North China Liberation Act OOC thread

[Triyun]

[quote name='hawk_11' date='03 July 2010 - 06:07 PM' timestamp='1278176843' post='2358750']
What? Our cruise missile rules are based off common sense, and common sense is dictated by realism. Realistically, cruise missiles are cheap and deployed in large numbers. If anything, you just made a strong case for allowing nuclear warheads to be mounted on cruise missiles, which I now support.
[/quote]

Precisely this. I based mine off of real world scenarios regarding missile levels. Each naval warship is equipped with well over 100 missiles. Malatose's numbers are real world scenarios and I was going off of those. I have been building up my military for a fight against Keshav and its assumed in CN RPs rules that first world nations have first world capabilities. This is in fact what the real world has shown.

In regards to satellite recon the Northern Plain of China has been deforested for 1000 years. Its pretty hard to conceal the facilities needed to supply and maintain armored divisions in the field there. Notice most of the targets in my post was heavy equipment, command centers, barracks, and vehicle supply garages. These [b]Would[/b] show up on satellite. Not with 100 percent accuracy, but I told you in private channels I wasn't expecting 100 percent accuracy.

I would like to ask Keshav though why he went and made an OOC thread with the [i]exact[/i] same questions after I answered his questions in private query a few days ago and he never responded.

Edit: Also in regards to stockpiling missiles, China could launch those at Mongolia if they had the targets pin pointed provided Mongolia was in range of those missiles. Missiles fly where you tell them too. The issue would be having a battle plan against Mongolia. In the case of the Articuno Islands, ever since I signed the armistice my leaders have very clearly in every instance indicated they wanted to continue the war. To assume they did not have target lists being drawn up even as I was stockpiling ammo and fuel for an assault and moving more troops into position is ignorant.

Edited July 4, 2010 by Triyun

[The FSM]

[quote name='Triyun' date='03 July 2010 - 10:55 PM' timestamp='1278212111' post='2359210']
Edit: Also in regards to stockpiling missiles, China could launch those at Mongolia if they had the targets pin pointed provided Mongolia was in range of those missiles. Missiles fly where you tell them too. The issue would be having a battle plan against Mongolia. In the case of the Articuno Islands, ever since I signed the armistice my leaders have very clearly in every instance indicated they wanted to continue the war. To assume they did not have target lists being drawn up even as I was stockpiling ammo and fuel for an assault and moving more troops into position is ignorant.
[/quote]

Indeed, China would have to deploy those missiles into positions where their targets were in range of their missiles (about 400 KM for their newest type). Missiles do fly where you tell them to, but you have to launch them from close enough in order for them to get where they want to go. In China's case, the 1300 missiles they have pointed at Taiwan would all have to be moved in order to be launched effectively at Mongolia. In your case, my apologies if I am not familiar with all the doings of your government and military, I do not read all of everyone's threads, just as Im sure you dont read all of my threads, theres no need to get hostile over it. As I said, if you have RPed placing those missiles in preparation for an assault on AI then I have no problem, in fact, I would love to read it if you could link me to it.

[king of cochin]

[quote name='Malatose' date='04 July 2010 - 01:01 AM' timestamp='1278185496' post='2358860']
I guess you missed the TOP - CnG war.
[/quote]


[quote name='Mergerberger II' date='04 July 2010 - 01:05 AM' timestamp='1278185741' post='2358864']
Sorry but have you ever fought a nuclear war? The IG system is very different from an actual war, and frankly it would be ridiculous to RP exactly following the IG system.
[/quote]

IG system is indeed very different from an actual war, but if you cared to exercise your reading abilities both of you would realize that I was putting forward a suggestion to a dilemma posed by Iamthey. This is a confused mess, this war, I think everyone would agree to it. It however does not need you guys spewing your bile on me for putting forward alternate suggestions.

Also merger, FYI, I have been in a lot of wars, a lot of nuclear wars and I do know what I am saying. In an IG nuclear war, nuclear attacks are a form of higher level attrition. Go look up what attrition means if you do not know. It means that you slug it off between each other, degrading each other's vital stats in the end hoping to reach the terminal point beyond where the interests of sustenance and aversion to further stats loss would cause one to surrender.

Decisive victories in IG are always determined based on the ground battles.

