NationStates Jolt Archive

Some persons are worried losing their nation they worked so hard on, if they lose wars. And many people don't know how to rp a nation that has lost a war.
This is just to give a guideline on how to rp a nation that has lost a war.

1. I attacked or was invaded by so and so and I lost. Does that mean I have to give him my nation?
Answer: No. You are not obligated to hand him your nation in real life nor are you obligated to let it "die".

2. I want to go to war again.
Answer: You have to first rebuild your economy and your military. You should wait at least one RL week before getting in another war.

3. What should I do during all that time?
Answer: You should be working on rebuilding your economy and your military. Preferably, economy would come first.

4. Wars should be thought out and planned in advance with the other person or people that will be involved in the rp. This makes the story telling better and lessens the likelyhood of Godmode wars. A good way to do this is by IM.
If you don't have IM, you can use telegrams.

5. Does this mean that I have to tell my opponent when I am going to attack him?
Answer: No. You can attack who ever you want, but they can also choose to ignore and not rp it. You can go ahead and rp taking over their nation, but it does not impact their nation unless they agree to it. Some good rps are started on the spur of the moment with nation A attacking nation B out of the blue. The problem is when either nation starts thinking he has to beat the other to avoid losing and having to let his nation die. As said before, even though you get defeated, you don't lose your nation and you don't have to let it die.

6. Can I get my nation back with nukes?
Answer: If you just your butt kicked, it is unlikely you will have nukes or other WMD's unless the victor lets you have them. In fact, nations under a week old cannot have nuclear weapons. Nations under 3 days old shouldn't have bio or chemo weapons.

7. I am rebelling against so and so with my 5 quadillion man army.
Answer: If you are being occupied, it generally means you lost a war. Therefore, you are not going to have a very big army. More likely you will start out with a couple of hundred nationalists with guns. You will need to depend on foreign generosity to resupply your rebel army with stuff like tanks, planes and ships cause you won't be able to get them yourself, until you defeat your opponent and get your independence back.

8. But all my nation's people carry guns.
Answer: You could rp that, but most people will ignore you. In every nation there will always be people who for some reason or other don't own or carry guns. Pacifism being one, incompetence being another.

9. But all of my citizens are patriots and they are all willing to die for the fatherland.
Answer: Don't forget that your citizens include people who can't fight such as the handicapped, children, and really old senior citizens. And you also have to keep in mind the pacifists who don't like war. They are not going to want to fight.

10. When you attack someone, make sure you know their tech level. If you are more advanced tech level, it is generally unfair to go to war with someone unless you have worked it out with them already by IM or TG and they are willing to rp a war with you. Though I think there could be some good war rps involving nations with different tech levels (like a war of the worlds type scenario), too many times, almost every war on NS that has involved nations with different tech levels have collapsed into godmoding wars. You can avoid this by planning the rp with the other person before attacking them. Unfortunately, improptu war rp's won't work in this type of situation. Hence, the other person needs to have prior knowledge for it to work. And only he can accept or reject that it will have any impact on his nation.
Now if you are modern tech, medieval tech, or ancient tech and you are attacked by a higher tech nation, you should expect defeat. But it is possible for a lower tech to defeat a higher tech nation if they are good at rping it. But that is a different issue.

11. From Decisive Action:
Ooc-
8- We've spent the last 20 years taking people from age 1 and throughout the school years of their life, we mold them as we want them, into the warrior and "Die for the Czar" mentality.

9- We "purified" all the crippled people, and the children as young as 10, and old men as old as 65, are expected to be ready to fight to the death if necessary. Volksstrum.
Answer: You could do both of those, but you should bear in mind that some people might ignore you if you do. Again, in such situations, it is best to have advanced communications with the person you going to war with.

12. From Frisbeeteria:
It takes time to develop a national infrastructure. I thought the conventional wisdom was that nations under 100 million generally couldn't form a nuclear program, which puts it at about a RL month or so. Younger nations could conceivably purchase WMD, but they'd be hard pressed to have anything but a secand-hand, third-rate delivery system purchased from someone else's leftovers.
Answer: A nation's nuclear capabilities are not determined by its population but rather, by its ability to pay for it. It is possible for a new nation to have nuclear weapons when it is a week old but it won't have very many of them (1 to 3 at the most) and they won't be very powerful in orders of magnituted. It should be remembered that not all nuclear weapons are the same and that a nation who has had them for a while will nukes that are 10 to 20 times more powerful and destructive than nukes that are developed by week old nations.
Example, The bomb dropped on Hiroshima destroyed a small city. The Hiroshima bomb was only America's second nuke and as such was not very powerful. In comparison, a modern American nuke can destroy the entire city of Los Angeles and half of Los Angeles County and LA County isn't what you would call a small place. Those who live there know what I am talking about.
Most nations develop their nuclear programs rather than purchasing from someoneelse. But those who do purchase, tend to improve on said delivery systems (again this takes a week).
General rule for nukes, it takes 1 rl week to develop 1 to 3 of them. The exemption would be if you had a superpower, all consuming, or freightening economy. Each of these rankings could theoretically go beyond the 3 nukes per week limit but no would be able to produce more than 6 per week. Not even frightening economies. Course the same applies to nations with billion populations, they could concievable build more nukes. So that, every half billion mark on your population, means that you build one nuke and every billion mark you can build an extra 2 nukes. The reason for this is that you a lot more people to work on your nuclear projects.
As for the chemo and bio stuff, you can make these from everyday household goods. So just about any one can make them. The 3 day limit on them is due simply to the fact that you need at least 3 rl days to get at least a decent economy and infrastructure going in your nation. Keep in mind however, that your infrastructure ain't going to be all that great if you only spend 3 days on it.

13. From Frisbeeteria:
It's actually anything but arbitrary (and isn't Whittier's limitation equally arbitrary?). There are sound reasons both IC and OOC.

RL nations don't spring up overnight with fully-formed armies, naies, and weapons programs. First World nations control the most powerful armaments by virtue of their size, longevity, and access to resources. Second World nations stay in the game by allying with First World powers.

