Leave your Fantastic Sci Fi Weapon systems at home

[Gunther]

[b]Post your comments here, if you wish.[/b]

The Franciscan Republic does not acknowledge the existence of any player created fantasy weapon systems that were produced fictionally for combat, combat support or combat service support either RP'd as a native production or bought from another player. Any player who attempts to engage FR units with such flights of fancy are considered rendered inoperative and do not do what they were intended to do or are treated as traditionally accepted current (RL earth technology) weapon systems without any advantage they may have had over Franciscan weapon systems.

[quote][u]First World Nation (1500+ tech)[/u]
[b]Inventions start coming from your nation, and you can build anything your heart can imagine*.[/b] You're still limited to IG levels of soldiers, tanks, nukes, CMs, etc. Now, beyond this your tech level still matters for your army efficency, but a lot less. Design statistics will matter less as there is an efficiency formula for your armies

[b]*{To a technological limit of the year 2020, of course, within the rules of what can and cannot exist in CNRP, so no mechs, lasers, or rods from god}[/b][/quote]

To project what technology exists between 2010 and 2020 is pure science fiction and open to subjective interpretation to the user. There is too much room for abuse on a major scale. I believe this rule was placed there so that a nation could use existing technology and adapt it to principles that could fashionably be used in a credible sense. The following "wrecks" are perfect examples of abuses to this rule.

[quote] F-79 Giant Flying Fortress: 10%

Notes-

[i][b]Payload: 59 tons of anti-aircraft missiles[/b][/i]

Weapon systems: Anti-aircraft missiles. The F-79 [b]can fire off all of its missiles within 10 seconds.[/b]

Armoring: 2 cm of carbon nanotubes reinforced with carbon fiber mesh. An additional 6 cm of shock absorbing bullet proof gel is in the middle part and a thin .5 cm of carbon nanotubes to hold the gel in place. Plus, there are anti-stick chemical covering on the armoring, preventing those sticky goo from GLS's Stick Flashbang or Revealer missiles from sticking onto the aircraft.

Wingspan: 250ft, with the addition of chines (small flat wings) attached to the nose for additional aerodynamic performance

Max speed: 420 mph

Cruise speed: 390 mph

Defense systems: 40mm computerized automated turrets that are connected to the aircraft's radar system, designed to shoot down any incoming missiles, rockets, or shells.

Operational range: 856 miles

Engines: 20 large turboprop engines. They all have automated air intake controller systems that shuts down intake if it detects incoming goo or other debris.

Stealth: Yeah right, everybody is going to notice a loud lawnmower buzz and see a large figure lumbering across the sky. That completely defeats the purpose of having expensive stealth technology equipped.

Other equipments: Radar, thermal vision, night vision, and auto-dimmers/opaque window covers


Uses: Sheer firepower, can devastate an entire squadron of enemy aircraft while being able to withstand dozens of enemy AA missiles[/quote]


There is no aircraft in existence that can carry 59 tons of anything let alone Air to Air missiles nor possess the ability to fire all of these missiles inside of 10 seconds. The concept is absurd and is not possible to exist even in the next ten years. First the Aircraft would never get off the ground and its weapon systems would overheat and burn up on the first try. RPing, that those deficiencies have been corrected is insufficient. It would take decades to overcome the massive numbers of deficiencies associated with these Science Fiction based weapon systems.

[quote] F-10 Interceptor

Notes:

Payload: 2 tons of anti-aircraft missiles

Weapon systems: AA missiles

Wingspan: 30ft, chines are also added to the nose of the aircraft. Tails are extendable if extra maneuverability is needed

[i][b]Max speed: Mach 9.6, Mach 10.6[/b][/i] with its chemical rockets activated (the chemical rockets can only be partially activated to avoid friction/heat related damages)

Cruising speed: Mach 3.6

Yadda, yadda, yadda, blah, blah, blah...Just more incredible productions of fictitious fantasy follows this.[/quote]

Mach 9.6? Be real. I would call Mach 3 fantastic. Forget about anything faster than that. If you couple UAV technology with a vehicle that can do Mach 9.6, I'd buy it, if it were the year 2040. Again, we have no idea what technology is going to produce in the next 10 years.
The more I read of these lunatic weapon systems, the more incredulous I become.

