NationStates Jolt Archive

This must be thread number 100.000 on the subject, but looking at the forums, it apparently needs to be stated over and over again. So here we go!

The Nationstates Rules of Engagement

1. Telegram your opponent before you attack
In real life, no army that invades a country stays unnoticed. So informing the opponent of the pending attack only adds to the realism. Also, issue a second telegram when you make the first move, to make sure the opponent knows what is going on.

2. Know that geography is of utmost importance
A nation is not a big flat field of grass with cities. Most likely, there are mountains, deserts and woods limiting troop movement, or creating strategical opportunities. A description of geography, or even a map, makes for a much more realistic war.

3. Make sure you have logistics and engineers / medics
Armies need food, water, equipment and repairs. When you describe the army you are sending in, also mention these support forces. Not using them means certain defeat in real life, because they are essential to the war effort. This also gives small nations a chance against larger armies.

4. Play turn based
I don't mean post, wait for reaction, post, wait for reaction etc. But you must give the opponent a chance to respond to your moves. Posting 20 moves in 5 minutes is unfair.

5. Starting a war takes time
It takes time to mobilise forces and it takes time to get them into the warzone. You can't start an invasion right away, you have to prepare a lot of things first.

You do NOT suddenly arrive at the 100 miles zone of your ally or enemy. It goes like this: 1. post: start. 2. post: half way there. 3. post: arrived.
THAT gives the hostile forces the chance to react accordingly, and it guarantees fairness.

6. Bigger is not necessarily better
Victory does not come with size. For instance: a large force from a dictatorship that attacks a highly motivated, democratic and patriottic defense force can easily lose.

7. The castle siege rule
In old times, a siege to a castle would cost the attackers 10 soldiers for each 1 defender killed. This still counts, as defenders are on home ground. They are far more mobile and efficient and will probably have the support of the population. (The ratio might not be 10:1 anymore, but still)

8. Invaders do not know the terrain!
When invading a nation, your forces enter unknown territory. It does not matter how well they are trained, the "home team" will always have better knowledge of their surroundings, and will also enjoy much more support from the local population in most cases. And yes, this is almost the same thing as stated in "7". So go figure how important it is!

9. Remember not all nations use similar technology
NS features nations ranging from the stone age to the year 4000, and from orcish tribes to automata's. So make sure that, when you are involved in armed conflict with nations from other timelines, that you set up guidelines about how different units would perform against others.

10. READ!!!
Nothing prepares you better than reading up. Look up your opponents' factfile, ask questions to other players, read his recent threads. Nothing screws up a war more than two players attacking each other with no idea about the actual structure and units of the other nation.

11. Limit the amount of participating nations
I know it is very tempting to call all your homies when you go to war. But, this quickly ends up in 30 or more nations involved in a conflict. And that is impossible to coördinate, increasing the probability of the war becoming a total mess that no-one understands. Try to cut a deal with your opponent, in which you make sure each side only calls in 3 or 4 allies or so. (I know, this will never happen, but it would be good).

Any comments or additions?

Yeah.. very basic, but if all people actually bothered to consider such things average RP might significantly imrpove.

It's basic, but most of them are never taken into consideration. Especially numbers 2,3 and 6 are "forgotten" 9 out of 10 times.

Pretty Cool. I had actually never seen one of these before.

this should be stickied

this should be stickied

Hmm. To make it sticky it should be much bigger and more detailled.

this should be stickied

Hmm. To make it sticky it should be much bigger and more detailled.even if it is not bigger, it should be because the noobs usually have no idea what they are doing. most senior nations have no idea what they are doing.

Description helps. It is an RP, after all. Merely posting numbers and such gets boring after half a page.

Description helps. It is an RP, after all. Merely posting numbers and such gets boring after half a page.

Exactly. That's why I want to see logistic routes being set up, camps being made, I want to see geographical features influencing combat etc. Merely posting numbers is not rp, it's math.