However in this case, a balance between IG and RP/RL should be found in a way that is fair to both sides.

Edited July 4, 2010 by king of cochin

[Triyun]

.... Cochin I really do not know what is with you and personal attacks, but cut it out. Everyone here is intelligent enough to know what attrition means. Merger's point is perfectly correct that nuclear wars are in no way the same as conventional wars.

In game as far as words go, yes victory is only mentioned in ground attacks, but wars are won at high levels by nuclear weapons and war chests. High levels and high mid levels are more or less where wars are won and lost. That is what Merger was referring to. If it was ground battles which were decisive, history over the past year and a half would have been a whole lot different.

[king of cochin]

[quote name='Triyun' date='04 July 2010 - 04:22 PM' timestamp='1278240718' post='2359396']
.... Cochin I really do not know what is with you and personal attacks, but cut it out. Everyone here is intelligent enough to know what attrition means. Merger's point is perfectly correct that nuclear wars are in no way the same as conventional wars.

In game as far as words go, yes victory is only mentioned in ground attacks, but wars are won at high levels by nuclear weapons and war chests. High levels and high mid levels are more or less where wars are won and lost. That is what Merger was referring to. If it was ground battles which were decisive, history over the past year and a half would have been a whole lot different.
[/quote]

Triyun, I find it sad and affronting when people assume things in negative manner, imagine personal attacks when there are none, and become insulting towards people with negative opinion. Also just because a person does not blindly support another person in everything they say, it should not mean they do not read what the first guy says.

If you read this thread properly you would see that a dilemma arose regarding the difference between in game war and real war. The dilemma arose because of Keshav RPing in a strictly IG mode, which definitely does not translate easily into real warfare. Two GMs, Lynneth and Iamthey were stating the logical discrepancies in this issue when I put forward a [url="http://forums.cybernations.net/index.php?showtopic=88427&view=findpost&p=2358822"]suggestion[/url], about a possible solution. I suggested my opinion about how cruise missiles/aircraft attacks/nuclear attacks are in the end principally attrition tools. This statement of mine was attacked in such a silly fashion by two aforementioned persons, and of course anything done by them is not considered a personal attacks, considering as they were posting something that did not address the issue in concern but my experience. In order to establish my point of view, I had to challenge these personal attacks and try to bring the discussion back to the basic issue at hand - how to settle the IG/RL discrepancy of war here.

And yes, nuclear weapons, warchests are attrition tools. It shows the survivability against sustained attacks. Perhaps you do not know that attrition warfare has as much importance as decisive battles in a sustained warfare, but the point I was making is that all forms of attrition warfare aka CM/aircraft/nukes would be nullified in this RP war, and the only decisive factor in Triyun/Keshav war could be ground battles. I was simply stating what was agreed beforehand.

Please comprehend what someone is saying rather than blatantly accuse and insult themselves out of hand. Attack the message not the messenger.

[iamthey]

Here is the issue with this entire thing. The two combatants in this case are fighting under irregular rules, and with irregular standards, both of which only exist because the two of them have mutually agreed to them. Keshav has agreed to continue the war, they have both decided to use IG modifiers, and now we are dealing with the issue of keshav being committed to really just utterly ridiculous caps, while triyun is trying to fight a normal CNRP war. The problem is not that Triyun fired 1300 missiles, at the end of the day it really makes very little difference if it was 500 or 800 or even 3000, no one here really has any objective idea of how much or how little damage any of those options would do, and no one is going to RP at a level of detail which would make any difference relevant. The issue is that keshav cannot respond in kind as he only has 50 missiles of his own. And if Triyun is firing 26 times more missiles than Keshav then keshav will always have a disadvantage and neither of them can deny that.

As I see it, there are two options. Either A we just $%&@ the RP and do essentially a written mock IG war, which is essentially just destroying the entire point of this forum. Basically it would be taking CN war, which is hardly something that catches anyone's interest at the level of its content, and bringing it over to RP. Personally I find this idea appalling, and in all honesty I wouldn't be reading any of it. The alternative is B put keshav on even footing as far as troop levels go and just scrap all of the caps for this war. Anything else is going to be a mess, and there is just going to produce even more disputes as we will always be dealing with incomplete and ad hoc rules that are being conjured into existence at one moment and dispelled at another.

