Strategic Weapons of a Non-Nuclear Nature

[Triyun]

Namely I am talking about EMPs here. It seems to me that to posses weapons capable of disabling an entire country (basically nuke equivalent, lets be honest here, civilian casualties don't matter in a game) is fundementally bias and unfair. This is a back door to inflate ones arsenals.

One can easily see the unintended consequences of the use of these weapons, by merely looking at the latest war. Lavo launches EMPs at Vektor in addition to nuclear warheads, these weapons he claims Vektor doesn't even have basic cold war anti-emp equipment to protect against. Basically Lavo here is getting the equivalent of nuclear assualt on Vektor's population center without having to even worry about using up his nukes. He has claimed that Germany is w/o power (disabled in modern warfare terms).

As we have no in game measurement of these weapons, to have the ability to take out an entire countries warfighting ability without the actual use of your nuclear weapons is fundementally unfair, I believe we made an excellent step with removing orbital platforms, I move we take it a step forward and remove these type of bombs from the game, or require that to have weapons that can have such a range you use your nuclear slots to deploy them. I think this is the only fair thing to do.

[Mergerberger II]

I would agree to this motion. Basically, if someone can magically conjure up things the day they take office, I think someone should have basic cold-war EMP-proof technology when they are in the 2020s...

[Maelstrom Vortex]

You can EMP proof weapons systems and platforms.. it's called "manual backup systems". Tanks weren't always fully electronically automated.

[Malabyte]

I concur. As Triyun stated, it's fundementally unfair. Such weaponry removes the strategy side of the role play.

[New Frontier]

Yes, most nations do use their nuclear warheads to use EMPs, so it makes sense that they'd use up a nuke slot.

[Il Terra Di Agea]

I like the level of realism that they add to the game. I think that complaining about it is just an easy way to avoid the RP of EMP proofing, and building EMPs.

Like many things, I don't use them, and probably won't in the future, but I think that they deserve to stay

[Stefano Palmieri]

I like the level of realism that they add to the game. I think that complaining about it is just an easy way to avoid the RP of EMP proofing, and building EMPs.

Like many things, I don't use them, and probably won't in the future, but I think that they deserve to stay

I agree

[Cody Seb]

I find it to be one of those real life things that takes away the nature of it being a game. I've RP'd EMP proofing, but its just like when I opposed doomsday devices. It may be possible in real life, but it makes the game less fun through inbalance.

[Malatose]

To say that a nation doesn't have basic EMP proofing, as evident in the Cold War US/USSR/Japan/And even China to a degree, is pure ignorance at best. Especially considering, most nations in the RP are deploying weapons systems far beyond anything currently developed in RL. So yeah, we can deploy super fighters, but not provide the most basic of EMP systems?

Whatever.

[Kaiser Martens]

I must call to attention how they only object to EMPs once that they have already been used, even though they have been in use for long, long times, Triyun in particular objects once his ally is a victim of it, this is biased and unfair.

If EMP is removed at all, although I think it shouldn't be, the only fair thing to do is to remove it "from here onwards" but to leave their effect in the war as is, for the sake of fairness. This is like Hafnium, people only criticized it once I started to use it often although it was an older thing, criticizing things when having them banned supports your IC interests is as unfair as the rest claim EMP to be.

Edit:

Also, yes, most people CAN have EMP protection, but, the thing is, EMP protection isn't "default" or "standard issue" equipment, EMP protection *must* be RPed. You should't just take it for granted.

Edited February 15, 2009 by Kaiser Martens

[Lavo]

Namely I am talking about EMPs here. It seems to me that to posses weapons capable of disabling an entire country (basically nuke equivalent, lets be honest here, civilian casualties don't matter inOne can easily see the unintended consequences of the use of these weapons, by merely looking at the latest war. Lavo launches EMPs at Vektor in addition to nuclear warheads, these weapons he claims Vektor doesn't even have basic cold war anti-emp equipment to protect against. Basically Lavo here is getting the equivalent of nuclear assualt on Vektor's population center without having to even worry about using up his nukes. He has claimed that Germany is w/o power (disabled in modern warfare terms).

Actually, I have not claimed or reported any of Malatose's damage. I'm waiting on him to post stuff. In terms of defense, Malatose's SDI did go up against the missiles (although a good amount got through). As for "anti-EMP" equipment, you have to build something from the start to "EMP-proof" it. For some military equipment, "EMP-proofing" is standard. As well, to quote your post: "Lavo launches EMPs at Vektor in addition to nuclear warheads" I have not launched a single nuclear weapon against Malatose. As well, an EMP is nowhere near the equivalent of a nuclear assault. It does not kill people, radiate an area and people for hundreds of years, and does not incinerate everything within it's blast radius. I find it odd that this has only been brought up now, and not when I have used this weapon multiple times in the past and to the same extent, and as such I question the motives behind the post. Are EMPs "fair"? They are as fair as the British tanks in WWI and the AK47s in Vietnam, they gave their users an amazing and awe-inspiring weapon during their time.