Quite right.
I'm especially..motivated to roll my eyes on repeatedly seeing people post even realistic % of their pop. as military staff...only to claim them all as front-line soldiers. Who's bringing them munitions and petrol??

Anyway..since it is so brief and basic I think it's in some ways more useful than the more detailed posts that many new players don't bother to read, being too eagre to get into the action, if you see what I mean.

Perhaps it should be linked in the relevent sticky thread (what is it? New to NS? Read these threads: ?)

I'll try to look for examples the coming days. Each rule then gets a "good" and a "bad" example. PLease help me find them!

I am specialized in WW2 fighting, the most important engagement concerning supplielines, if i would wage a war id probably never talk about them unless they are cut. The supplielines are there, they always are, even in peacetime.

Just like mobilisation, its a basic move, one i wouldnt discuss, when you make your invasionplans you automaticaly make a list of (reserve)units you want to use, and usually (or so i thought) the commanders (who generally take part in strategic planning) prepare those units.

And then im not discussing the troops that are always prepared for combat

Not that my opinion is really important, i just wanted to add this.

if you notice the last war game i was in, i always posted what i was doing. i also posted suppliy lines

Good thoughts here. I'm glad there are individuals truly interested in preserving realism.

For one to plan the logistics and tactics of a million man army is nightmarish. I'll just stick to squad based stuff.

I am specialized in WW2 fighting, the most important engagement concerning supplielines, if i would wage a war id probably never talk about them unless they are cut. The supplielines are there, they always are, even in peacetime.

Just like mobilisation, its a basic move, one i wouldnt discuss, when you make your invasionplans you automaticaly make a list of (reserve)units you want to use, and usually (or so i thought) the commanders (who generally take part in strategic planning) prepare those units.

And then im not discussing the troops that are always prepared for combat

Not that my opinion is really important, i just wanted to add this.

Well your comment is very valuable. But you should mention the supplylines, or at least how supplies arrive, for instance by air, land or sea. And mobilisation should not be discussed as it is an internal matter, but a nation should take some time to mobilise. Many nations just say "I declare war" and "my army has arrived" in the same sentence.

(Bit off topic, but I don't intend to go on with the tangent for long-) Does that mean, Vollmeria, that your nation is WWII era at all? I just set up "Walmington on Sea" the other day especially to play that tech-level. We just decided it was time to design an infantry support tank which will become the Matilda I :) Needs more nations to interact with is all.
Doesn' matter if not.


..Sorry, carry on.

I'll try to look for examples the coming days. Each rule then gets a "good" and a "bad" example. PLease help me find them!

yeah, but not for me 35% of all my divisions (air force, army) have 35% support

I'll try to look for examples the coming days. Each rule then gets a "good" and a "bad" example. PLease help me find them!

yeah, but not for me 35% of all my divisions (air force, army) have 35% support

So for each soldier there is 1 support person?

no....35% of my army is support(medics and stuff liek that), the other 65% is frontline...same with the air force 35% is support (loaders, mechanics, etc) rest is pilots...yeah i had a grammatical error, lol

(Bit off topic, but I don't intend to go on with the tangent for long-) Does that mean, Vollmeria, that your nation is WWII era at all? I just set up "Walmington on Sea" the other day especially to play that tech-level. We just decided it was time to design an infantry support tank which will become the Matilda I :) Needs more nations to interact with is all.
Doesn' matter if not.


..Sorry, carry on.

Never "selected" an era to be in, problem is id already be thinking about the next developement. Even when the current one isnt ready yet.

-Supplielines trough the air are ok for small armys or actions, supplies should always go over land(you can get much more stuff to your troops over land than by aircraft). only over sea if theres a sea. And i think those supplielines exist whenever an invasion fleet is involved.

-How fast an army can arrive somewhere simply depends on the size of that country, in todays warfare its possible to get trough a middelsize country within a day, Declaring war is a typical WW2(or even WW1) move, and in most cases troops are already crossing the border at the time of the DoW.