Beyond that the issue is we are being asked to resolve issues in this war, and there are no existing rules to apply. You all are essentially fighting a war outside of the normal CNRP procedure, so how are we supposed to make fair rulings when you two are basically making it up as you go along? I can't make a ruling based on two different sets of rules, and other than fundamentally changing the way this conflict is being fought, I can't really think of anything other than to retcon this entire war, or to purge keshav, neither of which I think is really a viable or fair option.

[The FSM]

[quote name='iamthey' date='04 July 2010 - 03:51 PM' timestamp='1278273078' post='2359604']
Here is the issue with this entire thing. The two combatants in this case are fighting under irregular rules, and with irregular standards, both of which only exist because the two of them have mutually agreed to them. Keshav has agreed to continue the war, they have both decided to use IG modifiers, and now we are dealing with the issue of keshav being committed to really just utterly ridiculous caps, while triyun is trying to fight a normal CNRP war. The problem is not that Triyun fired 1300 missiles, at the end of the day it really makes very little difference if it was 500 or 800 or even 3000, no one here really has any objective idea of how much or how little damage any of those options would do, and no one is going to RP at a level of detail which would make any difference relevant. The issue is that keshav cannot respond in kind as he only has 50 missiles of his own. And if Triyun is firing 26 times more missiles than Keshav then keshav will always have a disadvantage and neither of them can deny that.

As I see it, there are two options. Either A we just $%&@ the RP and do essentially a written mock IG war, which is essentially just destroying the entire point of this forum. Basically it would be taking CN war, which is hardly something that catches anyone's interest at the level of its content, and bringing it over to RP. Personally I find this idea appalling, and in all honesty I wouldn't be reading any of it. The alternative is B put keshav on even footing as far as troop levels go and just scrap all of the caps for this war. Anything else is going to be a mess, and there is just going to produce even more disputes as we will always be dealing with incomplete and ad hoc rules that are being conjured into existence at one moment and dispelled at another.

Beyond that the issue is we are being asked to resolve issues in this war, and there are no existing rules to apply. You all are essentially fighting a war outside of the normal CNRP procedure, so how are we supposed to make fair rulings when you two are basically making it up as you go along? I can't make a ruling based on two different sets of rules, and other than fundamentally changing the way this conflict is being fought, I can't really think of anything other than to retcon this entire war, or to purge keshav, neither of which I think is really a viable or fair option.
[/quote]

Another possibility IAT is to have Triyun and Keshav agree to a set of uniform rules and caps for fighting this war. Ultimately both RPers are using different RP styles which obviously cannot go head-to-head in any viable manner. Rather than forcing either Triyun or Keshav to RP according to the other persons rules and standards, I think it would be in the best interest of fairness to have both of them alter their style so that they can be on an even footing, without sacrificing the RP for an IG text war and still allowing Keshav and Triyun to RP with some emphasis on the style they prefer to use in CNRP.

While I would initially be partial to just eliminating Keshav's caps, I dont think that is fair to Keshav because Keshav prefers to RP with a strict adherence to IG limits and information. Making Keshav RP in the same style as Triyun would be just as unfair to Keshav as forcing Triyun to RP an IG-style war.

Im sure there must be some room for Triyun and Keshav to compromise on this so that they both can RP this war on a regular, even footing in regards to the rules. Have the two of them sit down (someone else can be an agreed upon moderator if need be) and come up with a set of rules that are acceptable to both of them, have the GM's read the list of rules over and agree to them, and then post them up in the new war thread. I dont think it is too much to ask to have both Triyun and Keshav give a little ground in terms of RP style to find a middle course that could end up avoiding the dillemma you posed IAT.

[Sir Keshav IV]

[quote name='iamthey' date='04 July 2010 - 07:51 PM' timestamp='1278273078' post='2359604']
Here is the issue with this entire thing. The two combatants in this case are fighting under irregular rules, and with irregular standards, both of which only exist because the two of them have mutually agreed to them. Keshav has agreed to continue the war, they have both decided to use IG modifiers, and now we are dealing with the issue of keshav being committed to really just utterly ridiculous caps, while triyun is trying to fight a normal CNRP war. The problem is not that Triyun fired 1300 missiles, at the end of the day it really makes very little difference if it was 500 or 800 or even 3000, no one here really has any objective idea of how much or how little damage any of those options would do, and no one is going to RP at a level of detail which would make any difference relevant. The issue is that keshav cannot respond in kind as he only has 50 missiles of his own. And if Triyun is firing 26 times more missiles than Keshav then keshav will always have a disadvantage and neither of them can deny that.