If these systems are ever used against the Franciscan Republic, I must insist that they do not work. They are either too heavy, carry too much ordnance or travel faster than any human being can physically sustain. Besides the physics involved in all of this. CNRP never addresses the vital factor of Gross Domestic Product, Military budgets and expenditures on R&D and procurements. Pardon me, if I sound like I'm trying to throw a damp towel on someone's fun, but I did not join CNRP to have some over-sized, ridiculous science fictional fantasy used against my RP'd systems which are all based on current technology. The only thing I have done differently is to incorporate UAVs; both flying and ground down to the lowest level. This is the sort of thing that the GMs had in mind.

One more thing, forget about your railguns. I know they will be the primary weapon of the future for Naval vessels both on the surface and in space; but when will they become operational? doubtful if anytime prior to 2020. Railguns are definitely outside the intended spectrum of the GMs rule.

It all boils down to IG Technology. A Nation with 1500 or 2500 tech can not use systems described above against a nation with 5,307.48 IG Tech [url="http://www.cybernations.net/nation_drill_display.asp?Nation_ID=185020"](Galileo Corporation)[/url]. If someone creates a fighter bomber that is a UAV attacking ground targets on the other side of the planet, I'll buy that. That is sensibly realistic technology if the Airframe, weapon systems and weights all fall within existing technological parameters.

[Markus Wilding]

Out of curiosity, where did you find the examples for the planes you quoted?

[Gunther]

http://forums.cybernations.net/index.php?showtopic=73021

[Executive Minister]

Personally, When I make my fantastic Sci Fi weaponry:

I determine what I want my thing to do.

Think of any quirks or capabilities I want it to have.

Search for RL examples of weapons/vehicles that are able to perform what I want and do it in the way I want.

For example, the [url="http://forums.cybernations.net/index.php?showtopic=59602&view=findpost&p=1617360"]NMI Ripper[/url].

I based its overall look, size and feel on the FN Minimi.
Its firing capabilities on the P90/Minimi and ruggedness on the FN FAL and AK-74.
Its unique recoil quirk on the Saiga-12.
Things like the DAD are of my own creation, but do not really have an impact on RP usages.

While I do agree those examples you have are horrendous, surely not all RP'd systems are abhorent?

Edited April 4, 2010 by Executive Minister

[Gunther]

[quote name='Executive Minister' date='04 April 2010 - 06:09 PM' timestamp='1270418977' post='2247913']
While I do agree those examples you have are horrendous, surely not all RP'd systems are abhorrent?[/quote]

No, even my Vampire III UAV bomber falls into this realm. It is a B-1B Bomber with UAV technology integrated into it. Your Ripper system falls into that category of feasible plausibility. I haven't said anything about your VTOL aircraft you are using in the Kickapoo Valley campaign as it appears valid as well. I got the VAMPIRE III from a Don Brown Novel, but when you understand what it does, it makes sense and is possible.

In fact, the next generation fighter is an integration of the stealth technology, avionics, flight controls of an aircraft like the F-22 or Su-34 and adapting an autonomous UAV system that can be pre-programmed to perform AI, AC or CAS missions without human interaction. The F-22 for example can perform maneuvers that would cause a human being to black out. Remove the human equation and a Gen V version of that stealth fighter could not be touched by a human occupied fighter. It is my intention to research that evolution.

But the biggest problem I have with the whole tech issue is the lack of a budget. Even in CN we have a budget to work with. We can only buy so much infrastructure. An example would be something like this:

nation X has a GDP of $15,000,000,000,000 and budget 5% for Defense spending. That would be $750,000,000,000 for defense spending. The rest would go to paying governmental employees, reducing debt and paying for any social welfare programs the nation may have. From that $750,000,000,000 the nation would have to allocate a portion to paying its soldiers, sailors, airmen and marines as well as R&D, Procurements, housing and other military base costs plus the purchase of ammunition. If a nation allocates 20% of its military budget to procurements, this would allocate $150,000,000,000 in a year to purchase new equipment.

The lack of a GDP system and budgetary concerns is a large contributor to the abuses of the Science fiction weapon system.

Edited April 4, 2010 by Gunther

[Executive Minister]

Ah, so the problem is feasibility.

We do have [url="http://forums.cybernations.net/index.php?showtopic=69203"]this[/url] thread that helps people deal with those sort of things. While I admit that it isn't used too much, it pretty much addresses the problems you mentioned. Why not become a lead contributor to it?

EDIT: Good luck getting that GDP thing off the ground. When I see large numbers and calculations I see school, not RPing.

Edited April 4, 2010 by Executive Minister

[Gunther]

[quote name='Executive Minister' date='04 April 2010 - 06:34 PM' timestamp='1270420448' post='2247941']
Ah, so the problem is feasibility.