Its hard to tell when such a move/post is correct/reallistic(especially with the DoW and army movement) so i'm gonna quit critisizing. You do understand that people arent always "godmodding"(or whatever you call this) if they make such a post (my army has arrived...)

I'll try to look for examples the coming days. Each rule then gets a "good" and a "bad" example. PLease help me find them!

dude, im doing an RP with myself to better my roleplay skills. its called 'Incursion of THS Fed. Troops into Reb Territory (like BHD)'
its sorta like Black Hawk Down. If anyone has ANY suggestions, please post them there.

I'll try to look for examples the coming days. Each rule then gets a "good" and a "bad" example. PLease help me find them!

dude, im doing an RP with myself to better my roleplay skills. its called 'Incursion of THS Fed. Troops into Reb Territory (like BHD)'
its sorta like Black Hawk Down. If anyone has ANY suggestions, please post them there.

The only thing I can suggest is including at least 1 or 2 main characters that are not essential to the storyline, e.g. people that can die. Having the whole troop of main characters survive that is a little bit X-menlike

Bump for n00bs

oh, no, at least 20 people die. it says that that captain guy is moving in the rest of the squads, well, something goes wrong there, and squad five also meets difficulties.

Having moved here from a link, I'm not sure how close to the top this thread is - Anyway, I think it's a pretty important read for many, and if that is what it takes for it to get stickied I volunteer to write a semi-long piece of fiction for every rule to illustrate the point.

I'm a tactics buff and a creative writer through many years[/brag]

Anyway, if it'd help, please answer here or PM me, then I'll get right on it.

Regards,
Tias(player of AC)

Very nice Vort. I have an idea, I will post a link in my war thread that is on the newcommer sticky.
Sound good ?

Excellent!

Nice post. The only part of it that I’ve never really sorted out is my nations geography, I’ve got a general map of all the nations around me and the shape of my nation, but not detail into the important landmarks, terrain and city locations.

Logistics and engineers are only briefly mentioned, but they are taken into account when thinking of numbers… though I wouldn’t mind if someone would make a guide on Navel Units and support. I don’t really know the name of the units used to transport large numbers of tanks and vehicles, as well as the units used to place infantry and so on. I haven’t always got time to research this and I’ve spend a lot of time playing with the numbers of my army (now 1.4% population, including support).

Either way, nice guide, should at least be linked in a sticky thread…

Edit: Oh, and what about the local superiority guideline… the one that says that you often need a 3:1 local superiority to be assured victory in combat.

Excellent!

Any time :)

Oh, and what about the local superiority guideline… the one that says that you often need a 3:1 local superiority to be assured victory in combat.

I think the 3:1 is not a fixed ratio, and that the number can differ. But you're right, the defending nation always has an advantage. Updated the first post saying that. Thanks!

I think the 3:1 is not a fixed ratio, and that the number can differ. But you're right, the defending nation always has an advantage. Updated the first post saying that. Thanks!I know I know, but thats the general figure quoted... I think it is also ment to take into account all the factors and I was talking about battles in general, not just defence.

Thanks either way.

[tag]

great post VC, I think that it's basic enough so n00b will read it, but adavanced enough so that it still will make a good war. I could use this myself!
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://images.google.com/images?q=tbn:uhPFTc9k5a4C:www.loc.gov/preserv/man.jpg
Fredrick Barbarosea Jr.
High King of the Barbarosea Empire
Leader of JIDA
CoTW
CoE

[tag]

great post VC, I think that it's basic enough so n00b will read it, but adavanced enough so that it still will make a good war. I could use this myself!
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://images.google.com/images?q=tbn:uhPFTc9k5a4C:www.loc.gov/preserv/man.jpg
Fredrick Barbarosea Jr.
High King of the Barbarosea Empire
Leader of JIDA
CoTW
CoE

Ah sheesh :oops:

11. Limit the amount of participating nations
I know it is very tempting to call all your homies when you go to war. But, this quickly ends up in 30 or more nations involved in a conflict. And that is impossible to coördinate, increasing the probability of the war becoming a total mess that no-one understands. Try to cut a deal with your opponent, in which you make sure each side only calls in 3 or 4 allies or so. (I know, this will never happen, but it would be good).