Third World nations attempt to sneak in the game by secretly building WMD programs kept hidden from the powerhouse nations, or by buying or stealing their way into the game. New NS nations are tiny things with no significant national policy, and they grow steadily into more active powers.

OOC, new players need to get a feel for the game before n00king everything on their third or seventh day. Puppet nations don't have the same limitations, but experienced players can find ways to bring puppets (annexation, colonization, or just having a couple spares lying around building pop) in without limiting themselves to strict population factors.

There is plenty to do without "ME DELCARES WARR ON N00BIA!!!" topics. If you ask me, that's the pointless part.

Answer: That's an excellent point. Just because you are 7 days old and have a nuke or two, does not mean its a good idea to use them on other nations. This could get you:
a. annexed
b. obliterated
and/or c. ignored
Even though you have a nuke, you still want to work on your infrastructure, your economy in particular. The only reason a nation that is a week old or less should go to war is if they are the ones who have been attacked. A nation that goes on the offensive within the first 3 weeks is not good rping.


What else belongs here?

Good guide, except for the planned part. I detest players who only accept planned war RPs.

planned works sometimes. But most of the time improv is the best. Much more fun even though there is a lot of godmoding but the you just ignore those people.

Good guide, except for the planned part. I detest players who only accept planned war RPs.

I only accept war RPs from players who RP, rather than just trying to win. Sometimes a certain amount of planning is necessary to keep everyone happy. Otherwise, you end up with Hataria.

Good guide, except for the planned part. I detest players who only accept planned war RPs.
Your issue has been addressed.

OK, this needs to be stickied! Very good. thanks!

I only accept war RPs from players who RP, rather than just trying to win. Sometimes a certain amount of planning is necessary to keep everyone happy. Otherwise, you end up with Hataria.

That's true on some levels, but there are also great spontaneous war RPs (as Whittier added) that become excellent stories. Some of my best stories are born from random warring, as it suits my overall national style.

One thing that one should do is make sure that you go to war with someone that is the same tech level as you.

If you are modren tech and you declare war on a future tech, don't complain they are godmodding cause they have starship. Also don't declare war on a modren tech nation if you are future tech, it's just not right or fair.

One thing that one should do is make sure that you go to war with someone that is the same tech level as you.

If you are modren tech and you declare war on a future tech, don't complain they are godmodding cause they have starship. Also don't declare war on a modren tech nation if you are future tech, it's just not right or fair.
Addressed in point ten.

I only read part of it, don't I look like the fool.

maybe make that part 11. READ the ENTIRE post.

I only read part of it, don't I look like the fool.

maybe make that part 11. READ the ENTIRE post.
I actually added it as point 10. After reading your post, is what I meant to say.
:)

thanks

now I don't feel so stupid, and like I actually contributed something

thanks

now I don't feel so stupid, and like I actually contributed something
no problem.

8. But all my nation's people carry guns.
Answer: You could rp that, but most people will ignore you. In every nation there will always be people who for some reason or other don't own or carry guns. Pacifism being one, incompetence being another.

9. But all of my citizens are patriots and they are all willing to die for the fatherland.
Answer: Don't forget that your citizens include people who can't fight such as the handicapped, children, and really old senior citizens. And you also have to keep in mind the pacifists who don't like war. They are not going to want to fight.


Ooc-
8- We've spent the last 20 years taking people from age 1 and throughout the school years of their life, we mold them as we want them, into the warrior and "Die for the Czar" mentality.

9- We "purified" all the crippled people, and the children as young as 10, and old men as old as 65, are expected to be ready to fight to the death if necessary. Volksstrum.

Ooc-
8- We've spent the last 20 years taking people from age 1 and throughout the school years of their life, we mold them as we want them, into the warrior and "Die for the Czar" mentality.

9- We "purified" all the crippled people, and the children as young as 10, and old men as old as 65, are expected to be ready to fight to the death if necessary. Volksstrum.
Replied to in point 11.

In fact, nations under a week old cannot have nuclear weapons. Nations under 3 days old shouldn't have bio or chemo weapons.
It takes time to develop a national infrastructure. I thought the conventional wisdom was that nations under 100 million generally couldn't form a nuclear program, which puts it at about a RL month or so. Younger nations could conceivably purchase WMD, but they'd be hard pressed to have anything but a secand-hand, third-rate delivery system purchased from someone else's leftovers.

I thought the conventional wisdom was that nations under 100 million generally couldn't form a nuclear program, which puts it at about a RL month or so.

No, that's the conventional idiocy. It's arbitrary and pointless.

If you don't have to give up your nation if you lose a war then why do Sevaris and ITD and others keep telling Hataria that he's dead and that he belongs to them?

If you don't have to give up your nation if you lose a war then why do Sevaris and ITD and others keep telling Hataria that he's dead and that he belongs to them?

Because they're just as bad godmoders as Hataria.

Because they're just as bad godmoders as Hataria.

Hataria never RPed, never even tried to RP a resistance movement to retake his nation. He just pops and army of 20 million and a 1,000 ship navy out and starts declaring war left and right.

Hataria never RPed, never even tried to RP a resistance movement to retake his nation. He just pops and army of 20 million and a 1,000 ship navy out and starts declaring war left and right.
But regardless, if ITD and co won the war that doesn't mean that they own Hataria. The fact that he's a godmodder doesn't give them the right to take over him.

If invading a nation doesn't mean you control it then what's the point of war? I agree you should leave them some space to continue RPings, but that doesn't mean your nation should just get reset to its pre-war status. That's just stupid.

No, that's the conventional idiocy. It's arbitrary and pointless.
It's actually anything but arbitrary (and isn't Whittier's limitation equally arbitrary?). There are sound reasons both IC and OOC.

RL nations don't spring up overnight with fully-formed armies, naies, and weapons programs. First World nations control the most powerful armaments by virtue of their size, longevity, and access to resources. Second World nations stay in the game by allying with First World powers.

Third World nations attempt to sneak in the game by secretly building WMD programs kept hidden from the powerhouse nations, or by buying or stealing their way into the game. New NS nations are tiny things with no significant national policy, and they grow steadily into more active powers.

