Allouxia, if you truly want to ensure the safety of your nation, there are other forms of WMDs that you can create. Please, keep space a place for peace and cooperation.
Yeah but it's too conventional, the point of the landing castle is so that if a country declared war on me then I could have one of my landing castles in orbit descend on said country's capital and launch their military into disarray.
I would use the landing castle to establish a beachhead and annihilate anyone in the vicinity at the same time, after that I could launch a full scale invasion.
Let me level with you a moment. You seem to desire a very military manner of RP, yes? Think for a moment on what the incentive is for anyone else to do the same if you have an 'I win' button at your disposal whenever you desire.
Lets examine this from another perspective. As far as I'm concerned, I could care less about who wins or loses in a conflict. For Christ's sake, I made myself a regional-at-best power in the prior iteration of this nation (before once again rebooting it once I figure out a new history for it in this new world we're going to be in) by putting myself in the Caucasus, otherwise known as 'that area that has been fought over as a buffer territory for literal millennia'.
You can thus see I'm much more interested in doing a bit, playing a role, than in playing some sort of game where the objective is WINNING, mostly because if I wanted to do the latter I'd just do it on my own time in Civ V or Rome 2 or something, rather than come here and negotiate this or that.
However, you seem to be trying to Win. That is fine in the context of there being something to Win. But there appears to be a disconnect here between those of us trying to roleplay (which appears to at least include Thalasus and Escanthea besides myself; Danceria seems a lot more flexible on this) and those of us trying to play to Win.
I am willing to switch to playing to Win, but I would demand some form of measurable metric by which we operated. Hazy, what-I-say-is-what-happens kind of stuff works fine in a role-playing context, but if you're trying to Win, then there need to be metrics by which we measure just who exactly is winning. And if you don't want to do that, then stop trying to ducking Win and just roleplay already ffs.
Acctually Falbania i really don't plan on fighting, I just like to have the Allouxian Military feared,
Like in a way that is "I really shouldn't plan on attacking or pissing off Allouxia"
Really I want to get Allouxia off fossil fuels is my main goal, only reason why I spend a good time on my military is that no one dares to think they can attack me without loosing a couple hundred million in the process.
See it from my perspective, we may not have open hostilities, but Acaria doesn't know what you do behind closed doors. For all I know, you could be planning a super mega invasion in the future. It's better to be safe than sorry.
many of our nations are bigger than yours ingame by ~2 billlion people.
RP wise we use about 10% of our ingame populations, but the proportions are still mostly the same (excepting maybe Falbania due to the Caucasus not really being conducive to a high density population)
with that in mind, there's really no reason for you to be the top dog. Why would Thalasus be scared of you? Historically the Germans have had a pretty sh*t navy, and the Thalasians have a really good one. They can just ignore you, and you have to deal with that. Having weaknesses is an important part of developing a believable character or faction. So far all I've seen is a desire to be 100% at everything, but that's simply not good RPing. You need to try and limit yourself to prevent yourself from seeming like the NS equivalent of an edgy Sonic OC.
Yeah, since the Bermudan Pentagram I've been using 1/100th as a sort of counterweight to always pushing the bleeding edge techwise (to use a military analogy since that's a nice simple one, having troops thrice as good thanks to equipment and training is irrelevant if they're outnumbered 10:1). 60 million still seems like a lot frankly for the Caucasus, but I suppose vertical farming and a big push towards vegetarianism outside really hilly, rural areas that are really only suited to sheep/goats could make up most of that gap.
Post re-re-reboot of this nation though it will definitely make more sense, since I won't be quite so geographically constrained.
uhh... i don't know wats going on because i took a break from NS. can anyone tell me whats been going on the past few days?