As I see it, there are two options. Either A we just $%&@ the RP and do essentially a written mock IG war, which is essentially just destroying the entire point of this forum. Basically it would be taking CN war, which is hardly something that catches anyone's interest at the level of its content, and bringing it over to RP. Personally I find this idea appalling, and in all honesty I wouldn't be reading any of it. The alternative is B put keshav on even footing as far as troop levels go and just scrap all of the caps for this war. Anything else is going to be a mess, and there is just going to produce even more disputes as we will always be dealing with incomplete and ad hoc rules that are being conjured into existence at one moment and dispelled at another.

Beyond that the issue is we are being asked to resolve issues in this war, and there are no existing rules to apply. You all are essentially fighting a war outside of the normal CNRP procedure, so how are we supposed to make fair rulings when you two are basically making it up as you go along? I can't make a ruling based on two different sets of rules, and other than fundamentally changing the way this conflict is being fought, I can't really think of anything other than to retcon this entire war, or to purge keshav, neither of which I think is really a viable or fair option.
[/quote]

We have our uniform rules, we know our limits. We have spent time working on them IaT. The issue here is mainly well the number of Cruise Missiles. Triyun and I agreed to keep it realistic while the other limits are CN IG, keeping CM's as CN IG limits is just plain dumb. The main issue here I see is the launching of 1300 missiles in such a short time span. If it seems fair enough then I shall continue with this war and post my reply today/tomorrow.

[Voodoo Nova]

[quote name='Sir Keshav IV' date='04 July 2010 - 10:03 PM' timestamp='1278295421' post='2359874']
We have our uniform rules, we know our limits. We have spent time working on them IaT. The issue here is mainly well the number of Cruise Missiles. Triyun and I agreed to keep it realistic while the other limits are CN IG, keeping CM's as CN IG limits is just plain dumb. The main issue here I see is the launching of 1300 missiles in such a short time span. If it seems fair enough then I shall continue with this war and post my reply today/tomorrow.
[/quote]

The thing about 1300 missiles at once is that it is completely plausible and can be done in real life, the PRC is a great example of that. The issue is in replacing all 1300 missiles and the logistics associated with moving such a large number of them in to position during a war.

[Executive Minister]

Missile spam is missile spam is missile spam. Unless he's targeting population centers with these things, why not just have Articuno mobile Anti-CM units engage any that approach vital positions?

[Triyun]

Keshav with warships alone, if I was using roughly modern day equivalents which I am using slightly more advanced ships. Arleigh burke has 90 missile cells, times seven that is 630. A ticonderoga cruiser has 122 cells times by 976. Iowa refit battleships which are cold war tech adds 32 times 8 is 252. That almost gets you to 1700 alone right there. I'm using battleships designed more recently and more equipped with missiles, and larger framed destroyers, plus other ships. Than you take into account land based missiles, the 80 airbased ones, and the China number, and you see even if my land based missiles are far below that I can easily get to 1700 launchers.

Edit: As you can see to answer Voodoo's question, the Navy pretty much takes care of a huge portion of moving missiles into position.

Edited July 5, 2010 by Triyun

[The FSM]

[quote name='Triyun' date='05 July 2010 - 11:32 AM' timestamp='1278343940' post='2360273']
Keshav with warships alone, if I was using roughly modern day equivalents which I am using slightly more advanced ships. Arleigh burke has 90 missile cells, times seven that is 630. A ticonderoga cruiser has 122 cells times by 976. Iowa refit battleships which are cold war tech adds 32 times 8 is 252. That almost gets you to 1700 alone right there. I'm using battleships designed more recently and more equipped with missiles, and larger framed destroyers, plus other ships. Than you take into account land based missiles, the 80 airbased ones, and the China number, and you see even if my land based missiles are far below that I can easily get to 1700 launchers.

Edit: As you can see to answer Voodoo's question, the Navy pretty much takes care of a huge portion of moving missiles into position.
[/quote]

That statistic is misleading triyun, yes an Arleigh Burke destroyer has 90 VLS tubes, but only a fraction of those are fitted to fire land-attack weapons. Those 90 VLS also house the arleigh-burke's SAM, AShM, Aegis/Anti-Ballistic Missile, and its ASROC weapons systems in addition to its land-attack missile systems. The same holds true for the Ticonderoga cruiser, its VLS not only contains its tomahawks, but also its Sea Sparrows, ASROCs and RIMs. Only a fraction of the VLS on a RL naval vessel would be loaded for ground attack missions.

You can get to 1700 naval based launchers, but unless you have outfitted all of your vessels to carry only land-attack ordinance in their VLS then you are not going to get to 1700 land-attack cruise missiles. As I have already said with the land-based missiles/China number, China placed those 1300 missiles across from Taiwan over a span of decades. Could China launch 1300 missiles en masse at Taiwan? Yes. Could (with a effective range of 400km or less) China launch 1300 missiles en masse against Mongolia or Russia? No, not without noticeably moving them all first.

As I said earlier, if you had taken the time to RP that you were moving missiles and such to a place where they were within range of targets in AI, then I would not be taking part in this discussion. After spending some time earlier going through your posts since the 'armistice' between USC and AI, I have not been able to find any evidence of the USC military moving missiles in preparation for a barrage that large. I leave things open to the fact that I may have missed that post, if thats the case, I will gladly retract my arguements and be on my merry way if you can point that post out to me.

As Voodoo said, the issue is not the 1300 missiles for me. If, like the PRC has done over the past 20ish years with Taiwan, the USC had built up or moved 1300 missiles into position across from the AI border, then I would have no objection to the number of missiles the USC is firing.

[Triyun]

I thought it quite obvious that I amassed my missiles along the border of who [i]I have been at war with[/i] as part of the troop deployment that I have been building up on that border. It has [i]never[/i] been the standard before to say that someone has to RP every little movement of military hardware specifically, but rather general movements of hardware. Missiles are no less a component part of a military than are say supply trucks. Look at the USCs geography, we are surrounded by allies to the South. Our border is pretty small with Cochin and we have a non-aggression pact with them. The Articuno Islands we have been [i]at war with[/i] and is the sole hostile power we border, and this has been the case for almost our entire existence. Its not like its not crystal clear where a good chunk of those missiles are going to go. Tactical Missiles are part of my armies, if you look at where I've positioned the bulk of those armies, its been on the AI border or near it.

On top of that, the USC Navy's designs are different from the USA's Navy designs. First of all the Articuno Islands lacks a navy so we don't need ship to ship missiles. Secondly our battleships and carriers carry more missiles than the US Navy's Battleships and Carriers. Our cruisers are setup differently than the US Navy's in that we do not have a single uniform VLS system, but are more like the Soviet one with the some of the anti-ship and anti-air missile batteries equipped on separate turrets. I was merely using the example of a US Navy ship to demonstrate a point, that bringing to bear that many missiles with Navy ships [i]alone[/i] which is [i]not[/i] what I am using is not unreasonable.

[king of cochin]

I am afraid I have to interject here with a bit of common sense. First of all it is illogical but not illegal to have naval warships with "only" land attack missiles. I hope you would be consistent with these designs and not suddenly sprout Anti Air Missiles if Keshav launches an Air to Surface Attack on you?

Also if you fire all these 1300 missiles which would mean the entire magazine capabilities of these warships then you should also constraint your naval forces from any further contribution in this warfare without RPing necessary replenishment operations, which to replace the entire magazine capacity of a warship would require at least some days tied alongside a dock. On sea replenishment would not work for large quantities of missile cells. If you insist on this 1300 barrage at the start of the campaign your remaining missile attacks on Keshav's other positions would have to be wiped out.

Also when your ships are tied alongside the docks they would also be vulnerable to counter attack.

I am just pointing out the immense logical fallacies in your argument, which of course you are free to use, but would only hamstring your own warfare and could even lead to your defeat in an RP war.