Any comments or additions?

Yes! Yes! It's imposible for anyone to keep up with this.

11. Limit the amount of participating nations
I know it is very tempting to call all your homies when you go to war. But, this quickly ends up in 30 or more nations involved in a conflict. And that is impossible to coördinate, increasing the probability of the war becoming a total mess that no-one understands. Try to cut a deal with your opponent, in which you make sure each side only calls in 3 or 4 allies or so. (I know, this will never happen, but it would be good).

Any comments or additions?

Yes! Yes! It's imposible for anyone to keep up with this.

Yes, it's hard. But this "11th directive" would greatly increase the transparancy of wars.

Good post, although ive never been at war it has triggered some :idea: 's to assure im ready if/when i do..

Damn it makes me want to go to war...

your welcome :)
----------------------------------------------------------------
http://images.google.com/images?q=tbn:uhPFTc9k5a4C:www.loc.gov/preserv/man.jpg
Fredrick Barbarosea Jr.
High King of the Barbarosea Empire
Firestorm Regional Pact
Leader of JIDA
CoTW
CoE

no....35% of my army is support(medics and stuff liek that), the other 65% is frontline...same with the air force 35% is support (loaders, mechanics, etc) rest is pilots...yeah i had a grammatical error, lol

Admirable that you take support into account, but you don't have nearly enough.

At minimum (and assuming a modern or futuristic army -- it takes less for a medieval one), you should have around two to three support personnel per soldier. In the air force, you're probably talking more like six or seven mechanics per pilot, and cutting-edge technologies often require more. As a general rule, the more futuristic your technology is, the greater the amount of support personnel you need. (Labor-saving technology can, of course, decrease the requirements, so it's not perfectly linear.)

So if you've got a million-man army, you might have 750,000 berserk orcs with battleaxes supported by 250,000 cooks, bearers, and carters; or 300,000 modern soldiers supported by 700,000 medics, supply officers, administration, arms sergeants, etc.; or 80,000 power-armor infantry armed with laser rifles, supported by 920,000 medics, mechanics, supply personnel, and so forth. Though that last one would also be fairly expensive in terms of both materials and training, which is another factor.

tag

So if you've got a million-man army, you might have 750,000 berserk orcs with battleaxes supported by 250,000 cooks, bearers, and carters; or 300,000 modern soldiers supported by 700,000 medics, supply officers, administration, arms sergeants, etc.; or 80,000 power-armor infantry armed with laser rifles, supported by 920,000 medics, mechanics, supply personnel, and so forth. Though that last one would also be fairly expensive in terms of both materials and training, which is another factor.

Pah... I only have 200 powered armour infantry... they are expensive as hell, admittedly they can drop in from the skys Here they are... (http://www.nationstates.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=63527&highlight=)

I have been following those guildlines of support for some time and the support counts towards my 1.4% population in the military. Generally I have about 4 men support each pilot for my air ships and 5 men support each man in my space fleet, though I've found I have extra men (due to a small fleet) so it's probably more.

Support is vital in todays armies becuase of the added complexity of modern battles.

{Tag; For Future Reference}

And for the love of god. Don't be so hysterically worried about LOSING.

It's roleplaying not an TSG, theres a lot of fun to be had in being bombed back to the stoneage too.

At minimum (and assuming a modern or futuristic army -- it takes less for a medieval one), you should have around two to three support personnel per soldier. In the air force, you're probably talking more like six or seven mechanics per pilot, and cutting-edge technologies often require more. As a general rule, the more futuristic your technology is, the greater the amount of support personnel you need. (Labor-saving technology can, of course, decrease the requirements, so it's not perfectly linear.)