We do have [url="http://forums.cybernations.net/index.php?showtopic=69203"]this[/url] thread that helps people deal with those sort of things. While I admit that it isn't used too much, it pretty much addresses the problems you mentioned. Why not become a lead contributor to it?

EDIT: Good luck getting that GDP thing off the ground. When I see large numbers and calculations I see school, not RPing.
[/quote]
LOL...when I was in AHRP with Shamshir, they had an excellent system of maintaining a budget. most of the contributors to that were HS students in the UK.

I'll ask Voodoo Nova if he needs assistance with that. I saw that thread when I first arrived here and questioned him about it. I really wasn't sure what he did there. But if testing a player based item as credible or not is the purpose, I would embrace that task wholeheartedly.

[Executive Minister]

[quote name='Gunther' date='04 April 2010 - 06:37 PM' timestamp='1270420634' post='2247946']
LOL...when I was in AHRP with Shamshir, they had an excellent system of maintaining a budget. most of the contributors to that were HS students in the UK.

I'll ask Voodoo Nova if he needs assistance with that. I saw that thread when I first arrived here and questioned him about it. I really wasn't sure what he did there. But if testing a player based item as credible or not is the purpose, I would embrace that task wholeheartedly.
[/quote]

I can't remember the last time he's done anything in that thread. Now its free game for anyone.

[Captain Enema]

I railed on about the budget bit when I joined up way back when. I agree, some of the expenditures for munitions and such are so over the top it would put most of these nations into instant Chapter 11.

Probably why I try to be picky about who I RP with. However, keep in mind that CNRP is supposed to be about having fun. That for some people is ignoring the realistic and going with the fantastic. When they do that I tend to ignore them icly.

Edited April 4, 2010 by Tidy Bowl Man

[Gunther]

I try to ignore the fantastic, but when rest on my border, it becomes difficult.

[Bacharth]

See, you can ignore advantages all you like, but that's why the efficiency system is in there. They can have some fantastical thing you don't recognize, but because their nations is bigger than yours, they can create a piece of !@#$ and it'll still kick you out of the sky.

Because of TE, people abuse what's realistic and what isn't because it doesn't matter. I know that scale was my idea, but TE was LVN's idea, which is something I never wanted to happen.

If you want that to happen, the TE needs to be removed, and we need to have a Tech-smart GM here.

[Captain Enema]

Ehh.. I'm not overly hyped on GMs anyway. I miss the old days of people getting together to do some communal story writing. The fact that we have people trying to seek out advantages over others in a game like this merely confirms my suspicion that some people need to get a grip.

What I suggest though about the big loopaloola planes mentioned earlier is PM the person who created them and lay out a step by step explanation of why they aren't feasible and offer some suggestions to help get them into compliance. Be polite and helpful as egos are a problem here in CNRP and they get bruised sooo sooo very easily.

[Yawoo]

[quote name='Gunther' date='04 April 2010 - 04:45 PM' timestamp='1270417517' post='2247882']

One more thing, forget about your railguns. I know they will be the primary weapon of the future for Naval vessels both on the surface and in space; but when will they become operational? doubtful if anytime prior to 2020. Railguns are definitely outside the intended spectrum of the GMs rule.
[/quote]

Railguns are already currently operational, they just haven't been wide spread deployed. Certain American naval vessels have them installed already. The more advanced railgun systems are scheduled for a 2015 release date, so it falls well within the 2020 limit.

[Centurius]

[quote name='Yawoo' date='05 April 2010 - 12:57 AM' timestamp='1270421820' post='2247972']
Railguns are already currently operational, they just haven't been wide spread deployed. Certain American naval vessels have them installed already. The more advanced railgun systems are scheduled for a 2015 release date, so it falls well within the 2020 limit.
[/quote]

Yeah, I'll keep my railguns, kthnx.

[Lynneth]

I for one have checked and double-checked most of my weaponry. All of it is quite possible.
Thank you very much, I'll keep them guns. :V

[iamthey]

As a preface, my personal philosophy on technology and the 2010-2020 projection is quite liberal- especially when it comes to techs that don't really have an effect on other nations and are more props in your internal nation/character RP. Judging by what I've read, my guess is lynneth's personal philosophy on tech is just as liberal if not more so than myself. That said, what you are essentially doing is the equivalent of a tantrum/rant which occurs in natural order whenever a particularly entitled member of the community isn't getting their way on an issue. You are presently at the point where by your own force of will, you have declared a principle you will not back down from and are unilaterally promulgating that you refuse to recognize X. Understand this is not the first instance of this and that the community has indiscriminately mowed down a few high profile cases over the years. Note my intention in this is not to disparage you in anyway, this is simply my objective assessment of the situation. That said the community makes the rules not the GM's, we may make minor adjustments, issue interpretations, or resolve disputes; but overall if the community decides if it gets rail guns (just an example) and in general sets the definition on what '2020 tech' is.