Also I think it is reasonable to assume that your land based cruise missiles which can be assumed to have as much mobility as you have explained, if we assume them to be truck/track mobile. Again if you are doing a volley fire on these missiles it would take a long time before you can bring any more missiles into combat action. After all cruise missiles are more expensive than artillery shells or free flight rockets and need greater complexity to manufacture, as you do not seem to have built up any stockpiles.

[Triyun]

[quote name='king of cochin' date='06 July 2010 - 08:14 AM' timestamp='1278400439' post='2360956']
I am afraid I have to interject here with a bit of common sense. First of all it is illogical but not illegal to have naval warships with "only" land attack missiles. I hope you would be consistent with these designs and not suddenly sprout Anti Air Missiles if Keshav launches an Air to Surface Attack on you?

Also if you fire all these 1300 missiles which would mean the entire magazine capabilities of these warships then you should also constraint your naval forces from any further contribution in this warfare without RPing necessary replenishment operations, which to replace the entire magazine capacity of a warship would require at least some days tied alongside a dock. On sea replenishment would not work for large quantities of missile cells. [/quote]


I did not say the ships for [i]this mission[/i] were not equipped with anti-air missiles I said they were not equipped with [i]anti-ship[/i] missiles. I am allied with the only two other navies in the North West Pacific, if I am attacked from the South from other countries navies at the moment, some of my allies have positioned tasksforces there.


[quote]If you insist on this 1300 barrage at the start of the campaign your remaining missile attacks on Keshav's other positions would have to be wiped out.[/quote]

What remaining missile attacks, are you talking about moves that have not even been made yet?

[quote]Also when your ships are tied alongside the docks they would also be vulnerable to counter attack.[/quote]

Same thing as above.

[quote]I am just pointing out the immense logical fallacies in your argument, which of course you are free to use, but would only hamstring your own warfare and could even lead to your defeat in an RP war.[/quote]

Again its not up to you to decide how other people RP.

[quote]Also I think it is reasonable to assume that your land based cruise missiles which can be assumed to have as much mobility as you have explained, if we assume them to be truck/track mobile. Again if you are doing a volley fire on these missiles it would take a long time before you can bring any more missiles into combat action. After all cruise missiles are more expensive than artillery shells or free flight rockets and need greater complexity to manufacture, as you do not seem to have built up any stockpiles.
[/quote]

I also haven't seen any build up RP of bullets grenades or anything else. Cruise missiles are a piece of weaponry just like any other bomb. Its reasonable to assume that people who field cruise missiles as a weapon on their weapon systems have surpluses of such weapons.

[The FSM]

Seeing as people are required to RP the development and placement of weapons stockpiles for use in the event of a guerilla war, I disagree that people have never been required to RP anything more than general military movements. No one is asking you to RP the specific locations of all your missile batteries, how many missiles are in each battery, and what emplacements in AI each specific battery is targeting. Were you firing a couple dozen missiles at the AI then I dont think anyone would have any problems. However, since you are trying to replicate a China-Taiwan situation in terms of the number of missiles being fired there needs to be some sort of RP showing that you are building up for such an attack. This is more than just placing some missiles on the border of a nation you signed an armistice with, this is placing all your missiles on the border with AI, and not something that can just be left to assumption.

All that was required was a handful of sentences, its hardly an onerous burden on the RP.


In regards to surpluses, yes it is reasonable to assume that you have surpluses of your weapons, but thats only if you are firing a handful of missiles. Just like it is not safe to assume you have 1300 missiles pointed at one country with no RP about it, it is not safe to assume you have a couple hundred extra missiles sitting around close by to be used in a second volley after you have fired 1300 missiles at someone. The scale of your missile attack requires more background RP than has been made; its not something that can be assumed like smaller preparations.

[king of cochin]

[quote name='Triyun' date='06 July 2010 - 08:03 PM' timestamp='1278426819' post='2361088']
I did not say the ships for [i]this mission[/i] were not equipped with anti-air missiles I said they were not equipped with [i]anti-ship[/i] missiles. I am allied with the only two other navies in the North West Pacific, if I am attacked from the South from other countries navies at the moment, some of my allies have positioned tasksforces there.
[/quote]

Magazine capacities of various classes of RL warships were explained by [url="http://forums.cybernations.net/index.php?showtopic=88427&view=findpost&p=2360273"]you[/url], and Flying Scotsman [url="http://forums.cybernations.net/index.php?showtopic=88427&view=findpost&p=2360764"]pointed[/url] out that the total launch cells are distributed for various functions like ground attack, AShM, SAM, ABM etc to which you further [url="http://forums.cybernations.net/index.php?showtopic=88427&view=findpost&p=2360897"]countered[/url] that you did not have AShMs armed as AI does not have ships.

