NationStates Jolt Archive

I think we have apretty good, really efficient Military for a nation of Well over 60 million people, yet my military count is less than 0.5% of the population. Many (insanely crazy Godmoddy) nations think everyone should have 20 Million man armies with 50,000 F-22s and 500,000 M1A1 Abrams and every tank has a nuke despenser. I go for the more efficient approach. but anyway, most nations my size have 10 times the military.... is it really necessary? Should we change?

Military stats: http://www.nationstates.net/forum/viewtopic.php?p=1987505#1987505

http://www.bateshome.com/jordan/rsig2.jpg (http://www.nationstates.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=78939)

lol wheres the option for NO at on the poll

We don't see the need to have a 8 million men military. We think our 1.85 million strong active military is pertty effective. Having a huge active army is nothing but a waste.

In short, we'd suggest into putting more in various technology research, such as ballistic missile defence.

lol wheres the option for NO at on the pollSecond one down, the one that says "You only use .5% and you're still effective? Good job!"

You stupid idiots! This isn't Starcraft! It's a goddamn message board! If you want a real game, touch a woman!

PS

See my flag!omg.. Faggot, get off my thread and go back to your boyfriend lol modalert... don't lock this thread, just get rid of this dork.

lol wheres the option for NO at on the pollSecond one down, the one that says "You only use .5% and you're still effective? Good job!"

OHHH LOL sorry, i havent been to sleep since 3:30 am last night and im dog tired lol, i thin kits time for me to crash for the night

lol wheres the option for NO at on the pollSecond one down, the one that says "You only use .5% and you're still effective? Good job!"
I only use 0.23%, and yet it is still working for me well :P

Good technology counts here, because I have less money going to the soldiers...

We don't see the need to have a 8 million men military. We think our 1.85 million strong active military is pertty effective. Having a huge active army is nothing but a waste.

In short, we'd suggest into putting more in various technology research, such as ballistic missile defence.Done... We are VERY good in defense. Our Defense systems make Raysia completely inpregnable by sea or air. Our police forces know exactly who is a citizen and who is not. Its all taken care of ;) We've got power, We've got defense, we've got diplomacy, we've got intell... the only ting we don't have is space, and i am proud not to be part of that club lol

And btw, good job on having a good military at even half the size of mine! We would have it even smaller, but a lot of our citizens just want to help defend our nation.

And as for 50 million man armies.... you could nuke them and not have to worry about collateral damage or civillians, just nuke the bases lol And as for 50000 plane airforces, order everyone to point a gun in the air and they'll hit something :P


We've got it covered.

I voted for the naval option because of my military theory (to have an army that can capture a capitol within days, which basically gives them almost no time to take mine, so they are afraid of attacking)

From what I've seen, your military theory is more geared towards castle-ization, basically making some big scary walls so the noobs will think twice..... But no defense is perfect, and they will always find a hole to slip stuff through.

Anyway, too many normal armies are slow, and a good blitzkrieg on a key target could completely negate any size advantage they may have.

So maybe a bigger fast-attack division is in order?



(ooc: in an unrelated note, I will be coming out with a new strike carrier soon, and MS Paint ownz j00)

Umm, that's exactly why I have no Navy :) Navies are too slow. I can have 150,000 men on the ground and 500 planes in the air at a nation on the other side of the world in less than 18 hours.

I see no need for navy, there is nothing they can do that my superior air force can not.

And as for defense... what do you expect me to do? I have intel, I have missile defense, i have air defense, I have coast defense, I have ground defense, i have civil defense... True there always is a way, but if they find a way in, we're prepared.

So we're nearly perfect inside and out, do we really need a 50 million man army? That's my question. It just urks me to see 50 Million pop nations with armies as big as mine ;)

You couldn't land them without a navy........If you were attacking someone on the other side of the world they would see it coming.... So basically you need a faster navy to support your planes in close proximity to the enemy.

The message is:
Do not glorify airpower to the point where you think it can work without support!



And no, you don't need a huge army, unless you want bragging rights amongst noobs.

As I said in my military factsheet thread, my Navy serves one purpose, protect the Seaborne Airstips. My planes can land on 6 Portable airstrips. THose are the only thing that are slow, which is why usually, when we do a quick expeditionary mission, we make sure we have nearby nations to land in, but our whole expeditionary force could stay in action and in the air for 24 hours without landing.