[Malatose]

I must call to attention how they only object to EMPs once that they have already been used, even though they have been in use for long, long times, Triyun in particular objects once his ally is a victim of it, this is biased and unfair.

If EMP is removed at all, although I think it shouldn't be, the only fair thing to do is to remove it "from here onwards" but to leave their effect in the war as is, for the sake of fairness. This is like Hafnium, people only criticized it once I started to use it often although it was an older thing, criticizing things when having them banned supports your IC interests is as unfair as the rest claim EMP to be.

Edit:

Also, yes, most people CAN have EMP protection, but, the thing is, EMP protection isn't "default" or "standard issue" equipment, EMP protection *must* be RPed. You should't just take it for granted.

It is standard issue, in most Soviet equipment and US communications/power equipment. So, I don't know where you've heard that before.

[Triyun]

I must call to attention how they only object to EMPs once that they have already been used, even though they have been in use for long, long times, Triyun in particular objects once his ally is a victim of it, this is biased and unfair.

If EMP is removed at all, although I think it shouldn't be, the only fair thing to do is to remove it "from here onwards" but to leave their effect in the war as is, for the sake of fairness. This is like Hafnium, people only criticized it once I started to use it often although it was an older thing, criticizing things when having them banned supports your IC interests is as unfair as the rest claim EMP to be.

Edit:

Also, yes, most people CAN have EMP protection, but, the thing is, EMP protection isn't "default" or "standard issue" equipment, EMP protection *must* be RPed. You should't just take it for granted.

This is an old and tired argument. Its being called attention to because its the first time its been used when people were AROUND. You can't really well make this argument when you don't make it easy to find for people that there could be a problem. I never imagined, nor did Vektor that we did not assume nations protected themselves out of sheer common sense. Nor did I imagine that there were any of these bombs big enough to disable a nation, I've always assumed it was tactical in nature.

The majority of players weren't actually around when you guys were using these weapons, times change. Just like mechs and space platforms, while some may have been ok with it back then does not justify it today.

[Malatose]

Actually, I have not claimed or reported any of Malatose's damage. I'm waiting on him to post stuff. In terms of defense, Malatose's SDI did go up against the missiles (although a good amount got through). As for "anti-EMP" equipment, you have to build something from the start to "EMP-proof" it. For some military equipment, "EMP-proofing" is standard. As well, to quote your post: "Lavo launches EMPs at Vektor in addition to nuclear warheads" I have not launched a single nuclear weapon against Malatose. As well, an EMP is nowhere near the equivalent of a nuclear assault. It does not kill people, radiate an area and people for hundreds of years, and does not incinerate everything within it's blast radius. I find it odd that this has only been brought up now, and not when I have used this weapon multiple times in the past and to the same extent, and as such I question the motives behind the post. Are EMPs "fair"? They are as fair as the British tanks in WWI and the AK47s in Vietnam, they gave their users an amazing and awe-inspiring weapon during their time.

If you want the type of effects, such as the total blackout of an entire country, then you will have to go the Nuclear route. The results of a Electromagnetic Bomb will only be noticeable beyond 10 km.

On the otherhand, if it IS Nuclear based, It can go far beyond 10km. But it also depends on the yield and altitude, plus atmospheric stability among other things..

[Chancellor Bismarck]

If you mean specifically, EMP's, fine. But you can have high-yield bombs that can be used, fired from ICBM's, that have high yields, like my defensive ICBM's that use 2,000 15,000 pound MIRV's to attack a city. This is a non-nuclear weapon, but can still cause a lot of damage to a city. Things like these should not be removed.

EDIT: Though it definetly can not take out a nation's entire warfighting ability, no.

Edited February 15, 2009 by Pacifism

[Maelstrom Vortex]

If you want the type of effects, such as the total blackout of an entire country, then you will have to go the Nuclear route. The results of a Electromagnetic Bomb will only be noticeable beyond 10 km.

On the otherhand, if it IS Nuclear based, It can go far beyond 10km. But it also depends on the yield and altitude, plus atmospheric stability among other things..

Actual website, www, and wikia research has indicated to me most modern.. not future, but modern non-nuclear EMPs do not exceed a few hundred meters. Let alone Kilometers... but I digress. THe data originates from multiple sites and sources.

Edited February 15, 2009 by Maelstrom Vortex

[SirDelirium]

Actual website, www, and wikia research has indicated to me most modern.. not future, but modern non-nuclear EMPs do not exceed a few hundred meters. Let alone Kilometers... but I digress. THe data originates from multiple sites and sources.

