Military Stats Suggestions

[Karl Martin]

Comprehensive guideline suggestions


1. IG Soldiers: 10x IG potential for RP soldiers (assuming non-Botha mode)

2. IG Tanks:

Total numbers of RP [b]tanks/attack helicopters(combined)[/b] are same as IG potential At the same time, [b]0.1 x of IG potential for number of ballastic missiles, CMs, and land-based anti-air systems (like the Patriot. Handheld like Stingers or sea-based like RAMs are not included). [/b]

3. IG Planes

Each IG plane is a flight of 4 RP planes.

In addition, each IG plane will be two flights worth of lightly armed UAVs (Predator, for example). If the UAV is similar to a cruise missile, it will be part of IG tanks.

[b]However, there is an exception to this: For each IG carrier you have, 5 IG planes can be a squadron per IG plane, but ONLY for naval use.[/b]


4. IG CMs

Indicates chemical, biological, and radiological weapons. [b]The maximum size per IG cm is a warhead that can be fit onto a ballastic missile[/b]. In addition, IG CM will count as megabombs (like MOAB).

5. IG Nukes

Total number of nuclear warheads. I recommand the following site for RPing power and damages: http://www.carloslabs.com/projects/200712B/GroundZero.html

Edited May 27, 2010 by Karl Martin

[Vedran]

How nice, I already consider my IG cruise missiles to be my chemical stockpile.

[Triyun]

For Self propelled artillery and tanks yes. IFVs should not be counted as they are much cheaper and more plentiful.

[Subtleknifewielder]

Meh, I need to be more awake to comprehend this...I'll comment once I've gotten some sleep.

[Silhouette]

I'm still not liking planes. Honestly, how many nations in our world have more than a few dozen combat aircraft? not many I'd wager. In our universe, every man and his dog owns a fighter jet it seems. I'd support some sort of graduated scale or lesser multiplier, but 12x105 planes is getting to superpower levels, especially when you have high tech.

[Karl Martin]

[quote name='Triyun' date='25 May 2010 - 11:19 PM' timestamp='1274851124' post='2312141']
For Self propelled artillery and tanks yes. IFVs should not be counted as they are much cheaper and more plentiful.
[/quote]

By IFV, I was thinking of the M2 Bradley. APCs like the B1 would not be part of the tank.



[quote name='Silhouette' date='26 May 2010 - 01:11 AM' timestamp='1274857890' post='2312206']
I'm still not liking planes. Honestly, how many nations in our world have more than a few dozen combat aircraft? not many I'd wager. In our universe, every man and his dog owns a fighter jet it seems. I'd support some sort of graduated scale or lesser multiplier, but 12x105 planes is getting to superpower levels, especially when you have high tech.
[/quote]

I have tried to fix that by having UAV also be part of IG planes.

[KaiserMelech Mikhail]

[quote name='Karl Martin' date='25 May 2010 - 09:19 PM' timestamp='1274840351' post='2311939']
Comprehensive guideline suggestions


1. IG Soldiers: 10x IG potential for RP soldiers (assuming non-Botha mode)[/quote]
Fine. This is the system that is already in place.
[quote]2. IG Tanks:

Total numbers of RP tanks/infantry fighting vehicles/artillery(combined) are same as IG potential At the same time, 0.1 x of IG potential for number of ballastic missiles and CMs. [/quote]
I was thinking that IG numbers equal our tanks, and the IFV/Artillery combined should match it. I'm liking the cruise missile idea. Most people now have a stupidly high number, and makes for unrealistic scenarios.

[quote]3. IG Planes

Each IG plane is a squadron of 12 RP planes. In addition, each IG plane will be two squadrons worth of lightly armed UAVs. If the UAV is similar to a cruise missile, it will be part of IG tanks. [/quote]

[b]NO!!!![/b] Planes are a very difficult vehicle to obtain and maintain properly, and many nations don't have more than a few dozen. The previous idea of 1 IG plane=1 RP plane for 3rd world nations really needs to stay. When you reach modern and 1st world nations, then you can move up to a full squadron. The same goes for UAV's, however, they are also precise pieces of equipment, so it should really be 1 plane per IG plane, or 2 unarmed UAV's per IG plane.

[quote]4. IG CMs

Indicates chemical, biological, and radiological weapons. The maximum size per IG cm is a warhead that can be fit onto a ballastic missile. In addition, IG CM will count as megabombs (like MOAB). [/quote]
This is fine, it is the system already in place.