OOC, new players need to get a feel for the game before n00king everything on their third or seventh day. Puppet nations don't have the same limitations, but experienced players can find ways to bring puppets (annexation, colonization, or just having a couple spares lying around building pop) in without limiting themselves to strict population factors.

There is plenty to do without "ME DELCARES WARR ON N00BIA!!!" topics. If you ask me, that's the pointless part.

If you don't have to give up your nation if you lose a war then why do Sevaris and ITD and others keep telling Hataria that he's dead and that he belongs to them?
Conventional noobism of the same kind they accuse him of.
"Before trying to remove the splinter from your neighbor's eye, first remove the plank from your own eye." Jesus.

Hataria never RPed, never even tried to RP a resistance movement to retake his nation. He just pops and army of 20 million and a 1,000 ship navy out and starts declaring war left and right.
That a reason to ignore him, not harrass him and what ITD and that other fellow are doing, is looking more like harrassment than ignoring. If you notice, they follow him around to almost every thread and do the exact same thing. If you are going to ignore, that means you interact ic or (in some cases) ooc.
It means neither one exists and that nothing they do affects the other and that if nation A builds weapons, the same weapons don't exist for nation B.
Problem: What if they recognized each other before the ignore. Then the A nation weapons in nation B's arsenal should be renamed something else. This would avoid potential conflicts and confusion such as a certain one that happened recently.

If invading a nation doesn't mean you control it then what's the point of war? I agree you should leave them some space to continue RPings, but that doesn't mean your nation should just get reset to its pre-war status. That's just stupid.
Already addressed.

Updated. Thanks to Frisbeeteria.

Is it?

Is it?
Points 1,2,3,6,7,8, and 9

That a reason to ignore him, not harrass him and what ITD and that other fellow are doing, is looking more like harrassment than ignoring. If you notice, they follow him around to almost every thread and do the exact same thing. If you are going to ignore, that means you interact ic or (in some cases) ooc.
It means neither one exists and that nothing they do affects the other and that if nation A builds weapons, the same weapons don't exist for nation B.
Problem: What if they recognized each other before the ignore. Then the A nation weapons in nation B's arsenal should be renamed something else. This would avoid potential conflicts and confusion such as a certain one that happened recently.


Actually I don't ignore Hataria anymore, I consider his nation a "refugee state" where the remenants of his former nation exist on another land mass, kinda like if he formed a colony somewhere else. I support his right to exist, but only as a refugee state, until such a time when he can responsibly rp the actions of his nation.

Actually I don't ignore Hataria anymore, I consider his nation a "refugee state" where the remenants of his former nation exist on another land mass, kinda like if he formed a colony somewhere else. I support his right to exist, but only as a refugee state, until such a time when he can responsibly rp the actions of his nation.


How about I just write up the actions of his nation, TG it to him, he posts it on the forum, everybody loves it, then he can be a responsible RPer with my occasional help.

How about I just write up the actions of his nation, TG it to him, he posts it on the forum, everybody loves it, then he can be a responsible RPer with my occasional help.

No, I would much rather see him improve on his own, with support from other role-players. He does sometimes show improvement, it is just not consistent. Also, my nation hasn't taken a direct action against Hataria in months. There is nothing wrong with critiquing someone else’s work, constructive criticism is always a good thing.

How about I just write up the actions of his nation, TG it to him, he posts it on the forum, everybody loves it, then he can be a responsible RPer with my occasional help.
Holy Paradise is already trying to help him. Rather him than me!

OOC: To get off the subject and Hataria and back on the main topic of this thread, I just had my ass kicked in a naval battle and thought I'd post my losing post here as an example of one way to lose with dignity for the n00bs and newbies. It's a long post, but worth reading IMHO. I'd welcome comments though. Here goes:
-------------------------------------------

Excerpt from: A Naval History of Mauiwowee, by: David Slutchpuppy, Simon & Shooster, 1st Edition, May 2294

The first great naval battle of Mauiwowee in the 21st Century was also one of Mauiwowee's few losses in the arena of naval warfare. In 2019 the Baltic Penninsula country of Euroslavia was threatened by an armed uprising of communist insurgents. Being a staunch anti-communist, and fearing what would happen in the area if the communists gained control of Euroslavia (it must be remembered that Mauiwowee had allied itself with the nearby nation of Generia and the Generic States), King 'Lude II ("The Uniter") sent a naval fleet to the Baltic/Euroslavic sea to assist Euroslavia. Unbeknownst to King 'Lude II at the time, the nearby Grecian state of Nikoloas the Great viewed the uprising in Euroslavia as a chance to invade and conquer Euroslavia for his own ends. Nikoloas neither cared for, nor despised communism in this instance, he was merely concerned with increasing his power and holdings. Under the leadership of his son, Achillies, a Greek army massed on the border of Euroslavia. Meanwhile, Euroslavia accepted Mauiwowee's offer of aid and asked that they use their navy to attack any nation which sought to take advantage of the situation in any way and invade Euroslavia and Mauiwowee agreed.

Shortly after this agreement, Achillies and the Greek army launched an invasion of Euroslavia. True to its promise, Mauiwowee's navy in the Euroslavian sea sent in a strike force from its air craft carrier, the Bhang II to fight off the invasion. The attack apparently caught the Greek forces by surprise and over 500 tanks and heavy artillery pieces were destroyed and close to 50,000 invading Greek soldiers were killed in the Mauiwowee air strike. Marking the strike as one of the greatest single non-nuclear uses of air power in history up until that day. However, the strike was not without consequences. It was those consequences that led to the defeat of Mauiwowee's naval forces in the "Battle for the Euroslavian Sea" as the conflict has come to be known in Mauiwowee.