That bears repeating :)

Too many people claim that their futuristic technology means they can cut corners militarily on support. But the reality is, the more cutting edge technology used, and the more technology used in general, the more support is required.

At minimum (and assuming a modern or futuristic army -- it takes less for a medieval one), you should have around two to three support personnel per soldier. In the air force, you're probably talking more like six or seven mechanics per pilot, and cutting-edge technologies often require more. As a general rule, the more futuristic your technology is, the greater the amount of support personnel you need. (Labor-saving technology can, of course, decrease the requirements, so it's not perfectly linear.)

That bears repeating :)

Too many people claim that their futuristic technology means they can cut corners militarily on support. But the reality is, the more cutting edge technology used, and the more technology used in general, the more support is required.

And the same goes for maintenance costs, R&D expenses, replacement costs, internal control costs, education and training expenses, etc.

*Tag* Silently cheers, "Sticky, sticky sticky"

Vortex>> Oi, speak up! Would you need my phat fiction-writing or not?

This must be thread number 100.000 on the subject, but looking at the forums, it apparently needs to be stated over and over again. So here we go!

The Nationstates Rules of Engagement

1. Telegram your opponent before you attack
In real life, no army that invades a country stays unnoticed. So informing the opponent of the pending attack only adds to the realism. Also, issue a second telegram when you make the first move, to make sure the opponent knows what is going on.

2. Know that geography is of utmost importance
A nation is not a big flat field of grass with cities. Most likely, there are mountains, deserts and woods limiting troop movement, or creating strategical opportunities. A description of geography, or even a map, makes for a much more realistic war.

3. Make sure you have logistics and engineers / medics
Armies need food, water, equipment and repairs. When you describe the army you are sending in, also mention these support forces. Not using them means certain defeat in real life, because they are essential to the war effort. This also gives small nations a chance against larger armies.

4. Play turn based
I don't mean post, wait for reaction, post, wait for reaction etc. But you must give the opponent a chance to respond to your moves. Posting 20 moves in 5 minutes is unfair.

5. Starting a war takes time
It takes time to mobilise forces and it takes time to get them into the warzone. You can't start an invasion right away, you have to prepare a lot of things first.

You do NOT suddenly arrive at the 100 miles zone of your ally or enemy. It goes like this: 1. post: start. 2. post: half way there. 3. post: arrived.
THAT gives the hostile forces the chance to react accordingly, and it guarantees fairness.

6. Bigger is not necessarily better
Victory does not come with size. For instance: a large force from a dictatorship that attacks a highly motivated, democratic and patriottic defense force can easily lose.

7. The castle siege rule
In old times, a siege to a castle would cost the attackers 10 soldiers for each 1 defender killed. This still counts, as defenders are on home ground. They are far more mobile and efficient and will probably have the support of the population. (The ratio might not be 10:1 anymore, but still)

8. Invaders do not know the terrain!
When invading a nation, your forces enter unknown territory. It does not matter how well they are trained, the "home team" will always have better knowledge of their surroundings, and will also enjoy much more support from the local population in most cases. And yes, this is almost the same thing as stated in "7". So go figure how important it is!

9. Remember not all nations use similar technology
NS features nations ranging from the stone age to the year 4000, and from orcish tribes to automata's. So make sure that, when you are involved in armed conflict with nations from other timelines, that you set up guidelines about how different units would perform against others.

10. READ!!!
Nothing prepares you better than reading up. Look up your opponents' factfile, ask questions to other players, read his recent threads. Nothing screws up a war more than two players attacking each other with no idea about the actual structure and units of the other nation.

11. Limit the amount of participating nations
I know it is very tempting to call all your homies when you go to war. But, this quickly ends up in 30 or more nations involved in a conflict. And that is impossible to coördinate, increasing the probability of the war becoming a total mess that no-one understands. Try to cut a deal with your opponent, in which you make sure each side only calls in 3 or 4 allies or so. (I know, this will never happen, but it would be good).