[quote]5. IG Nukes

Total number of nuclear warheads. I recommand the following site for RPing power and damages: http://www.carloslabs.com/projects/200712B/GroundZero.html
[/quote]
Fine, this is also already in place.

[Gunther]

[quote name='Silhouette' date='26 May 2010 - 03:11 AM' timestamp='1274857890' post='2312206']
...Honestly, how many nations in our world have more than a few dozen combat aircraft? not many I'd wager.[/quote]
USAF: 5,573 aircraft, of which 2,132 are fighters
Russian Air Force: 2,749 aircraft
PLAAF: 2,024 combat aircraft
Indian AF: [url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_aircraft_of_the_Indian_Air_Force#Current_aircraft]1,790 aircraft[/url]
RAF: 1,112 aircraft
Turkish AF: 930+ aircraft
FAF: 829 aircraft
RSAF: 817+ aircraft
Eqyptian AF: 806 aircraft
IAF: 750 aircraft
Syrian AF: 734 aircraft
Spanish AF: 650 aircraft
Italian AF: 517 aircraft
Greek AF: 538 aircraft
Luft: 457 aircraft
Iranian AF: 331 aircraft
Polish AF: 320 aircraft
RJAF: 251 aircraft
SAAF: 221 aircraft

[Gunther]

[quote name='Karl Martin' date='26 May 2010 - 03:41 AM' timestamp='1274859688' post='2312216']
By IFV, I was thinking of the M2 Bradley. APCs like the B1 would not be part of the tank.[/quote]
IFV/APCs should not be considered in the count against Tanks.
Infantry formations use IFV/APCs. They do not ride in the back of trucks or walk into a fight. Only Light/Airborne units do that and they are a small percentage of a nation's armed forces.

[Silhouette]

Considering there are 230 nations and counting, thats not many Gunther, my point still stands.

EDIT: Not to mention, all those states have considerable financial status or political clout.

Edited May 26, 2010 by Silhouette

[Gunther]

[quote name='Silhouette' date='26 May 2010 - 05:46 AM' timestamp='1274867161' post='2312243']
Considering there are 230 nations and counting, thats not many Gunther, my point still stands.

EDIT: Not to mention, all those states have considerable financial status or political clout.
[/quote]
Most nations in the RL world are not first World Industrialized, but impoverished third world nations. I did not post the numbers of Aircraft in those 19 nations to argue one way or the other in the case against or for lowering the number of aircraft a nation gets to use in CNRP. Just to counter your assertion that most nations only have a few dozen aircraft. I intentionally chose nations who have larger economies merely because most players of CNRP would compare themselves to the 20 larger nations in the world rather than the 210 other nations. I intentionally omitted Canada as I found their air forces quite a bit smaller than any in this list. Obviously Canada relies on NATO and USA for most of its Air Defense.

But onto the suggestion about CNRP Air Forces. I would suggest/urge that you keep the 12 Aircraft per squadron multiplied by the IG aircraft and then add another factor. Take the Nation Strength in thousands and add a percentage. For example: Let's assume a nation has Construction, 5+ CVs and FAFB; then they would have 105 Aircraft multiplied by 12 = 1260. Next we'll take a nation like [url=http://www.cybernations.net/nation_drill_display.asp?Nation_ID=207727]New Cymru[/url] and take its Nation Strength of 60,106.625 divided by 1,000 = 60.106 rounded off to the nearest whole number and displayed as a percentage or 60%. Apply 60% to the number of possible aircraft 60% of 1260 = 756. We arrive at a number of aircraft that actually does appear reasonable. This formula can be written as follows:

(NS/1000)% of (IG Acft X 12) = CNRP Aircraft total.

A sampling of CNRP nations:
Kitex' Blue Heaven (<500 tech): 50 IG Aircraft x 6 (Halfsquadron) = 300 x 7% (7K NS) = 21 aircraft [Sorry, Kitex]
Shan Revan's Naboo (>500 tech): 85 IG Aircraft x 12 = 1020 x 11% (11k NS) = 112 aircraft
Elrich von Richt's Greater Japanese Empire (>500 tech): (50 - 75) x 12 = (600 - 900)* X 28% (28K NS) = 168 - 252 *depending on how many CVs he has.
Emperor Mudd's Tahoe (>500 tech): (70 - 95) X 12 = (900 - 1140) x 58% (58K NS) = 522 - 661 depending on the number of CVs
Gunther's FR (>500 tech): 105 x 12 = 1260 x 72% (72K NS) = 907 aircraft
Lynneth's Saboria (>500 tech): 105 x 12 = 1260 x 120% (120K NS) = 1512 aircraft

Using this formula, larger nations will have larger Air Forces and Smaller nations will have smaller air forces. It is all gradual based on size. No one wants to compare themselves to the Nigerian Air Force, The Bolivian Air Force or the Sudanese Air Force, yet even they have between 170 and 240 aircraft.