Trust me, I ahev everything thought out :) I tested it out in the worst possible case scenario, a nation with no runways and no paved roads (Dra-Pol) :)

Also, because of this, most of our ground forces are quick-deploy, an airship simply flies into combat, drops the ground forces from a safe altitude (50,000 feet) then leaves the are aoto the safest runway. VTOL transports and fighters handle a lot of stuff.

Amazing what a nation can afford when they skip Navies and keep a small air force :)

The message is:
Do not glorify airpower to the point where you think it can work without support!

IMHO, I truly agree.

Many times a group of fighters cannot stop a group of assualt ships coming.

The message is:
Do not glorify airpower to the point where you think it can work without support!

IMHO, I truly agree.

Many times a group of fighters cannot stop a group of assualt ships coming.Coming for what? If they're coming for my shore, I have other defenses there. And bombers with torpedoes could easily swarm a ship and sink it.

The bombers might win, assuming they aren't blown out of the sky by the airforce the navy is carrying.........If you attack them, they dogfight and continue moving, or are forced to retreat from damages(which would indicate bad planning on their part....)

Also: deploying troops from dropboxes is a very hazardous thing to do, not because the dropboxes provide easy SAM targets, but because they strand your forces in enemy territory. We use dropships so we have some form of escape ready for our troops, should they need to retreat. If you had to evac troops, you would be limited to your VTOL transports and such because dropboxes dont work in reverse.

Coming for what? If they're coming for my shore, I have other defenses there. And bombers with torpedoes could easily swarm a ship and sink it.

Your bombers could be shot down by SM-2s on ships before they are even in range :P

My military is 1%. In reality, that would be very large. My other nation has somewhere around .3% to .5% active troops.

My military size is almost 2% and I even think thats almost pushing it.Unless u are at war u should not have 4 or 5% of your pop in the military.

LoL Raysia, I go for the exact opposite theory. My entire armed forces is made up of naval forces (including Marines and naval aviation). However, my marines are trained to be more than just light expeditionary forces, although I don't plan on occupying a country without a large coaltion behind me, so I don't see the need for anything else. I guess its all up to personal style.

My military size is almost 2% and I even think thats almost pushing it.Unless u are at war u should not have 4 or 5% of your pop in the military.
Even 2% will affect your economy greatly, partly by taking away the labor force.

Besides, with 40+ million people in your military, I don't know how you can pay them salary or give them food without spending all your military budget.

I used 0.3% for a long time, then I droppd to 0.25%, and finally 0.23%.

Seriously...Thats all im going to say...Seriously.

Joke options are teh funneh.

Sorry.

You don't need a huge military unless you're all on your own. I have a very limited military for my size, however, my soliders are walking tanks by modern standards. (More cost per soldier in equipment/weapons/training V. more soliders with less training and equipment)

You don't need a huge military unless you're all on your own. I have a very limited military for my size, however, my soliders are walking tanks by modern standards. (More cost per soldier in equipment/weapons/training V. more soliders with less training and equipment)

Agreed.

What's the use of having a 4 million active force when you aren't in a serious war in months?

While I do focus a little more on my navy, I mostly focus on training (tactics used by soldiers, etc.), technology (technology effectiveness, "unique" creations, etc.) and effectiveness (again, use of tactics, high morale, etc.). With that, I'm pertty happy with my 1.85 mil active military.

In answer to your question: "No!"

-Dire.. ah, crap.. I need new characters!
Living ones.

Meh, if you think I am stupid enough to ONLY send bombers, then you seriously underestimate me. A UCAV force that would attack a single boat would be 2 bombers and 2 fighters. Supermaneuveranble UCAVs with advanced missiles and no pilot to worry about controlling G-forces... they can do a lot of damage to someone trying to attack the bombers.

The forces that would attack a battlegroup would obviously be much greater, possibly even a whole Air Carrier. I make up for a navy with heavily armored jumbo jets, blimps with rail guns, and Aircraft carrier planes :)

Also, only the Expedtionary Force and the Defense Force are active, the others are reserve, only used in wartime. That makes my total active military force at 1.2 Million.