It didn't take long after the strike for Nikoloas and the Greeks to figure out who had launched it and where they had come from. With that information they planned and carried out a massive counter-strike against Mauiwowee's naval forces in the Eurslavian Sea (also called the Baltic Sea, but referred to here by its popular name in Mauiwowee). While equipment wise, Mauiwowee had a slight technological edge on the Greeks, the sheer number of the Greek forces coupled with the fact the Greeks were fighting in "their own back yard" so to speak, overwhelmed Mauiwowee's naval forces. For example, Mauiwowee had 2 carriers in the Euroslavian Sea, the Bhang II and the Slash. Between the 2 ships, and due to losses incurred in the earlier strike on the Greek army, Mauiwowee had only 77 planes available for the battle. Of those, 32 were Harrier 33A VTOL jets and the other 45 were F-23A "stealth" fighters and all were carrier based (the Generic Empire wishing to maintain neutrality in the conflict had refused Mauiwowee permission to use Mauiwowee's air base in the Generic Empire in the conflict). On the other hand, Nikoloas and the Greeks had over 200 aircraft, all based on land bases and outnumbered Mauiwowee by more than 3-to-1 in the air battle. The Greek craft were primarily composed of F-19A Tomcat type fighters, more or less equivalent to the Mauiwowee Harriers, but outclassed by Mauiwowee's stealth fighters. However, being out numbered by 3-to-1 odds, the Mauiwowee naval air forces didn't stand a chance. Of Mauiwowee's 72 planes, only 2 survived the conflict by making emergency landings in Euroslavia itself. Their pilots were later returned to Mauiwowee by Euroslavia. While Mauiwowee's air forces were decimated, it should be remembered that the Greek forces lost significant numbers of planes as well.

One of the more dramatic moments in the battle came when one of the Greek jets armed 8 patriot missiles, but before they could be fired the plane was struck by a targeted EMP pulse from the carrier Bhang II. When all the electronics failed on the plane, the Greek pilot, flying with a dead stick and no electronics at a speed close to Mach 1, managed to guide his plane into a direct hit on the carrier's conning tower. His plane and all 8 of his already armed missiles exploded on impact ripping the tower to pieces and causing it to collapse on the landing deck. The captain and most of the senior staff of the Bhang II were killed and it didn't take long after that for the Greek subs and other air forces to finish off the Bhang II.

It shouldn't be thought though that Mauiwowee just "rolled over" and died in the conflict. The losses to the Greek forces were significant and the victory was not without its cost to them as well. One tactic used by Mauiwowee that seemingly came as a surprise to the Greeks was the use of helicopter attacks. Mauiwowee "Blue Thunder" class choppers, flying so low their landing skids literally hit the tops of large swells in the ocean flew in at the Greek ships and launched a variety of patriot missiles and torpedos. Several Greek ships were heavily damaged as a result and more than a few were sunk as well. Apparently the low approach, speed and manuverability of the choppers hadn't been counted on and the Greek forces had a great deal of difficulty defending against these attacks. Unfortunately, Mauiwowee didn't have enough choppers (only about 20-25) available for use in this way to turn the tide in their favor. Most of the choppers (by best estimates, 15) safely returned to the Mauiwowee ships that managed to escape the area at the end of the battle.

Under the sea the going was even worse for Mauiwowee, it had 3 subs in the area, but only 2 actually were involved in the battle. The 3rd was a "special ops" sub that had landed a team of SEALs on Pirates Cove Island and when the fighting broke out, they submerged to the bottom of the channel between the island and the mainland and remained there, unnoticed by the Greeks. The captain of that sub said in a later statement that while he regretted the loss of Mauiwowee's naval forces, he knew that one more sub would make little difference in the battle's outcome and his SEAL team and their mission, on the other hand, could be of significant use in resolving the matter (apparently they were sent in to try and kidnap the sister of Euroslavia's Empress who it was feared was allied with either the Greeks or the communists). The two remaining subs were left to take on a force of approximately 20 Greek subs. It was an intense cat-and-mouse game for a while with the Mauiwowee subs possibly contributing to the sinking of a Greek ship or two and maybe one or two Greek subs. But in the end, both of Mauiwowee's subs went down with all hands lost.

At the end of the day, of Mauiwowee's two aircraft carriers, one was gone and the other so badly damaged due to craters in its landing deck from Greek missiles that it withdrew. Of the 8 battleships sent in by Mauiwowee, only 2 made it out, one of which was so badly damaged it was scuttled on the way home. The other only had 1 working gun turrent and ran on backup electrical power. Of Mauiwowee's 6 destroyers, only 1 made it out. Luckily it was relatively unscathed and it provided the cover for the other escaping Mauiwowee vessels. All 4 of Mauiwowee's medical ships escaped (and the Greeks must be congratulated on their decision not to fire on the medical ships and the captains of those ships must be congratulated on not entering into the frey despite their relatively strong combat capabilities). Both of Mauiwowee's sub-hunter ships were lost as well. It is believed they sunk a few subs, or at least damaged them, but no official stats could be located for this publication. Also, as noted above, the two Mauiwowee subs in the conflict were lost as well; with a 3rd sub remaining in the area, unknown to the Greeks, and involved in a special ops. task. All said and done that day, over 21,000 Mauiwowee sailors and pilots lost their lives and close to 1,200 were taken as prisoner of war by the Greeks after being picked up from the sea from ditched aircraft and sunken ships. In the next section we'll review the battle from the Greek perspective and review the figures on their losses in the battle as well as discuss what became of the POW's.

One final issue should be considered. What if the Greeks had left Mauiwowee alone, they (the Greeks) would not have suffered the losses they did which were significant, make no bones about it (though obviously not as bad as Mauiwowee's). However, if left alone, Mauiwowee's ability to intervene after the first air strike would have been limited to a few well placed surgical strikes and the odd cruise missile into Greek territory. Mauiwowee had no ground forces in the area and after the attack on the armoured column as it advanced into Euroslavia, they were severely limited in their ability to make significant strikes on the Greeks. It may be for this reason, after viewing the losses they were taking and had already taken in the sea battle, that the Greeks allowed the few Mauiwowee ships to withdraw that they did.