Any comments or additions?

Common sense really..

Yes. But you should take a look at wars around here. BIG lack of common sense, I can tell you that.

Common sense is relative........to those who have none.

Seriously though, very rarely have I seen these ideas truly implemented in any war RP. Everyone always talks about waging a "good" war (in the sense of following these guidlines) but no one ever does. Because if they did, no one would be able to toss out numbers like "ten million troops deploy into position" or "one million tanks overwhelm your border troops." Sigh, so we are all doomed to numberwanking.

Alas, your post was a good one, but I fear that few shall take it under advisement.

Common sense is relative........to those who have none.

Seriously though, very rarely have I seen these ideas truly implemented in any war RP. Everyone always talks about waging a "good" war (in the sense of following these guidlines) but no one ever does. Because if they did, no one would be able to toss out numbers like "ten million troops deploy into position" or "one million tanks overwhelm your border troops." Sigh, so we are all doomed to numberwanking.

Alas, your post was a good one, but I fear that few shall take it under advisement.

But this sounds a little bit like:

"I won't play realistic because nobody else does"

If everybody shares that attitude, of course nothing will change.

Tho it may be based on common sense, I see problems with it as follows:

Rule 1: TG opponent is out of courtesy but should not be mandated. Germany did not send a letter to Poland or France. Japan did not notify the people of Hawaii to evacuate first. Saddam did not ask permission of Kuwait, etc etc etc etc. This is strictly out of courtesy to TG first to make better RP is great idea.

Rule 2: In todays day and age, there is no country anywhere in the world that is not practical or accessable knowledge of terrain. There is no such thing as a hidden valley or mountain range anymore. Just do a search, you can get the terrain map of any nation, any county, any city of the world these days. Militaries do prepare for this.

Rule 3: I do not know of any nation that travels without these anymore. The days of barbarism are gone for the most part.

Rule 4: Makes for good RP

Rule 5: Most, if not all nations do plan their attack in advance, this rule is kind moot, but again, makes for good RP only.

Rule 6: Bigger is not better? Then how did the Soviets and Americans manage to be victorious in WWII? Reserves is the issue here. A one billion pop can summon a higher draft/reserves than a 200 million.

Rule 7: Irrelevent, militaries rarely ever fight in hand to hand combat. Sabers are for dress design only.

Rule 8: See Rule 2

Rule 9: So true, I love the time machine theory that NS has. Darth Vader kills Christ!

Rule 10: TRUE, threads are wasted with "can someone summarize?"

Rule 11: Only if agreed by the two parties involved. Better RP if both agree, but then again, I think that Japan had no choice in the US summoning near all of the Western Hemisphere.

Rule 12: Read the stickies!!!!!!! Too many threads in end Nuke fest or Ignore/Godmod fest. Has a war ever been successfully completed on NS?

Rule 13: War is started because all diplomacy efforts that have been suggested and are assumed to have failed. Do not waste alot of time doing this? Cut the fat, get to the meat of the story, good RPers will recognize that diplomacy has already failed. Offer of peace is great before war, but insistances are unnecessary, make the offer once and leave it at that. Some story lines depend on a military confrontation.

Rule 14: As I have noticed, limit the alliance entanglements. A nation is rarely involved in multiple conflicting alliance structures. "I go to war because I am a member of CAGE, NCA, EOTED, GDODAD, NJA, SATO, NATO, DOMINION, UNAOTO, GA, REICH, UTP, UED, YUT, etc etc etc etc etc etc."

Rule 15: Keep the puppets in the box.

Everyone has opinions and I posted mine. (Damn, and Wilson only had 14, lol)

But this sounds a little bit like:

"I won't play realistic because nobody else does"

If everybody shares that attitude, of course nothing will change.