In typical CNRP war if you refuse to recognize a war your nation automatically loses and your territory is assumed to have surrendered unconditionally. In this case if you refuse to recognize the attacks of a nation utilizing technology permitted under the community created rules (and that technology is upheld by the GM's), then the result will simply be those attacks occurring and your casualties and damages being RP'd for you.

If you want to make arguments about particular features of given technology and can prove they are impossible then great thats cool; but to outright deny any tech that doesn't presently exist isn't going to work out too well.

As for it being science fiction, what's wrong with that? 30 years ago the computer I am presently using would have been science fiction, what you are suggesting would shut down one of the most creative and cognitively stimulating aspects of the RP (not to mention one of its most established and long standing precedents of the technologically liberal paradigm). This isn't purely a text driven game or risk, it is also a story which necessitate a degree of creative licence on the part of those involved. Part of that second aspect is the activity of creating a nation which is both your voice in the game as well as the setting of your primary plot line. If we were to cut it off at 2010 we'd have little more than a bunch of cookie cutter nations that essentially reflect the real world- in which case the question becomes what is the point? If we are mimicking and copying the world as it is, what escape is there and what purpose does the game serve? The point of the tech system is to A reflect CN's tech level, B to reward those who actually take the time to research and write up new content for the game, and C to ensure that the game has some place to go.

If you don't like that your own technology is inferior to those who have taken the time to creatively write up and design new weapons (that are permissible under the rules) then I suggest you respond with technology and ideas of your own. There have been numerous offshoot RP's over the years that have existed for the purposes of moving the tech scale back down to include only existing RL technologies, all of them have failed. The CNRP has existed continuously for over 2 years, so to invalidate the technologies of half the community and tell them to piss off if they don't like it, is probably not the smartest or the most prudent thing to do. The community and its rules don't change simply because a single member finds the RP wasn't as they have foreseen it to be; to that end it exists for the amusement and personal enjoyment of its 30 or so members, not solely your own. This isn't AHRP, it is an entirely different game with its own history and informal network of rules an precedents. If they(ahrp) had a system that worked then awesome, we have our own system and any alteration that is made will need to be approved by the community.

That being said, if your solution to not getting your way is to simply make a mess of any RP war you're in. Be it posting a deluge of OOC complaints, making a nuisance of yourself with overly critical nitpicking, or in simply refusing to play by the rules, then understand that you are only going to be acting as a contributor to everything that is wrong with this game. I don't mean to be harsh, but your attitude with respect to this matter has been altogether arrogant, and condescending. There are more voices and opinions on the matter than your own (some of whom have been here far longer), and simply because they happen to disagree in no way does that make them invalid.

Edited April 4, 2010 by iamthey

[Lynneth]

IAT:
Truth. Nothing more, nothing less.

[Sargun II]

IAT is actually pretty wrong. What Gunther here is "ranting" about is the impossible weapons that are being used like Mach 9.6 interceptors and plane with 59 tons of ammo that can fire all of it within ten seconds. He isn't ranting about all technology that is made up, but because there is no separation between obvious fiction and feasible technology, he is declaring that because of the horrible examples above he will simply refuse to recognize it.

Edited April 5, 2010 by Sargun

[iamthey]

[quote name='Sargun' date='05 April 2010 - 01:11 AM' timestamp='1270426243' post='2248054']
IAT is actually pretty wrong. What Gunther here is "ranting" about is the impossible weapons that are being used like Mach 9.6 interceptors and plane with 59 tons of ammo that can fire all of it within ten seconds. He isn't ranting about all technology that is made up, but because there is no separation between obvious fiction and feasible technology, he is declaring that because of the horrible examples above he will simply refuse to recognize it.
[/quote]


[quote]The Franciscan Republic does not acknowledge the existence of any player created fantasy weapon systems that were produced fictionally for combat, combat support or combat service support either RP'd as a native production or bought from another player. Any player who attempts to engage FR units with such flights of fancy are considered rendered inoperative and do not do what they were intended to do or are treated as traditionally accepted current (RL earth technology) weapon systems without any advantage they may have had over Franciscan weapon systems.[/quote]

[quote]To project what technology exists between 2010 and 2020 is pure science fiction and open to subjective interpretation to the user. There is too much room for abuse on a major scale. I believe this rule was placed there so that a nation could use existing technology and adapt it to principles that could fashionably be used in a credible sense.[/quote]

Technology that is impossible can be addressed through normal complaints of feasibility. Its one thing to reject impossible tech within the scope of 2020, it is another thing to reject any tech that doesn't exist RL or is a slight modification of it. As there is a great degree of subjectivity in terms of what the next ten years could potentially bring, the only real parameters are established by the community. What Gunther is doing is denying that altogether and asserting that he gets to arbitrate what will effect him and what will not based on his own definition of what is possible. (Thats the way I understood it anyway.)