So how many launch cells do you have on a warship to facilitate 90/122 missile launch cells dedicated to ground attack missiles alone and in addition having separate turrets and launch cells for SAMs?

It is only natural to be curious about the weapons capabilities of a weapon you use in you war, how many launch cells do they have?

Also yes, Keshav does not have a navy but he does have an air force, which can strike your naval units, and to defend against which you would need SAMs on your warship magazines.

[quote name='Triyun' date='06 July 2010 - 08:03 PM' timestamp='1278426819' post='2361088']
What remaining missile attacks, are you talking about moves that have not even been made yet?
[/quote]
No, I am talking about the separate missile attacks like the
1)Phony War for which you had stated your number of 1300, which you had said is partly fired by your naval warships,

Then the Yellow Sea Naval Task Force attacks including
2)Corvette launched missile barrages in Shandong
3)Battleship launched missiles against Beijing/Hebei
4)Frigate/Cruiser missile attacks in north east/Shanxi/Henan
5)Destroyer missile attacks on Xian
6)Carrier missiles in Shaanxi/Shanxi
7)Submarine missile attacks on airbases/hangars

If you launched such a heavy fire in the early attack itself where would your ships get the missiles for remaining attacks? Or are attacks 2-7 part of the first attack itself?



[quote name='Triyun' date='06 July 2010 - 08:03 PM' timestamp='1278426819' post='2361088']


Same thing as above.
[/quote]
As above your naval bases and ships tied alongside are vulnerable to air force and missile bombardment from Articuno Islands. The very process by which your missiles and shells fly towards Articuno Islands would also enable AI weaponry to be targeted towards your own assets.


[quote name='Triyun' date='06 July 2010 - 08:03 PM' timestamp='1278426819' post='2361088']
Again its not up to you to decide how other people RP.
[/quote]

Thank you for pointing that out, but I was not telling you how to RP, just pointing out the logical fallacies in your argument. There is a big difference between commenting on something and ordering that it should be done in such a manner,



[quote name='Triyun' date='06 July 2010 - 08:03 PM' timestamp='1278426819' post='2361088']


I also haven't seen any build up RP of bullets grenades or anything else. Cruise missiles are a piece of weaponry just like any other bomb. Its reasonable to assume that people who field cruise missiles as a weapon on their weapon systems have surpluses of such weapons.
[/quote]

I concede inability to respond to that particular argument,

[Subtleknifewielder]

[quote name='Triyun' date='06 July 2010 - 07:33 AM' timestamp='1278426819' post='2361088']
Again its not up to you to decide how other people RP.
[/quote]
You need to learn the difference between constructive criticism and an order.


[quote name='Triyun' date='06 July 2010 - 07:33 AM' timestamp='1278426819' post='2361088']I also haven't seen any build up RP of bullets grenades or anything else. Cruise missiles are a piece of weaponry just like any other bomb. Its reasonable to assume that people who field cruise missiles as a weapon on their weapon systems have surpluses of such weapons.
[/quote]
OK, what's the price of a magazine of bullets? What's the price of a grenade?

Now what's the price of a single cruise missile?

Surpluses, yes, but after firing so many not in very great numbers. And cruise missiles cannot be assumed, because there are defenses designed to STOP specifically them.

[Triyun]

What do defenses have to do with firing them? I have not had a chance to type a second turn and you guys are making an assumption about how many I am going to fire.

[Mergerberger II]

[quote name='Subtleknifewielder' date='06 July 2010 - 04:59 PM' timestamp='1278449922' post='2361464']
Surpluses, yes, but after firing so many not in very great numbers. And cruise missiles cannot be assumed, because there are defenses designed to STOP specifically them.
[/quote]

What is it we are still arguing here? Did Triyun fire more missiles recently? If he didn't, then there is no issue at all....