It is, but in all fairness, when unenforcable rules are broken, even the most "realistic" player is forced to commit some kind of wankery, either that or face a sound defeat at the hands of a lamer.I'll ask you this - how many good RPs have you seen descend into n00bishness because someone was unable to make the call early on and premptively terminate the the RP before it got bad? I would hazard a guess and say a geat many. Because 1) people don't want to just drop something they worked hard on, and 2) most people can't stand "losing" anyways, no matter what.

So I guess the problem is that everyone does share the aforementioned attitude, and unfortunately, I don't think that it will be cured anytime soon.

Tho it may be based on common sense, I see problems with it as follows:

Rule 1: TG opponent is out of courtesy but should not be mandated. Germany did not send a letter to Poland or France. Japan did not notify the people of Hawaii to evacuate first. Saddam did not ask permission of Kuwait, etc etc etc etc. This is strictly out of courtesy to TG first to make better RP is great idea.

Look at your comment on the next rule. Any country would know that the enemy is coming. This first rule is designed to prevent people from opening a new thread and noticing the enemy is already in their capitol.

Rule 2: In todays day and age, there is no country anywhere in the world that is not practical or accessable knowledge of terrain. There is no such thing as a hidden valley or mountain range anymore. Just do a search, you can get the terrain map of any nation, any county, any city of the world these days. Militaries do prepare for this.

So? The point that geography is important still stands. Mountains, rivers etc. will always slow armies down, no matter how well they prepare. Nothing ruins a war like player A saying "My navy starts bombing your coast" and player B replying "but I'm landlocked!"

Rule 3: I do not know of any nation that travels without these anymore. The days of barbarism are gone for the most part.

Show me 3 separate wars in which logistic support is rp-ed. Good luck finding it. The point is that it is necessary, but in NS hardly ever mentioned.

Rule 5: Most, if not all nations do plan their attack in advance, this rule is kind moot, but again, makes for good RP only.

I don't know what your argument is exactly, but wars cannot be started without thorough preparation.

Rule 6: Bigger is not better? Then how did the Soviets and Americans manage to be victorious in WWII? Reserves is the issue here. A one billion pop can summon a higher draft/reserves than a 200 million.

Then why are guerilla's so succesful? Smaller forces are more flexible, intangible, harder to find and easier to maintain. A small elite army will beat a bunch of rookies any day. Look at special forces, for instance.

Rule 7: Irrelevent, militaries rarely ever fight in hand to hand combat. Sabers are for dress design only.

Three men sit in a bunker. Thirty men storm that bunker. Probably, a lot of those 20 men die before reaching it. This rule represents the fact that somebody that is dug in has much more chance of survival than a man in the open field.

Rule 13: War is started because all diplomacy efforts that have been suggested and are assumed to have failed. Do not waste alot of time doing this? Cut the fat, get to the meat of the story, good RPers will recognize that diplomacy has already failed. Offer of peace is great before war, but insistances are unnecessary, make the offer once and leave it at that. Some story lines depend on a military confrontation.

Negotiations should always be held before going to war. Period.

Enemy already present is BS, I do not argue that, if I say that...say, 20 bombers are on their way and you fail to acknowledge it, what stops the bombs from being dropped? It comes down to "read." Another point is, what is the time frame of NS, from population growth, minutes in RL are days in NS. It would be correct to announce movements first.

Avoid terrain, avoid godmod. What stops me from claiming "how did your troops get on the other side of a mountain larger than Everest? Exact same principle. Armies traverse rivers and deserts quite easily these days. Open a paper, how long did it take the US to reach Baghdad? How many crossing are over the Mississippi? With the implementation of mechanized infantry, terrain has little to no effect anymore.

Guerilla warfare is totally ineffective. You show me a war where it was used, I show you millions of civilian casualties. Russia, Vietnam, Afghanistan, China, Venezuela, etc etc etc.

If your commanders order a storming of a bunkard without armor support, there better be a court-marshal awaiting his return.