Real world nuclear programs developed from scratch ... just one, the United States (with considerable assistance from British and refugee Allied scientists)

The Soviet Union had considerable help from espionage (but built everything themselves and developed their own H Bomb)

France and Britian had considerable technical assistance from the US

India, China almost certainly had to develop their own, but by that point, nukes had been around almost 20 years

Israel probably was given US nuclear material (built its own reactor and had its own scientists)

South Africa (still uncertain if they ever actually had nukes) would certainly have gotten help from Israel

Japan and Germany (and for that matter, Taiwan, South Korea, and nearly every country in Western Europe) could easily develop weapons in a very short space of time (have sizeable nuclear power industries)

Most of the development costs in the US and Soviet programs were determining IF it could be done and exactly how, most of the other programs knew both, and only had to build facilities

Pakistan built its weapons on its own, possibly with Chinese help (nearly 50 years after Hiroshima)

any nation with a breeder reactor, a few billion dollars (at most) and access to scientists trained in Western Universities can build a bomb... its the weapons grade material that is the hard part (and the most time consuming and hard to hide)

Only the US, Soviet Union, China and India had populations over 100 million when they developed their nuclear weapons

Therefore, a nation with a population base in the 20 - 50 million range, with a good economy, access to uranium and nuclear reactors (both of which show up in the game routinely) could conceavably develop first generation fission weapons in a fairly short time, and second generation (the first H bombs) shortly after that.... they don't have to figure out how to do it, they just have to set aside a goodly chunk of their national budgets for a few years at most (which to my mind, with population growing by the millions every game day, is pretty quick)

Israel, France, Britain all have populations under 50 million (and Israel only has about 6 million or so)

Kinda scary isn't it...

Luckily, in the real world, the nuclear powers tend to keep an eye on those nations with nuclear programs, especially as they know what to look for

As far as rockets go (and I mean missiles)... only the US has developed a reliable long range cruise missile capable of strategic missions, the Soviets (now Russians), Israelis, French, Norwegians, Swedes, and Chinese have developed cruise missiles with substantial regional range (more than 50 miles but less than 500 in all cases).. and Norway and Israel would be considered small nations in this game (with good economy for Norway, and a fair economy for Israel)

There is a way in the game for even a small nation to develop space flight (the private space sector option where you develop a Pepsi shaped rocket)

so in the right circumstances, according to the game itself, it would seem possible for even a really small state (in relative terms) to develop a MRBM with a nuclear warhead

It costs $20 million dollars to build a hardened silo capable of storing an ICBM...

no one has every fired a missile out of the silo it was stored in ... all US and Soviet ICBM tests were conducted by taking the missile out of th silo, shipping it to a test range, putting it in a test silo (after reconditioning the missile after transport) and then launching it.... even then, some break

estimates are that roughly 20% of all US ICBMs in silos at the height of Cold War would simply malfunction.... and no one knows what effects the magnetic field differences at the North Pole would have had on guideance systems of the day (which were entirely inertial)....its likely that about HALF would have worked like they were supposed too

for a time, the Polaris Missile carried aboard US submarines would launch just fine, but the warheads didn't work (took a few years to fix too)

ONLY the US has developed reliable solid rocket ICBMs, everybody else uses liquid fuel (and it takes a few hours to fuel them up before launch too)

And the Challenger disaster is a good illustration of how completely reliable solid rockets always are

Most of the SCUDS lauched at US forces in the First Gulf War broke up in flight (even before they got hit by a Patriot)

Which is why Warsaw, under the US SIOP (single integrated operation plan) for World War 3 had 135 nuclear warheads assigned (including B52s dropping real big H Bombs)

Just because you have a nuke, doesnt mean you have a delivery system now does it

Most container ships, freighters and other commercial ships are not inspected (even now) before entering harbor... and even a big, experimental type, H Bomb could easily fit into the hull of your average commercial cargo ship, along with shielding sufficient to hide it from routine scans

the big ports are huge cities

the first H Bomb was a 15 megaton blast (and wasn't intended to be that big either..oops)

Consider that for a moment

Ooc-
8- We've spent the last 20 years taking people from age 1 and throughout the school years of their life, we mold them as we want them, into the warrior and "Die for the Czar" mentality.

9- We "purified" all the crippled people, and the children as young as 10, and old men as old as 65, are expected to be ready to fight to the death if necessary. Volksstrum.

There's a second problem with this. Soldiers who are willing to "die for the Czar" are not willing to live for themselves. This results in soldiers who take stupid chances and lack the "common sense" to get out of trouble or find a better way to do things. In short - a strong soldier, but a rather dumb one where adaptability of thought is concerned. Why is this the case? Because the drive of self-preservation has been removed by the program. Yes, you can perform a WWI mass front attack, and in many cases you'll win. However, the Audie Murphy's and Sgt Yorks of the world will beat the pants off them because they're motivated by blatant self-interest ("I want to live and get back to my life") rather then "MUST DIE FOR CAUSE!".

This is proven in WWI and was proven again in WWII and Korea.

In the field of battle - as in evolution - the battle goes not to the strongest, but the most adaptable.

Both Germany and Japan had nuclear programs in World War 2... both were severely (and fatally) underfunded, lacked sufficient numbers of scientific talent (especially Japan, which had only one world class physicist working on the idea, and he came up with a microwave type death ray.. never used but worked in tests)...