[king of cochin]

I do not like limitations on IFVs and Artillery. So far they have been limited by common sense, and I would prefer that to remain so. Over regulation is not needed for these gray areas.

Ultimately when we do war RPs the only thing that count is number of soldiers and number of tanks in ground warfare. The IFVs, artillery etc are garnish used by those who want to use them to spice up their battle posts, otherwise inconsequential for the sequence of war.

[Zoot Zoot]

I just killed myself trying to that formula on my own.

It just sounds like we are over complicating a system that already works.

[Triyun]

I don't believe that it necessarily makes sense to base squadron strength on tech alone. IRL infra is more important for quantitative size.

[Voodoo Nova]

[quote name='king of cochin' date='26 May 2010 - 09:36 AM' timestamp='1274880986' post='2312314']
I do not like limitations on IFVs and Artillery. So far they have been limited by common sense, and I would prefer that to remain so. Over regulation is not needed for these gray areas.

Ultimately when we do war RPs the only thing that count is number of soldiers and number of tanks in ground warfare. The IFVs, artillery etc are garnish used by those who want to use them to spice up their battle posts, otherwise inconsequential for the sequence of war.
[/quote]

I agree with Cochin. Currently our system is governed by IG stats and commons sense.

1 Potential IG CM = 1 Non-Nuclear WMD

1 Potential IG Plane = 1 IC Squadron (People make squadrons different things, but never really go beyond 4-5 flights)

1 IG Blue Watar Navy Ship = 1 IC Blue Water Navy Ship (or whatever that multiplier is)

1 Potential IG Tank = 1 IC Tank

1 Potential IG Soldier = 10 IC Soldiers

Everything else is common sense and the community does maintain some semblance of that. Combat Support units (IFV's, Artillery, etc) are based off common sense. We do not need to regulate every little thing here.

[SpacingOutMan]

I concur, and I will continue (as such) to RP reasonable numbers of IFC and APC vehicles.

Also, your link to nuclear damages are retarded. It ignores way too many factors that are always included in predictive blast radius zones.

[The Disco Commandant]

Ill just rp what I think is right if I ever have to do military RP

[Acca Dacca]

Too much math. Will most likely just RP what I want till someone complains. Shouldnt take long

[Subtleknifewielder]

[quote name='Triyun' date='26 May 2010 - 07:43 AM' timestamp='1274884981' post='2312349']
I don't believe that it necessarily makes sense to base squadron strength on tech alone. IRL infra is more important for quantitative size.
[/quote]
Who said anyrthing about tech? NS is based on tech AND infra, as well as number of military units and land...

Edited May 26, 2010 by Subtleknifewielder

[Executive Minister]

Doesn't infra play an integral role in CNRP militaries anyways? Greater infra means more pop then soldiers then tanks, etc?

[Subtleknifewielder]

[quote name='Executive Minister' date='26 May 2010 - 03:01 PM' timestamp='1274911249' post='2312668']
Doesn't infra play an integral role in CNRP militaries anyways? Greater infra means more pop then soldiers then tanks, etc?
[/quote]
Yes, it does.

[Fizzydog]

[quote]The previous idea of 1 IG plane=1 RP plane for 3rd world nations really needs to stay. When you reach modern and 1st world nations, then you can move up to a full squadron.[/quote]

Little guys need the help we deserve. Getting curb stomped all the time because our military is extremely low isn't fair. Without a web of MDPS we would be crushed.

[Sargun II]

You don't "deserve" any help because you're small. You have to earn help - and by earn help I mean do worthless treaty spam.

[Fizzydog]

But that doesn't make the game fun for us. I love building, maintaining and rping aircraft. I love aircraft and infantry. Most fun thins to RP.

Now, spamming treaties, meh. Ruins the game. We spam treaties and rot, waiting and waiting for IG tech levels to reach 500.

[Markus Wilding]

Wonderful. I've been at third world level for months and I don't care so long as I have something to RP. I've gone through countless rerolls all with about the same stats and I can say I honestly don't care about how big my air force is. I've been fairly lax in maintaining treaties because [s]I reroll too often to make them work[/s] I don't need them.