What you are proposing is that NS players slow things down, detail all supply movements, announce all plans, send diplomats and ambassadors, extend a long war from 25 pages to 250 pages. Like I said, cut the fat, get to the meat of the issue. You can check any of my military movements when I post, you will notice Aux ships present. I do this out of courtesy and make RP a tad better by supplying those ships.

That is all I have to say about that.

Enemy already present is BS, I do not argue that, if I say that...say, 20 bombers are on their way and you fail to acknowledge it, what stops the bombs from being dropped? It comes down to "read." Another point is, what is the time frame of NS, from population growth, minutes in RL are days in NS. It would be correct to announce movements first.

Agreed. If somebody fails to read it, and does not take countermeasures, then that is his fault. But you still, indeed, have to state that they are mobilised and moving, before stating their arrival.

Avoid terrain, avoid godmod. What stops me from claiming "how did your troops get on the other side of a mountain larger than Everest? Exact same principle. Armies traverse rivers and deserts quite easily these days. Open a paper, how long did it take the US to reach Baghdad? How many crossing are over the Mississippi? With the implementation of mechanized infantry, terrain has little to no effect anymore.

Still, a war is fought better if maps are used. I repeat the earlier example in different form: if player A says his APC's have just driven through your country and dropped their troops in your capitol, while that capitol is actually on a frikkin island, you have to start over / retcon the whole movement. Geography will always be essential. And as for the US, they reached Baghdad fast because they prepared for desert warfare. If they had not taken geography into account, they would have been wearing standard combat suits and that would have been....well...bad.

Guerilla warfare is totally ineffective. You show me a war where it was used, I show you millions of civilian casualties. Russia, Vietnam, Afghanistan, China, Venezuela, etc etc etc.

Look at South and Middle America. Then start counting how many governments fell there in the last century because of guerilla warfare. Then tell me again that guerilla is ineffective.

If your commanders order a storming of a bunkard without armor support, there better be a court-marshal awaiting his return.

And why is that? Because the troops in that bunker have that huge advantage. So my rule that you cannot throw your forces onto fortified positions without heavy losses still stands. In other words: use tactics.

What you are proposing is that NS players slow things down, detail all supply movements, announce all plans, send diplomats and ambassadors, extend a long war from 25 pages to 250 pages. Like I said, cut the fat, get to the meat of the issue. You can check any of my military movements when I post, you will notice Aux ships present. I do this out of courtesy and make RP a tad better by supplying those ships.
That is all I have to say about that.

I am not proposing that players state every detail. I am proposing that players look at their moves in a war more carefully, and check if what they are doing is realistic. You don't have to post every frikkin' statistic, you just have to realize that there are certain preparations needed for war, and that there are certain advantages and disadvantages to being either the invader or defender. Just thinking and evaluating your own actions already helps a lot.

Good job VC. I followed the AMF/Ma-Tek incident, and it looks like everyone's making an effort to take their time a bit more. Lot's of diplomacy, offers, counter-offers, peace talks, then preparations, last warnings, deployment and finally conflict (unless the nation gets sucked into the void :) )
It's good to take things slow, and not rush thru the RP.

Good job VC. I followed the AMF/Ma-Tek incident, and it looks like everyone's making an effort to take their time a bit more. Lot's of diplomacy, offers, counter-offers, peace talks, then preparations, last warnings, deployment and finally conflict (unless the nation gets sucked into the void :) )
It's good to take things slow, and not rush thru the RP.

Thanks, though I don't think this thread made people act more realistic in that war. I think it's mostly because a lot of good rp-ers participated in it.

B :shock: MP!

Ok, I just have to say something here. You cannot have more combat personel than fighting personel, it's nearly impossibly. Hell, even I can't manage that and there's usually one master tech (called an Astech) assigned to every five mechs or fighters, there still has to be people to handle the smaller jobs. Plus, there's supply convoys or if you're advanced enough you might have dropships grabbing supplies from orbiting ships. But it all comes down to one thing: logistics, logistics, logistics.