That being said I'm not sure what you are referring to... if you are saying my interpretation is wrong then ok that was only a small part of the over all post, if you are saying my statement is entirely wrong then what specifically is wrong?

Edited April 5, 2010 by iamthey

[Sargun II]

[quote name='iamthey' date='04 April 2010 - 07:20 PM' timestamp='1270426835' post='2248061']
Technology that is impossible can be addressed through normal complaints of feasibility. Its one thing to reject impossible tech within the scope of 2020, it is another thing to reject any tech that doesn't exist RL or is a slight modification of it. As there is a great degree of subjectivity in terms of what the next ten years could potentially bring, the only real parameters are established by the community. What Gunther is doing is denying that all together and asserting that he gets to arbitrate what will effect him and what will not based on his own definition of what is possible. (Thats the way I understood it anyway.)
[/quote]

He starts off saying he will not recognize any [b]fantasy [or] flights of fancy[/b] weapons systems, fantasy being the key word meaning unrealistic or impossible. Now read his last few sentences:

[quote]If someone creates a fighter bomber that is a UAV attacking ground targets on the other side of the planet, I'll buy that. That is sensibly realistic technology if the Airframe, weapon systems and weights all fall within existing technological parameters.[/quote]

[The FSM]

One solution to the problems you describe Gunther is for savvy members of the community to help the community as a whole out by going through factbooks and the like to apply the believability test to it. Most people here are not at a level of knowledge or caring to either know what is believable or to take the time to research what is believable. In many cases these egregious violations of believability are the result of the 'Cartoon TV' effect where things are intentionally unbelievable to make them look cooler.

I know that during the Iberian War SOM and I went through a few people's factbooks and helped them correct some of the unbelievable aspects of their weapons systems. The people I worked with (think it was Maicke? maybe?) were happy for the input. I think that more community self-checking and self-regulation is the best way to improve the situation.

[Kaiser Martens]

I think that both "sides" may be overreacting a little. What he's trying to say really, although not in the best way, is that he won't recognize things that don't make sense simply because somebody has higher tech. If it can all be justified with some RL related info, it's fine, I suppose.

But in the end, it matters little who RPs which equipment. What counts in the end is to measure the technological efficiency of one's troops versus other's troops. How stronger or weaker is one troop when compared to another soldier from another country having different tech, how many soldiers of the weakest country it takes in order to kill the higher tech soldiers. So what text you put behind it is useless, in the end, it's just maths not RP that counts...not that I agree with it, but rules are rules.

[iamthey]

[quote name='Sargun' date='05 April 2010 - 01:24 AM' timestamp='1270427080' post='2248067']
He starts off saying he will not recognize any [b]fantasy [or] flights of fancy[/b] weapons systems, fantasy being the key word meaning unrealistic or impossible. Now read his last few sentences:
[/quote]

Alright that still overlooks techs such as rail guns which have long been accepted and recognized by the community sargun. I'm not defending the two examples he gave, those were obviously extreme. But in either case he was unclear. The bulk of my response is independent of the interpretation and has less to do with the merits of the abuse and more the fact that he is unilaterally asserting a right to invalidate techs he personally doesn't believe are possible. My purpose was simply stating that if the tech is ruled valid and is permitted by the rules then it may be RP'd with whether he thinks it should or not. Most of the post was a response to the spirit of his response and the implications of what he is suggesting. In other words, everything past the first paragraph has little to do with what you are saying.

Edited April 5, 2010 by iamthey

[Captain Enema]

Sounds to me like it is technological claptrap> storyline.

How dull.. learn to be creative people and actually use your characters. It won't kill you.

[Voodoo Nova]

[quote name='Executive Minister' date='04 April 2010 - 06:40 PM' timestamp='1270420816' post='2247950']
I can't remember the last time he's done anything in that thread. Now its free game for anyone.
[/quote]

I gave up after people all began to think they were experts + school exams at the time were taking my time.