Both were on the wrong track (heavy water simply is less effective than the 2 approaches Los Alamos used) and failed to build a nuclear reactor (problems with supply for one thing, Allied bombing was important there)

Neither had national governments who realized just how important those weapons would have been

Although both had bombers capable of carrying a Hiroshima type bomb (no way the V2 or even V4 would have though.. not enough payload lift)

In terms of population, industrial capacity and numbers of educated scientists.. Japan had about 60 million people, a fair (at best economy) and was under war time pressures.. and they knew exactly what happened at Hiroshima within hours of the reports (that is, their Scientists knew)

Germany was a LOT more powerful economically than Japan

both would be considered relatively young nations in this game

and all of the information I have related is open source material, easily gleaned by a moderately well educated person who reads a lot, and there is open source material out there giving you all you need to know to build a nuclear weapon

its the nuclear material thats hard to get unless you have a Breeder Reactor.. costs about 2 Billion to buy from a Western Nation like France or the Russians, where its even cheapier (although not as reliable)

guide to losing a war?.....

rule #1)
BE FRENCH

The Waffen SS combat units (the elite panzer types mostly) had consistently higher casualty rates than equiv Wehrmacht units in every single action they fought in ... of course they had better equipment, more of it, and first priority for replacements.. which made them formidable (and they had a die for the Fuhrer philosphy very much like the one DA has stated his troops have)

Japan of course took that to the extreme, as did Iran in the Iran Iraq War... both suffered monstrous casualties, and lost

World War I wasn't neccessaryly a slaughter because everyone wanted to die for their country, its just that tactical problems like lack of tactical communications, lack of tactical mobility, and the huge front without any flanks made for a couple of years of sheer slaughter until everyone adapted (the Allies by developing tanks, the Germans by coming up with better infantry tactics)

Paraguay in the 1860s developed an army like DAs, and three nations made sure that they all died for their country too (Brazil, Uruguay and Argentina).. most adult males in Paraguay died in that war.. guess who lost (and it wasn't the three allied countries)

Patton said it best... winning a war is about making the other poor dumb bastard die for his country

The Waffen SS combat units (the elite panzer types mostly) had consistently higher casualty rates than equiv Wehrmacht units in every single action they fought in ... of course they had better equipment, more of it, and first priority for replacements.. which made them formidable (and they had a die for the Fuhrer philosphy very much like the one DA has stated his troops have)

Japan of course took that to the extreme, as did Iran in the Iran Iraq War... both suffered monstrous casualties, and lost

World War I wasn't neccessaryly a slaughter because everyone wanted to die for their country, its just that tactical problems like lack of tactical communications, lack of tactical mobility, and the huge front without any flanks made for a couple of years of sheer slaughter until everyone adapted (the Allies by developing tanks, the Germans by coming up with better infantry tactics)

Paraguay in the 1860s developed an army like DAs, and three nations made sure that they all died for their country too (Brazil, Uruguay and Argentina).. most adult males in Paraguay died in that war.. guess who lost (and it wasn't the three allied countries)

Patton said it best... winning a war is about making the other poor dumb bastard die for his country

My first thought was "The Charge of the Light Brigade" - classic example of "must die for my country" thinking. So was most of the Franco-Prussian war, come to think of it...

My thought has always gone to "if they can RP it, they can have it".

Vastiva began the game with eight B-52s and sixteen airdropped nuclear weapons, leftovers from the nation which had "had friendly military advisors" in the nation to "keep the peace alive". Simple explanation, infrastructure, and nuclear weapons.

Ever use them? Nope. To date, Vastiva has not fired a nuclear weapon, though we now possess thousands of missiles overall, mostly in submarine platforms.

Did it make a huge difference? Not really. It worked part of our MAD doctrine, but not much beyond that - though it did give Vastiva a direction to go.

Oh yes - Finnish commandoes destroyed the only heavy water plant the Nazi's had access to, and their chief nuclear scientist had to start from scratch as all his notes were flown into Allied hands - along with the Jewish scientist who had helped him make them.


Wars in general should never be looked at as "I MUST WIN, I WILL ROOL U ALL!" structures, but as interactive games. We're ALL here to have fun - including the people you're pounding on.

Basic Rule - if you're emotionally involved to the point where losing is "unforgivable", you're too involved. Take a walk, clear your head. This is a GAME, not real life. Its not worth being a butthead over.

Is losing a war "fun"? Well, it can be, particularly if you have rp'ed the whole thing out. There's nothing wrong with losing, and it has its own dramatic potential - such as rebuilding your nation.

Remember - the US beat Germany and Japan in WW2 - and then helped rebuild them both, which lead to their being economic powerhouses later.

Its all in how you play.

8- We've spent the last 20 years taking people from age 1 and throughout the school years of their life, we mold them as we want them, into the warrior and "Die for the Czar" mentality.

9- We "purified" all the crippled people, and the children as young as 10, and old men as old as 65, are expected to be ready to fight to the death if necessary. Volksstrum.


I don’t want to get into the “how realistic” having a whole society geared for war, but rather see if we can address some problems:

1) What percentage of the population do you have indoctrinated in this program? It will be impossible to have all since indoctrination itself isn’t perfect and you will always have those who question the system – albeit they may be underground. As well, if you’ve been doing in for 20 years, then it seems to me like a relatively short time – that is, only one generation is like this. Long term effects of this are unknown.

2) The ones who are indoctrinated; can they do anything else? Can they work on a farm or a factory or do you have an entire generation itching for conflict If all they think about is “dying for the Czar” then they could start infighting amongst themselves if they aren’t given a target sooner or later. Or perhaps some opportunistic individuals could declare themselves “Czar” and lead a civil war.

3) You need a MASSIVE internal security and educational apparatus to make this work. And this assumes that everyone in the system is in 100% agreement with it. Think 1984, they had to keep the population focused outward so folks won’t start looking inwards at all of their problems.

4) I’m not sure what you mean by “purified” here. Did the cripples undergo surgery to make them combat capable? Then you must have a MASSIVE medical system to make this work.

5) I figure that not all your citizens may be on the front lines and that one can “die for the Czar” equally in a support role. That is, all the roles are seen as of equal importances. That might eliminate some problems.

6) What happens if the Czar dies? You would have a huge general malaise to deal with. Think Japan after the end of the second world war - but probably much worse. Cut off the head and the body dies.

I'd just like to point out that losing a war doesn't neccesarily mean your nation will be occupied.

OOC: To get off the subject and Hataria and back on the main topic of this thread, I just had my ass kicked in a naval battle and thought I'd post my losing post here as an example of one way to lose with dignity for the n00bs and newbies. It's a long post, but worth reading IMHO. I'd welcome comments though. Here goes:
-------------------------------------------

Excerpt from: A Naval History of Mauiwowee, by: David Slutchpuppy, Simon & Shooster, 1st Edition, May 2294

The first great naval battle of Mauiwowee in the 21st Century was also one of Mauiwowee's few losses in the arena of naval warfare. In 2019 the Baltic Penninsula country of Euroslavia was threatened by an armed uprising of communist insurgents. Being a staunch anti-communist, and fearing what would happen in the area if the communists gained control of Euroslavia (it must be remembered that Mauiwowee had allied itself with the nearby nation of Generia and the Generic States), King 'Lude II ("The Uniter") sent a naval fleet to the Baltic/Euroslavic sea to assist Euroslavia. Unbeknownst to King 'Lude II at the time, the nearby Grecian state of Nikoloas the Great viewed the uprising in Euroslavia as a chance to invade and conquer Euroslavia for his own ends. Nikoloas neither cared for, nor despised communism in this instance, he was merely concerned with increasing his power and holdings. Under the leadership of his son, Achillies, a Greek army massed on the border of Euroslavia. Meanwhile, Euroslavia accepted Mauiwowee's offer of aid and asked that they use their navy to attack any nation which sought to take advantage of the situation in any way and invade Euroslavia and Mauiwowee agreed.

Shortly after this agreement, Achillies and the Greek army launched an invasion of Euroslavia. True to its promise, Mauiwowee's navy in the Euroslavian sea sent in a strike force from its air craft carrier, the Bhang II to fight off the invasion. The attack apparently caught the Greek forces by surprise and over 500 tanks and heavy artillery pieces were destroyed and close to 50,000 invading Greek soldiers were killed in the Mauiwowee air strike. Marking the strike as one of the greatest single non-nuclear uses of air power in history up until that day. However, the strike was not without consequences. It was those consequences that led to the defeat of Mauiwowee's naval forces in the "Battle for the Euroslavian Sea" as the conflict has come to be known in Mauiwowee.

It didn't take long after the strike for Nikoloas and the Greeks to figure out who had launched it and where they had come from. With that information they planned and carried out a massive counter-strike against Mauiwowee's naval forces in the Eurslavian Sea (also called the Baltic Sea, but referred to here by its popular name in Mauiwowee). While equipment wise, Mauiwowee had a slight technological edge on the Greeks, the sheer number of the Greek forces coupled with the fact the Greeks were fighting in "their own back yard" so to speak, overwhelmed Mauiwowee's naval forces. For example, Mauiwowee had 2 carriers in the Euroslavian Sea, the Bhang II and the Slash. Between the 2 ships, and due to losses incurred in the earlier strike on the Greek army, Mauiwowee had only 77 planes available for the battle. Of those, 32 were Harrier 33A VTOL jets and the other 45 were F-23A "stealth" fighters and all were carrier based (the Generic Empire wishing to maintain neutrality in the conflict had refused Mauiwowee permission to use Mauiwowee's air base in the Generic Empire in the conflict). On the other hand, Nikoloas and the Greeks had over 200 aircraft, all based on land bases and outnumbered Mauiwowee by more than 3-to-1 in the air battle. The Greek craft were primarily composed of F-19A Tomcat type fighters, more or less equivalent to the Mauiwowee Harriers, but outclassed by Mauiwowee's stealth fighters. However, being out numbered by 3-to-1 odds, the Mauiwowee naval air forces didn't stand a chance. Of Mauiwowee's 72 planes, only 2 survived the conflict by making emergency landings in Euroslavia itself. Their pilots were later returned to Mauiwowee by Euroslavia. While Mauiwowee's air forces were decimated, it should be remembered that the Greek forces lost significant numbers of planes as well.

One of the more dramatic moments in the battle came when one of the Greek jets armed 8 patriot missiles, but before they could be fired the plane was struck by a targeted EMP pulse from the carrier Bhang II. When all the electronics failed on the plane, the Greek pilot, flying with a dead stick and no electronics at a speed close to Mach 1, managed to guide his plane into a direct hit on the carrier's conning tower. His plane and all 8 of his already armed missiles exploded on impact ripping the tower to pieces and causing it to collapse on the landing deck. The captain and most of the senior staff of the Bhang II were killed and it didn't take long after that for the Greek subs and other air forces to finish off the Bhang II.

It shouldn't be thought though that Mauiwowee just "rolled over" and died in the conflict. The losses to the Greek forces were significant and the victory was not without its cost to them as well. One tactic used by Mauiwowee that seemingly came as a surprise to the Greeks was the use of helicopter attacks. Mauiwowee "Blue Thunder" class choppers, flying so low their landing skids literally hit the tops of large swells in the ocean flew in at the Greek ships and launched a variety of patriot missiles and torpedos. Several Greek ships were heavily damaged as a result and more than a few were sunk as well. Apparently the low approach, speed and manuverability of the choppers hadn't been counted on and the Greek forces had a great deal of difficulty defending against these attacks. Unfortunately, Mauiwowee didn't have enough choppers (only about 20-25) available for use in this way to turn the tide in their favor. Most of the choppers (by best estimates, 15) safely returned to the Mauiwowee ships that managed to escape the area at the end of the battle.

Under the sea the going was even worse for Mauiwowee, it had 3 subs in the area, but only 2 actually were involved in the battle. The 3rd was a "special ops" sub that had landed a team of SEALs on Pirates Cove Island and when the fighting broke out, they submerged to the bottom of the channel between the island and the mainland and remained there, unnoticed by the Greeks. The captain of that sub said in a later statement that while he regretted the loss of Mauiwowee's naval forces, he knew that one more sub would make little difference in the battle's outcome and his SEAL team and their mission, on the other hand, could be of significant use in resolving the matter (apparently they were sent in to try and kidnap the sister of Euroslavia's Empress who it was feared was allied with either the Greeks or the communists). The two remaining subs were left to take on a force of approximately 20 Greek subs. It was an intense cat-and-mouse game for a while with the Mauiwowee subs possibly contributing to the sinking of a Greek ship or two and maybe one or two Greek subs. But in the end, both of Mauiwowee's subs went down with all hands lost.

At the end of the day, of Mauiwowee's two aircraft carriers, one was gone and the other so badly damaged due to craters in its landing deck from Greek missiles that it withdrew. Of the 8 battleships sent in by Mauiwowee, only 2 made it out, one of which was so badly damaged it was scuttled on the way home. The other only had 1 working gun turrent and ran on backup electrical power. Of Mauiwowee's 6 destroyers, only 1 made it out. Luckily it was relatively unscathed and it provided the cover for the other escaping Mauiwowee vessels. All 4 of Mauiwowee's medical ships escaped (and the Greeks must be congratulated on their decision not to fire on the medical ships and the captains of those ships must be congratulated on not entering into the frey despite their relatively strong combat capabilities). Both of Mauiwowee's sub-hunter ships were lost as well. It is believed they sunk a few subs, or at least damaged them, but no official stats could be located for this publication. Also, as noted above, the two Mauiwowee subs in the conflict were lost as well; with a 3rd sub remaining in the area, unknown to the Greeks, and involved in a special ops. task. All said and done that day, over 21,000 Mauiwowee sailors and pilots lost their lives and close to 1,200 were taken as prisoner of war by the Greeks after being picked up from the sea from ditched aircraft and sunken ships. In the next section we'll review the battle from the Greek perspective and review the figures on their losses in the battle as well as discuss what became of the POW's.

One final issue should be considered. What if the Greeks had left Mauiwowee alone, they (the Greeks) would not have suffered the losses they did which were significant, make no bones about it (though obviously not as bad as Mauiwowee's). However, if left alone, Mauiwowee's ability to intervene after the first air strike would have been limited to a few well placed surgical strikes and the odd cruise missile into Greek territory. Mauiwowee had no ground forces in the area and after the attack on the armoured column as it advanced into Euroslavia, they were severely limited in their ability to make significant strikes on the Greeks. It may be for this reason, after viewing the losses they were taking and had already taken in the sea battle, that the Greeks allowed the few Mauiwowee ships to withdraw that they did.

Good job.

guide to losing a war?.....

rule #1)
BE FRENCH
What if you're not French???
rule 2) Ask a French!

Both Germany and Japan had nuclear programs in World War 2... both were severely (and fatally) underfunded, lacked sufficient numbers of scientific talent (especially Japan, which had only one world class physicist working on the idea, and he came up with a microwave type death ray.. never used but worked in tests)...

Both were on the wrong track (heavy water simply is less effective than the 2 approaches Los Alamos used) and failed to build a nuclear reactor (problems with supply for one thing, Allied bombing was important there)

Neither had national governments who realized just how important those weapons would have been

Although both had bombers capable of carrying a Hiroshima type bomb (no way the V2 or even V4 would have though.. not enough payload lift)

In terms of population, industrial capacity and numbers of educated scientists.. Japan had about 60 million people, a fair (at best economy) and was under war time pressures.. and they knew exactly what happened at Hiroshima within hours of the reports (that is, their Scientists knew)

Germany was a LOT more powerful economically than Japan

both would be considered relatively young nations in this game

and all of the information I have related is open source material, easily gleaned by a moderately well educated person who reads a lot, and there is open source material out there giving you all you need to know to build a nuclear weapon

its the nuclear material thats hard to get unless you have a Breeder Reactor.. costs about 2 Billion to buy from a Western Nation like France or the Russians, where its even cheapier (although not as reliable)

Japan actually almost had the bomb before the US did. The reason they didn't is that the US found and sunk the submarine that was carrying the uranium for it. Niether Germany's nor Japan's nuclear programs were underfunded.
Both came very close to having the atom bomb before the Americans and the only thing that stopped Germany's bomb was allied victory in the invasion of Normandy which forced Hitler to shift resources.

Japan actually almost had the bomb before the US did. The reason they didn't is that the US found and sunk the submarine that was carrying the uranium for it. Niether Germany's nor Japan's nuclear programs were underfunded.
Both came very close to having the atom bomb before the Americans and the only thing that stopped Germany's bomb was allied victory in the invasion of Normandy which forced Hitler to shift resources.

Actually, what stopped Germany's bomb was saboteurs blowing theplant they were using to make heavy water all to hell. Without that, their nuclear program was screwed.

Well, actually, its was Norwegian commandos who sabatoged the German heavy water program (not the Finns).... and most historians believe that the Germans were years away from a successful chain reaction... apparently there were some very serious flaws in the line of thinking they were using

The Japanese Uranium wouldn't have made the slightest difference...uranium is merely the very first step in the nuclear materials process. They didn't have even a design for a nuclear pile, and without it, there is not going to be a nuke (Chicago test was in 1942, nobody else during the war even got near that far)

Besides, a good book on alternative history, called Hitler Victorious, discusses the possibilities of a more successful German program and the fact that every single heavy bomber in the USAAF and RAF would have flattened any major facility discovered, and you just can't build that kind of thing anywhere like you can an underground rocket plant. That kind of bombing alone delayed the V1 and V2 program for almost a year.

The Allies would have simply used their first nuke on the Germans instead if it had come to it and the war was delayed further (which was the primary choice anyway ... remember most of the scientists who fled to the US were fleeing the NAZIs after all)

My point though is that even a relatively second rate industrial nation can build nuclear weapons.... its the reliable delivery systems that are actually much harder to produce (by the way, I am also New Kern in case anyone is wondering)

Well, actually, its was Norwegian commandos who sabatoged the German heavy water program (not the Finns).... and most historians believe that the Germans were years away from a successful chain reaction... apparently there were some very serious flaws in the line of thinking they were using

Now you're going to make me track this down? Feh. It was Finn commandoes that blew up the heavy water facility in Finland, which was Germany's only source.

My point though is that even a relatively second rate industrial nation can build nuclear weapons.... its the reliable delivery systems that are actually much harder to produce (by the way, I am also New Kern in case anyone is wondering)

Agreed.

Members of the Norwegian Resistance, operating with British Support (ie arms, ammunition, explosives, and so on) blew up the Heavy Water Plant the Germans needed. I forget where it was, but the names Hellendoorn and Tellemark come to mind, although that may be because I've been playing too much Battlefield 1942... :)