Any real EMP would be nuclear based though. One nuke over Kansas could cripple the US. An EMP is a very powerful tool if used correctly.

Though I don't RP, I think it would be wise to keep them and to realize that while most military structures are EMP-proofed, most civilian stuff is not, and that an EMP would be more effective at lowering morale than anything else, and that perhaps that should be role-played.

[Triyun]

Any real EMP would be nuclear based though. One nuke over Kansas could cripple the US. An EMP is a very powerful tool if used correctly.

Though I don't RP, I think it would be wise to keep them and to realize that while most military structures are EMP-proofed, most civilian stuff is not, and that an EMP would be more effective at lowering morale than anything else, and that perhaps that should be role-played.

Nobody argues with this. The issue is, is that there is a limit of 20 nukes that Lavo in this case could deploy, these weapons he's using don't count towards that. This gives him a strategic weapon near unlimited usuage.

[Justinian the Mighty]

As a rule im generally against any weapon that isn't in use today. That includes, but is not limited massive emp weapons, rod guns (or whatever), coil guns, mechs, power suits, phaser guns, plasma guns, orbital fighters, nuclear powered tanks, (lolwut?) cloaking devices, laser cannons and particle beams.

This is just so that the next time this arguement comes up nobody cries and says I never had a problem with it before.

[JerreyRough]

When did they make the EMP weapons?

I don't really like EMP weapons. I've never been affected by them and even though they are in RL, for the sake of balence should not be in there. Its also ignored that it affects civilians as well, which EMP can turn a nation into complete hatred towards an enemy.

Its the same thing with oribital weapons platforms; there arn't any (that are known) in space right now, due to international pressure. If the international pressure (or not caring of international pressure, which happens constantly here) was removed/lessenend, then there would be weapons plantforms in space. But we don't have them here beause of balence.

(For cloaking device: here. )

[Sargun II]

USA uses e-bombs in real life, at a good height as Malatose said they could be good up to ten kilometers. That's how I RP'd my e-bombs since their inception - about ten miles (which is more than kilometers but I wouldn't say that much). I believe Lavo already said on IRC that he's accepting that the EMPs are not as large as nuclear.

Also, Triyun, a good 80-90% of the nations are today were around for both the South American war and the war that me and Lavo had against Neo Japan and Kyokujitsu. EMP usage by Lavo in SA and by both of us in the NJ/DKT war. That's only a few months ago and almost all of you were here. Don't pull the "I wasn't here" excuse, that's just a stupid way to get around facing the facts. They've been used before, you didn't complain until it got used against someone you liked, and if you have to deal with it then it's your fault.

[Centurius]

Actually, I have not claimed or reported any of Malatose's damage. I'm waiting on him to post stuff. In terms of defense, Malatose's SDI did go up against the missiles (although a good amount got through). As for "anti-EMP" equipment, you have to build something from the start to "EMP-proof" it. For some military equipment, "EMP-proofing" is standard. As well, to quote your post: "Lavo launches EMPs at Vektor in addition to nuclear warheads" I have not launched a single nuclear weapon against Malatose. As well, an EMP is nowhere near the equivalent of a nuclear assault. It does not kill people, radiate an area and people for hundreds of years, and does not incinerate everything within it's blast radius. I find it odd that this has only been brought up now, and not when I have used this weapon multiple times in the past and to the same extent, and as such I question the motives behind the post. Are EMPs "fair"? They are as fair as the British tanks in WWI and the AK47s in Vietnam, they gave their users an amazing and awe-inspiring weapon during their time.

It does not kill people?!? Are you serious. EMPíng doesn't see difference between Civilian and Military Equipment for example hospitals are nothing without power. People use pacemakers. EMP can easily kill thousands perhaps even millions. So they are very much equal to a Nuclear Attack.

[Sargun II]

It does not kill people?!? Are you serious. EMPíng doesn't see difference between Civilian and Military Equipment for example hospitals are nothing without power. People use pacemakers. EMP can easily kill thousands perhaps even millions. So they are very much equal to a Nuclear Attack.

Many weapons have unintended casualties. An EMP is not designed to kill people, it's designed to make it easier for one nation to invade and win with less bloodshed. It's a weapon of war. People die in war. Nuclear bombs have a strategic value in decimating cities, EMP has a strategic value in shutting down countries.

[Sumeragi]

Given that I've faced worse and no one said anything back then, I don't see why you make an issue out of this, Triyun.

[Centurius]

Many weapons have unintended casualties. An EMP is not designed to kill people, it's designed to make it easier for one nation to invade and win with less bloodshed. It's a weapon of war. People die in war. Nuclear bombs have a strategic value in decimating cities, EMP has a strategic value in shutting down countries.

That way you can argue Nukes aren't designed to kill people as it is also made to make it easier to invade. As for in realirty shutting down or destroying is the same as you can't use it anymore.