Karl Martin Posted October 6, 2010 Report Share Posted October 6, 2010 [quote name='Yawoo' timestamp='1286335308' post='2476814'] You launched twenty missiles of WWII era tech. My nation is a modern nation - it would easily be able to destroy those missiles before they impacted. According to your IG nation you have zero tech. I have over 4,000 tech. It's not a godmod... it's technology. [/quote] OOC: There is no major difference between a V-2 and a Scud. You would still have to do SDI rolls since they're ballistic missiles. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yawoo Posted October 6, 2010 Report Share Posted October 6, 2010 [quote name='Karl Martin' timestamp='1286335701' post='2476822'] OOC: There is no major difference between a V-2 and a Scud. You would still have to do SDI rolls since they're ballistic missiles. [/quote] I don't think anyone consider a V-2 necessary for an SDI roll. Though, I leave that up to the GMs. Though, if they do, it should be noted you had zero CMs at the time in your IG nation... so according to the rules, you wouldn't have been able to launch those V-2s. Correct, GMs? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zoot Zoot Posted October 6, 2010 Report Share Posted October 6, 2010 moreover SDI rules apply only to nuclear weapons as far as im aware. you had two modern/first world nations operating anti missile defence systems dude. your gloryfied fireworks failed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Karl Martin Posted October 6, 2010 Report Share Posted October 6, 2010 [quote name='Yawoo' timestamp='1286335861' post='2476828'] I don't think anyone consider a V-2 necessary for an SDI roll. Though, I leave that up to the GMs. Though, if they do, it should be noted you had zero CMs at the time in your IG nation... so according to the rules, you wouldn't have been able to launch those V-2s. Correct, GMs? [/quote] You forgot that missiles have no IG basis, meaning I can have an infinite number of missiles. CMs are only for WMD. Try arguing with someone who hasn't been trying to change the system. Now, either way, I wouldn't push for SDIs, but not letting a single missile pass is jsut godmod. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Justinian the Mighty Posted October 6, 2010 Report Share Posted October 6, 2010 Can I ask what the point is in destroying the British crown jewels? Seems childish and silly to destroy a country's property especially from a country who claims to be part of the coalition trying liberate it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Karl Martin Posted October 6, 2010 Report Share Posted October 6, 2010 [quote name='Justinian the Mighty' timestamp='1286336192' post='2476841'] Can I ask what the point is in destroying the British crown jewels? Seems childish and silly to destroy a country's property especially from a country who claims to be part of the coalition trying liberate it. [/quote] OOC information would be that Rüdiger von der Goltz, Minister, is an insane Pan-Germanist who does not tolerate any Germanic nations not coming under Germany's rule. THis time Wilhelm has nothing to do with this, since he's just a figurehead right now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zoot Zoot Posted October 6, 2010 Report Share Posted October 6, 2010 No it wasnt, it was an OOC move incase I end up getting England. something along the lines of biting your nose to spite your face. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Karl Martin Posted October 6, 2010 Report Share Posted October 6, 2010 [quote name='Zoot Zoot' timestamp='1286336569' post='2476846'] No it wasnt, it was an OOC move incase I end up getting England. something along the lines of biting your nose to spite your face. [/quote] I actually did not expect you to get England, after all the fuss you made for Finland. I am not that much of a hater. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zoot Zoot Posted October 6, 2010 Report Share Posted October 6, 2010 Fuss for Finland? Derp, that was IC and OOC rantings when I wanted something to whine about after a bad day. Yes, you are that much of a hater lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Karl Martin Posted October 6, 2010 Report Share Posted October 6, 2010 [quote name='Zoot Zoot' timestamp='1286336738' post='2476853'] Fuss for Finland? Derp, that was IC and OOC rantings when I wanted something to whine about after a bad day. Yes, you are that much of a hater lol [/quote] Then let us be barrack mates in the Hater Division. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KaiserMelech Mikhail Posted October 6, 2010 Report Share Posted October 6, 2010 I would like to speak up about something I don't like. Today, it seems that using a cargo ship to transport men and supplies is a convenient loophole to getting around a lack of a navy. As one of the pioneers of this method (I used it way back in 2008), I don't like what it has become. In the early days, you loaded men onto ships, and disembarked them at a friendly port, where there was proper facilities to handle ships. I was hoping that the GMs could make a rule that the only way that cargo ships can transport troops is if they can disembark at a port facility, and that cargo ships cannot be used to land troops on beaches or anything like that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HHAYD Posted October 6, 2010 Report Share Posted October 6, 2010 (edited) [quote name='KaiserMelech Mikhail' timestamp='1286338721' post='2476887'] I would like to speak up about something I don't like. Today, it seems that using a cargo ship to transport men and supplies is a convenient loophole to getting around a lack of a navy. As one of the pioneers of this method (I used it way back in 2008), I don't like what it has become. In the early days, you loaded men onto ships, and disembarked them at a friendly port, where there was proper facilities to handle ships. I was hoping that the GMs could make a rule that the only way that cargo ships can transport troops is if they can disembark at a port facility, and that cargo ships cannot be used to land troops on beaches or anything like that. [/quote] Cargo ships can not beach, they will run aground. Now you can launch motorboats after motorboats, but you would be limited to light weaponry, supplies, and infantry. But god help your invasion fleet if the enemy has a navy with lots of anti-ship defenses and ground forces stationed close to the invasion sites and was alerted of your presence from a long distance away while you send a massive fleet of unescorted cargo ships and motorboats. Edited October 6, 2010 by HHAYD Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zoot Zoot Posted October 6, 2010 Report Share Posted October 6, 2010 Thats why you use cruise liners, swap out the lifeboats for higgins boats and use manpads etc airforce defences. Landings ships IG can refer to amphibious assault ship such as the Albion class. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kankou Posted October 6, 2010 Report Share Posted October 6, 2010 [quote name='KaiserMelech Mikhail' timestamp='1286338721' post='2476887'] I would like to speak up about something I don't like. Today, it seems that using a cargo ship to transport men and supplies is a convenient loophole to getting around a lack of a navy. As one of the pioneers of this method (I used it way back in 2008), I don't like what it has become. In the early days, you loaded men onto ships, and disembarked them at a friendly port, where there was proper facilities to handle ships. I was hoping that the GMs could make a rule that the only way that cargo ships can transport troops is if they can disembark at a port facility, and that cargo ships cannot be used to land troops on beaches or anything like that. [/quote] On beaches? Which idiot does that? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maelstrom Vortex Posted October 6, 2010 Report Share Posted October 6, 2010 I prefer to land on cliffs.. tunnel under them.. and come up under the enemy. Much less resistance that way and totally unexpected. As if that'd ever work. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Captain Enema Posted October 6, 2010 Report Share Posted October 6, 2010 I bring lots of shovels and dig my own port before invading. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lynneth Posted October 6, 2010 Report Share Posted October 6, 2010 (edited) I bring portable ports with me. Just have to add water and they unfold. Edited October 6, 2010 by Lynneth Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Captain Enema Posted October 6, 2010 Report Share Posted October 6, 2010 I hear they are doing wonderful things with dehydrated ports. Further, I'm curious as to why Zoot's attacks on British monuments are being allowed when they are so clearly being motivated by OOC feelings of British nationalism. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KaiserMelech Mikhail Posted October 6, 2010 Report Share Posted October 6, 2010 [quote name='Tidy Bowl Man' timestamp='1286358879' post='2477037'] I hear they are doing wonderful things with dehydrated ports. Further, I'm curious as to why Zoot's attacks on British monuments are being allowed when they are so clearly being motivated by OOC feelings of British nationalism. [/quote] If Zoot wants to be a really bad British nationalist and blow up the Tower of London, that's fine. All that needs to happen is for the next person who RPs England to not recognize anything that happens in this war, and everything will go back to normal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zoot Zoot Posted October 6, 2010 Report Share Posted October 6, 2010 (edited) I destroyed the landmarks so historical artifacts wernt looted. Englands next owner can just say the items in question were relocated to a safer location when the counter attack on Britain began. Edited October 6, 2010 by Zoot Zoot Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yawoo Posted October 6, 2010 Report Share Posted October 6, 2010 [quote name='Karl Martin' timestamp='1286336177' post='2476840'] You forgot that missiles have no IG basis, meaning I can have an infinite number of missiles. CMs are only for WMD. Try arguing with someone who hasn't been trying to change the system. Now, either way, I wouldn't push for SDIs, but not letting a single missile pass is jsut godmod. [/quote] SDI rolls are only made for special missiles that go against a nation's IG CM count and nuclear weapons. So, feel free to push for an SDI roll - you won't get it. Now, try arguing/spreading your OOC B.S. with someone who doesn't know the rules like I do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Executive Minister Posted October 6, 2010 Report Share Posted October 6, 2010 [quote name='Yawoo' timestamp='1286369461' post='2477104'] SDI rolls are only made for special missiles that go against a nation's IG CM count and nuclear weapons. So, feel free to push for an SDI roll - you won't get it. Now, try arguing/spreading your OOC B.S. with someone who doesn't know the rules like I do. [/quote] I could have sworn SDI rolls were only used for weapons that were counted under IG nukes, and even then, only when the target it within your nation's boundaries IC. IG CM count weapons either have no counter to them, or simply have a penalty attached to them depending on how many MDs the target has. I'd need clarification on this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yawoo Posted October 6, 2010 Report Share Posted October 6, 2010 [quote name='Executive Minister' timestamp='1286371900' post='2477121'] I could have sworn SDI rolls were only used for weapons that were counted under IG nukes, and even then, only when the target it within your nation's boundaries IC. IG CM count weapons either have no counter to them, or simply have a penalty attached to them depending on how many MDs the target has. I'd need clarification on this. [/quote] Ah, well either way, in this instance, Karl Martin can not push for an SDI roll as it still wouldn't fall under the category. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Executive Minister Posted October 6, 2010 Report Share Posted October 6, 2010 [quote name='Yawoo' timestamp='1286372445' post='2477128'] Ah, well either way, in this instance, Karl Martin can not push for an SDI roll as it still wouldn't fall under the category. [/quote] Oh yes, I am not advocating on anyone's behalf at all, merely trying to clear up some confusion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iKrolm Posted October 6, 2010 Report Share Posted October 6, 2010 These are World War II V-2 rockets? I'd guess modern missile defenses could handle all of them without breaking a sweat. If they aren't, then just ignore this post. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts