBM? Nuclear Device. Explosive of the Nuclear Nature. Warheads AND ICBM or anything that can be labeled "Nuclear Weapon". No i will not pander to technicalities like "oh well its this Megaton so its small so i can haz more" or any of that nonsense. No I will not change my opinion on the matter Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sumeragi Posted December 30, 2008 Report Share Posted December 30, 2008 It's important, Frost. By your definition, one hiroshima-class nuke is the same as a 16-warhead ICBM, which are VERY different. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tahsir Posted December 30, 2008 Report Share Posted December 30, 2008 (edited) Why doesn't anyone just use M.O.A.B.s or F.O.A.B.s? Not to say nations can't have nukes. Set any nation that HAS nukes a limit decided by their infra on # and megatonage. Like every 2k infra = 1 nuke with a max of 40 megatons. That way there arnt THOUSANDS of nukes, or even hundreds. Meaning husbanding of these super weapon. Edited December 30, 2008 by Tahsir Re Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Frost Posted December 30, 2008 Report Share Posted December 30, 2008 It's important, Frost. By your definition, one hiroshima-class nuke is the same as a 16-warhead ICBM, which are VERY different. A nuke is still a nuke. Personally, I'd rather Nuclear weaponry be banned altogether, as they take away from the rp that is conventional warfare. However, even I realize that this is too much to hope for. Never the less, I am fully confident that anyone who is actually interested in quality, enjoyable rp, will agree with me when I say that limiting nukes to IG stats serves that interest Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sumeragi Posted December 30, 2008 Report Share Posted December 30, 2008 A nuke is still a nuke. Personally, I'd rather Nuclear weaponry be banned altogether, as they take away from the rp that is conventional warfare. However, even I realize that this is too much to hope for. Never the less, I am fully confident that anyone who is actually interested in quality, enjoyable rp, will agree with me when I say that limiting nukes to IG stats serves that interest I agree with you, but when a nation uses 60-something warheads and no one jumps up, I say we have a problem with reading. I don't mind being hit that hard, I just want to know what standard we go by before I get my MP. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Frost Posted December 30, 2008 Report Share Posted December 30, 2008 (edited) I agree with you, but when a nation uses 60-something warheads and no one jumps up, I say we have a problem with reading. I don't mind being hit that hard, I just want to know what standard we go by before I get my MP. Even in RL, use of 60 warheads is rediculous, considering the firepower of even the first Atomic Bombs. 1 IG nuke = 1 RP nuke is perfectly reasonable, especially since here on planet bob we deal with much smaller populations, so the effects of Nuclear weapons are much more severe Edit: also avatar Edited December 30, 2008 by Lord Frost Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sumeragi Posted December 30, 2008 Report Share Posted December 30, 2008 Even in RL, use of 60 warheads is rediculous, considering the firepower of even the first Atomic Bombs. Well, that happened in the Oceanic War, when Shan used 68 warheads to shut down my massive underground military-industrial infrastructure. Edit:also avatar It's the current Sumeragi. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tahsir Posted December 30, 2008 Report Share Posted December 30, 2008 another for your avatar sumeragi I still say the standard should be M.O.A.B.s and F.O.A.B.s if you want a reasonable alternative to nuclear weaponry. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JEDCJT Posted December 30, 2008 Report Share Posted December 30, 2008 another for your avatar sumeragi I agree. avy, Sumeragi... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Frost Posted December 30, 2008 Report Share Posted December 30, 2008 Well, that happened in the Oceanic War, when Shan used 68 warheads to shut down my massive underground military-industrial infrastructure. well to be fair, u didnt have that infrastructure to begin with, so it was kinda "I use magic" both ways. an eye for an eye, and all that It's the current Sumeragi. hawt Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sumeragi Posted December 30, 2008 Report Share Posted December 30, 2008 well to be fair, u didnt have that infrastructure to begin with, so it was kinda "I use magic" both ways. an eye for an eye, and all that I RPed it, Frost. Just because you don't read doesn't mean it doesn't exist. Selective reading is bad for RPs. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Frost Posted December 30, 2008 Report Share Posted December 30, 2008 I RPed it, Frost. Just because you don't read doesn't mean it doesn't exist.Selective reading is bad for RPs. U claimed it was there for decades when your nation isn't even that old. Magic is bad for RP's Now moving back into more important issues so that we don't clutter ANOTHER thread, I do not change my stance on the Nuke issue, with all reasons having been stated Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JerreyRough Posted December 30, 2008 Report Share Posted December 30, 2008 I think people are trying to have too advanced weapons. Aircarft like the one's RP'ed haven't been devloped in RL, which means about 5-10 years of testing (especially if they go really fast, then concept art is mostly uselss), then several more years to semi-mass produce them. And they will cost quite alot, but less if there is no pilot. Then their's armored soidlers (which I talked about earlier). I know its cool and fun to RP advanced stuff, but you got to set personal limit's up. If there is something advanced technology has, it is unseen weaknesses; I have a AI turret that attacks stuff (which is quite very possible, like this ), but it will glitch out sometimes, requires somebody to re-fill its ammo, requires a large power-source, gernades can take it out; etc.Please, for the sake of the RP community, don't go too far technology-wise. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aiden Ford Posted December 30, 2008 Report Share Posted December 30, 2008 I think people are trying to have too advanced weapons. Aircarft like the one's RP'ed haven't been devloped in RL, which means about 5-10 years of testing (especially if they go really fast, then concept art is mostly uselss), then several more years to semi-mass produce them. And they will cost quite alot, but less if there is no pilot.Then their's armored soidlers (which I talked about earlier). I know its cool and fun to RP advanced stuff, but you got to set personal limit's up. If there is something advanced technology has, it is unseen weaknesses; I have a AI turret that attacks stuff (which is quite very possible, like this ), but it will glitch out sometimes, requires somebody to re-fill its ammo, requires a large power-source, gernades can take it out; etc.Please, for the sake of the RP community, don't go too far technology-wise. Ironically, almost every craft I design, is based on a real life counterpart. Also, about that, its not necessarily true, the MiG-15, and Saber were both tested, designed, and fielded in less than a year, the fact is, during peace people tend to go on about a very slow pace, but in war they move quickly, looking to get it done fast, and in the field. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Triyun Posted December 30, 2008 Report Share Posted December 30, 2008 I think a bigger issue is someone just saying an aircraft is better because. I point to Martens recent thread where he was facing JSFs. One should not assume that those units are better, Marten's tech by any objective measure (not the 3500 amount that most have taken issue with) does not mean that he has a unit that totally outmatches the F-35. The F-35 is a modern plane which is highly manuverable and should not be discounted based on the projections of arm chair generals on this board. I would say the same thing if they were going up against my Sino-fighters and F-50s. Its easy to arm chair general and say you invented units which easily overcome issues IRL fighter craft can overcome. But rarely are IRL weaknesses that inevitably occur due to real life concerns and realities taken into account. My personal opinion is Nobody should say their tank, fighter, etc should be able to totally demolish the other side. Even if you claim better tactics, remember in real life combat pilots have seconds if that to react in dogfights whereas you have hours to sit down think out a strategy and write up a post. Its better to merely assume you took some losses, you got some kills. If you have things like a foreign airbase and higher tech which give you air combat bonuses you can say your pilots are a bit better trained, but nobody hear should assume just cause they say they have a magical plane brought with pretend money they should be better than those who choose to try and utilize IRL hardware. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King Kevz Posted December 30, 2008 Report Share Posted December 30, 2008 Quick question would Kaiser please explain how this merger of their forces helps them in anyway or did you merge because it sounded cool? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aiden Ford Posted December 30, 2008 Report Share Posted December 30, 2008 The JSF is a pretty crappy Aircraft, except for the USMC Version... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hawk11 Posted December 30, 2008 Report Share Posted December 30, 2008 I'm pulling this one out of the latest merger thread OOC: Please explain how this merger helps you in the war? My take on the Magna Europe merger? It allows all three of them to pool all of their military hardware into one large "armory" (for lack of better words) and send it wherever they want. Hypothetical situation: Say Nation A of Magna Europe was not technologically advanced enough to use cruise missiles. Now they're merged into Magna Europe which is sharing their tech. Now they can use cruise missiles and a variety of whatever Nations B and C might have as well. Bottom line, it's a way for them to take advantage of Nordland's ridiculous tech, even if it is only temporary. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King Kevz Posted December 30, 2008 Report Share Posted December 30, 2008 I'm pulling this one out of the latest merger threadMy take on the Magna Europe merger? It allows all three of them to pool all of their military hardware into one large "armory" (for lack of better words) and send it wherever they want. Hypothetical situation: Say Nation A of Magna Europe was not technologically advanced enough to use cruise missiles. Now they're merged into Magna Europe which is sharing their tech. Now they can use cruise missiles and a variety of whatever Nations B and C might have as well. Bottom line, it's a way for them to take advantage of Nordland's ridiculous tech, even if it is only temporary. I refuse to accept that the other nations can use Nordland's technology for their own. The other nation's won't have had the same training for their crews and anything like cruise missiles will have all the permissions and codes kept with the Nordland forces unless of course the Nordlanders would allow other nation's to have access to their most destructive weaponary which they wouldn't I hope and even if they did it would take a long tme to allow them access. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coloradia Posted December 30, 2008 Report Share Posted December 30, 2008 Did all treaties carry over to Magna Europa? If they are merged then it is reasonable to assume that some/many of their treaties are not carried over. The other signatories would have to agree to it. Just wondering which treaties remain. I don't recall anyone signing an MDP with Magna Europa. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Subtleknifewielder Posted December 30, 2008 Report Share Posted December 30, 2008 (edited) Did all treaties carry over to Magna Europa? If they are merged then it is reasonable to assume that some/many of their treaties are not carried over. The other signatories would have to agree to it. Just wondering which treaties remain. I don't recall anyone signing an MDP with Magna Europa. I agree. And to the best of my knoledge, no treaties carried over. Edited December 30, 2008 by Subtleknifewielder Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aiden Ford Posted December 30, 2008 Report Share Posted December 30, 2008 I agree. And to the best of my knoledge, no treaties carried over. According to Lavo they did Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Subtleknifewielder Posted December 30, 2008 Report Share Posted December 30, 2008 According to Lavo they did He was already in the war before the merger, so he doesn't count... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.