[king of cochin]

[quote name='Triyun' date='07 July 2010 - 03:29 AM' timestamp='1278453550' post='2361534']
What do defenses have to do with firing them? I have not had a chance to type a second turn and you guys are making an assumption about how many I am going to fire.
[/quote]

Triyun you have RPd several successive missile attacks on Keshav, you have in fact posted the second and even third turn of events for many of your attacks. For eg: amphib attack, holding the beach, chasing the defenders from their own positions all in a single step. According to RP logic, Keshav should have been given a chance to respond to your first amphib assault, failing which you would secure the beaches, if you succeed which only you get to chase his defending forces on the ground.

Also you did not address my question about the Phony War and the Yellow Sea Naval Task Force attacks are same or different. If they are different how would you get the chance to reload?


[quote name='Mergerberger II' date='07 July 2010 - 03:38 AM' timestamp='1278454106' post='2361550']
What is it we are still arguing here? Did Triyun fire more missiles recently? If he didn't, then there is no issue at all....
[/quote]

What we are still arguing is Triyun firing 2 or more full load of missiles from his warships seemingly without reloading, and in the span of five minutes. I have pointed out the separate attacks that he wrote about in my previous reply.

[Triyun]

Cochin I fail too see how its possible for me to have made multiple posts, when there are zero responses in the topic.

The Phony war were ground based missiles, the yellow sea task forces attack were sea based missiles.

In regards to the beach forces, Keshav has no forces positioned immediately on the shore he has them positioned inland on the peninusla.

[king of cochin]

[quote name='Triyun' date='07 July 2010 - 04:28 AM' timestamp='1278457078' post='2361654']
Cochin I fail too see how its possible for me to have made multiple posts, when there are zero responses in the topic.

The Phony war were ground based missiles, the yellow sea task forces attack were sea based missiles.

In regards to the beach forces, Keshav has no forces positioned immediately on the shore he has them positioned inland on the peninusla.
[/quote]

Triyun, when you were questioned about the Phony War you had said that part of its fire volume has been contributed by your navies. That was how the entire discussion on the cruise missile numbers and vertical launch cells on warships came about. Are you going back from that stance?

Also you did not make multiple posts, but make multiple sequential steps in the same post. You can launch several attacks along several sectors, but you can only launch the initial attacks, the second phases of your attacks(the ones you have already made) needs keshav's reply to come. This entire argument happened because of your RPing several sequences in the same post.

Also how do you know ICly that Keshav does not have any forces deployed immediately on the shore line? It does not take a lot of effort or manpower to create an effective mobile shore defense. I know for sure that Keshav gave you the deployments map for the attack OOCly, but that does not mean that you can use that OOC information ICly without proper RP. Also did you give Keshav your own troop dispositions to even the field out?

[Triyun]

Cochin, they asked me about the volume of 1300 missiles, which were [b]not[/b] part of the Phony War. 400 missiles were fakes. 1300 were the main barrage.

Furthermore, IC I do not know, however OOC I do know that those troops would not encounter any resistance and thus they would move forward inland. I began RPing encountering resistance where they would be engaged by resistance.

Edited July 7, 2010 by Triyun

[king of cochin]

[quote name='Triyun' date='07 July 2010 - 07:45 PM' timestamp='1278512086' post='2362390']
Cochin, they asked me about the volume of 1300 missiles, which were [b]not[/b] part of the Phony War. 400 missiles were fakes. 1300 were the main barrage.

Furthermore, IC I do not know, however OOC I do know that those troops would not encounter any resistance and thus they would move forward inland. I began RPing encountering resistance where they would be engaged by resistance.
[/quote]

Thank you for the clarification regarding the missiles. Also would be helpful to know if you would be having any Surface to Air Missiles in your ships after firing such a large volume of missiles,

Again you are RPing in a manner as if there is no fog of war. Your OOC knowledge should not be influencing your IC progress reports. As per agreements it should be Keshav who should respond, either countering your attacks in a manner or clarifying absence for forces thus permitting you the advance. Just like you cannot have infinite forces everywhere, he too cannot over stretch his deployable numbers in conflict.

My opinion is not binding however I am of the opinion that you should not have RPd the advance forward without Keshav being permitted to do his response. After all what war RP would it be if you RP out your entire sequence of steps without giving Keshav chance to retaliate?