An argument over the practicality of building a 2km long structure in space that is designed to fall to the earth and not break, while also somehow not transferring all that kinetic energy into the earth and causing more destruction than a multi-megaton warhead. Or maybe that's part of the goal, who knows. All I know is anime tends to be a really poor place to draw your superweapon ideas from. Most fiction, really. Like, a Death Star? Hella dumb.
but vegetarianism isn't better for the environment, you filthy hippie
I say, video games and books contain the best ideas for weapons of all kinds. One future weapon I particularly like the is the viking air and space craft from the Starcraft 2.
Environment schmenvironment; its about trophic levels. Why would I spend 10x the calories feeding a cow when I can just feed that grain to people and call it a day, assuming that farmland was at a serious premium?
Importing meat for the nobility is fine, that's not strategic anymore that's just luxury, but if the peasantry is to live in the density necessary for our continued economic growth and in numbers sufficient for the military security of the state, then we can't very well waste calories on giving them steaks for every meal, can we?
Don't mention vat-grown meat to them. Meat is for their betters.
That...doesn't even make any sense. First of all, a combat walker is already a bad design, for reasons I near constantly reiterate whenever the subject comes up. Then to make it able to transform into an air superiority fighter?
I can understand that that's cool for a video game. But it's utterly irrational from an engineering standpoint. Why build one thing to do two jobs, when you can build two things to do those two jobs individually for what is likely a fraction of the cost and complexity? I mean, we're seeing that with the F-35; because it's designed to do, what, three separate jobs, you could build 6 F-16s for the cost. And no matter how good it might theoretically be at that one job, one plane is certainly not going to do better than 6.
Any program that has 'multi role' in its description should be taken out back and shot, because all that means is that people are going to keep expanding the requirements until it's an overengineered pile of crap that can't even do its original job properly, nevermind the 15 others slapped onto it. Build one thing for one job. It's cheaper, it's simpler, and real talk, in Actual Wartime Situations that's what's going to be important, not being able to show off something that can halfass twelve jobs in peacetime. Sure, the T-34 wasn't sexy, and it wasn't the best tank in the world. But it was cheap to make and relatively simple to operate, and that's what won the war, not the glorious and wonderful Panther or Tiger tanks that half the damn time broke down before they ever got near a battlefield.
To bring it back onto the point I was originally making: no, I think that the 'A2 Viking Armored Mechanical Hybrid' is, practically speaking, incredibly stupid, for all that it's conceptually cool.
I'm just saying that subjectively, of course the Ciking unit wouldn't be practical. All I'm saying is that you don't need to replicate any piece of weaponry exactly, instead use the concept to further expand your imagination and possibilities.
I'm gonna redirect the billions I planned to spend on landing castles on the research and development on a cold fusion reactor.
No more coal imports means I can redirect those funds to the Military to construct more aircraft carries which I can deploy around the globe, the possibility of me bombing anyone at anytime should serve as a good deterrent.
Maybe the ME series aircraft could serve as a better deterrent then space super weapons.
Falbania I don't want to be a master at everything in terms of the Military, my ground forces are decent my navy...eh.
But I like to imagine my Luftwaffe being king of the skies.
I mean, sure, that's fair and all, but I can read sci-fi space opera, see stuff about antineutronium projectiles or graviton warheads or warped-quark torpedoes or any one of a billion sci-fi sounding things, and they all sound cool, but still run into the problem of violating our strict contemporary technology rule. It would be like doing something set in the age of sail, and then proudly announcing I had nuclear ICBMs, or bringing a C-130 into Antiquity. That would be utterly and profoundly ridiculous given the setting.
Okay, when I earlier said stuff about cold fusion, I wasn't implying I had it, or that it was attainable within the rules we have established. I was saying it as a direct comparison to your statements about landing castles.
You can work towards it if you want, but per the rules Thalasus earlier laid out, until there's actual evidence in the real world that such technology has been developed, you won't actually get to use it, and particularly not in a man-portable or even vehicle-operable fashion.
No I just want to make cold fusion my main source of electricity.
I'll still be using gas for cars, jets, ect
Hm well I got a surplus of my ME-209s,
*starts selling to third world conflicts*