NationStates Jolt Archive

Idioms: by the numbers
1. In unison as numbers are called out by a leader: performing calisthenics by the numbers.
2. In a strict, step-by-step or mechanical way.
By the book

Strictly according to the rules, as in Our trip leader is going by the book, allowing us to wander off only for short periods. Shakespeare already used the term figuratively in Romeo and Juliet (1:5): "You kiss by the book." Also see by the numbers.
There are a few things that annoy me, that just make my blood boil. And I keep seeing it on NationStates, especially International Incidents. And it keeps pissing me off. And this is going on for I don't know how long - probably before I joined. I'm not going to put a lot of thought into this, nor am I going to keep this covered in niceness and friendliness. No, this is just a plain statement of facts. So, if you are a player like me I suggest you stop reading this thread. Or skip this part and go to the more amusing paragraphs where I just prove the 'by the number' roleplayers wrong.

Now, just what exactly makes me mad? (and a lot of other players as well)

The 'no nukes when you are below age X, Y or Z'.

You know, it makes absolutely NO sense whatsoever. No matter from what angle you look at it, different perspectives. Even switching dimensions will not alter the fact this "rule" (it's an unwritten, unofficial bullshit "rule" never endorsed by the staff, mind) is the most mindless thing ever produced in NationStates. The person who made this up was either on acid or didn't want new players to be as powerful as he/she, so he/she thought this up. Who made this up, I do not care.

Source for real life populations: http://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook (http://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook)

This has to stop. As The Most Glorious Hack put it, North Korea has to be a godmodder. The United Kingdom probably is too. Let's not talk about Israel's godmodding. Iran is a godmodder too. Russia is a borderliner, since that country has +/- 140 million citizens. France is a godmodder too, they cannot have nukes! Never mind all the terrorist factions who might have small nuclear devices ready. And don't tell me Iraq isn't a godmodder since this rule also applies on WMDs as a whole. So goodbye to chemical, biochemical and biological weapons. So wait, that means WW1 was fought by a majority of godmodders? So in WW2 Nazi Germany was also godmodding their research of an atomic bomb?

HISTORY HAS TO BE REWRITTEN!

What I am trying to get across here, is that the people who promote this rule either cannot deal with or have to do this because they:

1. Cannot deal with new players owning nuclear weapons and therefore being a threat to their own security.
2. Cannot deal with people who have powerful weaponry.
3. Cannot deal with the humiliation of being defeated by a 6 or 12 or 40 million nation.
4. Their ego depends on propagating such bullshit rules, giving other people the impression they are well aware of all the NationStates ins and outs.
5. Want to show off their own superiority, either by registration date, population size or economy.
6. Are under the impression a nuclear strike means the end of your nation as it is, which is a false assumption.

I'll add more when the discussion grows. I will keep you updated on my crusade against idiocy in NationStates.

*claps*
You've made a case against the no nukes rule very well. I look forward to seeing more from you on this sort of subject

Good god, every single on your points agreed with me and vice versa, it's so true.

The whole idea that small nations have to be weak is utter crap, so they should just go "Lol yea, you're alllowed to pwn me, k?". No. If they can't match you man for man, of course they're going to bring WMD's to the game!

Yus, I agree.

1) a nuke age licence makes sense considering all nations will have enormous difficulty funding nuclear weapon programme from scratch

2) those "Godmodding" nations have all either stole or taken information from America which may I remind you spent allot of time and money developing Nukes (also U.K nukes was provided by America as an advanced base to attack Russia I see no problem if someone RP it like that)

3) the number of warmonger states on NS will surly cause a nuclear winter (even if NS is bigger than Jupiter!)

4) I hope you can back up those 6 assumptions

5) nukes are the biggest way to get your nation conquered (you won’t even get my very kind nations help)

6) these "Bullshit" rules are to help keep a balance and to help RP's

7) I don't think a larger nation would need to stop any smaller states having nukes because Nukes can be shot down and the larger nation can have more

8) a nuclear strike will mess up RP's e.g. enemy A invades but is killed by radiation

1) a nuke age licence makes sense considering all nations will have enormous difficulty funding nuclear weapon programme from scratch

2) those "Godmodding" nations have all either stole or taken information from America which may I remind you spent allot of time and money developing Nukes (also U.K nukes was provided by America as an advanced base to attack Russia I see no problem if someone RP it like that)


Our nukes were and are NOT "provided" by America, they are LEASED FROM America, there's a difference. You do realise that Atomic weaponry was a British concept that was given to the Americans to develop because we were getting bombed to smithereens at the time?

True. I agree completely. You are not alone is being pissed off either. The most annoying thing when starting my other nation (sig) was being restricted in these ways. Look at the vatican city, whats its pop? Can it afford a nuke? You betcha!

Our nukes were and are NOT "provided" by America, they are LEASED FROM America, there's a difference. You do realise that Atomic weaponry was a British concept that was given to the Americans to develop because we were getting bombed to smithereens at the time?

He speaks the truth. The Brits first conceived the idea, and handed it across. It was only fair they were leased/provided/other word which means we aquired them.

Our nukes were and are NOT "provided" by America, they are LEASED FROM America, there's a difference. You do realise that Atomic weaponry was a British concept that was given to the Americans to develop because we were getting bombed to smithereens at the time?

ah but at the time Britain was the owner of the British empire

I always thought Britain had lost most of its empire by this time. Im open to a history lesson though.

ah but at the time Britain was the owner of the British empire
So? I don't see what that has to do with anything

I'm in the middle...as in to say, I agree with both Guffingford's and CTP's arguments to an extent.

So? I don't see what that has to do with anything

um what was the empire pop?

Britain gave most of its empire independance after the war but as Rolatia said what has that got to do with nuclear weapons?

Minuta']I always thought Britain had lost most of its empire by this time. Im open to a history lesson though.
IInterestingly, I've looked at this recently on Wikipedia. A colonial power often has a period of massive disbandment - Britain started in 1947 with India and ended on the 1st of January 1984 with Brunei's indepdendence. In WWII, British Empire was basically fully intacty

Britain gave most of its empire independance after the war but as Rolatia said what has that got to do with nuclear weapons?

it means they could develop them without godmodding

See, learn something everyday! Thanks for giving me that insight.

I also don't see what it had to do with nukes. If you mean they could have been handed to a colony, you really think they could have handled it?

it means they could develop them without godmodding
I sort of understand, but it doesn't hold up too well. Like Minuta said, there is little chance of anyone handing over nukes to colonies - don't you think that there's a slight risk of deadly rebellion? Besides, if we got the nukes from the US and gave them the PLANS, colonial power is non-important

Minuta']
I also don't see what it had to do with nukes. If you mean they could have been handed to a colony, you really think they could have handled it?

in terms on money and resources we certainly could even after WWI and economic collapse (particularly in textile industry which made us so rich) but WWII was pushing it (we wouldn't of been able to win the race with how much we were putting into it compared to Harry Hun AKA Nazi Germany)

The colonial dissolution of the British Empire is all very interesting, but please do stay on topic - I'd rather not have to move this thread, after all. Thank-you!

~ Tsar the Mod.

1) a nuke age licence makes sense considering all nations will have enormous difficulty funding nuclear weapon programme from scratch

2) those "Godmodding" nations have all either stole or taken information from America which may I remind you spent allot of time and money developing Nukes (also U.K nukes was provided by America as an advanced base to attack Russia I see no problem if someone RP it like that)

3) the number of warmonger states on NS will surly cause a nuclear winter (even if NS is bigger than Jupiter!)

4) I hope you can back up those 6 assumptions

5) nukes are the biggest way to get your nation conquered (you won’t even get my very kind nations help)

6) these "Bullshit" rules are to help keep a balance and to help RP's

7) I don't think a larger nation would need to stop any smaller states having nukes because Nukes can be shot down and the larger nation can have more

8) a nuclear strike will mess up RP's e.g. enemy A invades but is killed by radiation

1. North Korea's economy sucks balls, and even they can find some spare cash to fund their own nuclear programme. It's not that difficult. Try it out someday. Even a very powerful country known as the USA is quite worried about these happenings.

2. Real life nations and NS nations do not interact. So, let's suppose this: a new nation who happened to obtain the name 'America' and and goes to the forums. America is a 5 million nation. Are they allowed to have nukes or should everybody beg our America to get nuclear weapons? Only in specific stories RL nations and NS nations collide. Nations do not buy tech from the RL UK, France, Russia. People use the tech aforementioned nations have produced. It's not borrowing, lending, hiring or anything related. It is up to the player whether he wants Russian or American military hardware.

3. Stop thinking in size. Get out of your box. Jupiter has been called into being to suit the needs for a measurment of mass. With all the earths in NS, you cannot talk of size anymore. Guffingford is a nation in a massive region in the pacific, where other large regions are located. (feeder pacifics anyone?) Size is irrelevant.

4. n/a.

5. No, nukes are a last resort kind of weapon. An everything or nothing object. Save what you can, you don't get it, I don't have it. Attacking with nuclear weapons is stupid - and there the ignore comes into play. OOC threads with RP guidelines are also for you, to make it easier to roleplay. Or (and this is something new) add a clause where you ban nuclear weapons from that specific RP, or just don't roleplay with them.

6. No. Young nations are defenceless and aren't capable of having large alliance and individual networks of allies. Nuclear weapons are the difference young nations seek. Remember the Feline Catfish situation? Or how about peaceful nuclear technology? Is that banned too in your limited vision?

7. Doesn't take away the fact you can stay out of a war if you want to. Nobody forces you to take part and start shooting down missiles. It's a matter of choice.

8. See point number 5.Here's my counter argument, have fun with it. My opinion still stands.

PS: http://search.ebay.com/search/search.dll?cgiurl=http%3A%2F%2Fcgi.ebay.com%2Fws%2F&fkr=1&from=R8&satitle=uranium&category0= Here you can buy alpha uranium. Just to illustrate how easy it is to procure uranium. If you have the connections and the know-how, I am sure you get weapons grade uranium or plutonium somewhere. Try the Ukraine or some other former Soviet republics.

1)China helped allot with that (also where is your proof that they have managed to actually develop nukes?)


2) I think it is godmod to somehow take top secret technology without any RP you could still reproduce them with allot of research (another point to add to the rule)

3) NS Earth is huge the fact that know one has had the time to map the world is a clear sign of this the Earths don't make a dent in the sheer size of NS Earth

4. no really were are these nations scared of newbie's?

5. pushing the big red button still happens (it just needs to be RP well) remember nukes can be used for offence

6. um...I fought FC remember (we were both new nations at the time) I managed to survive (FC vanished) and right now I make a point to stop invasions of smaller nations

7. I was talking about you saying large nations would be scared

furthermore don't add to my quote name:mad:

p.s you can buy uranium with the right connections your point?

1) a nuke age licence makes sense considering all nations will have enormous difficulty funding nuclear weapon programme from scratch
Considering America did it with a 1940s economy... no not really. I agree that a small, poor nation shouldnt be able to do it without help, but that isnt the same as an "age licence".

2) those "Godmodding" nations have all either stole or taken information from America which may I remind you spent allot of time and money developing Nukes (also U.K nukes was provided by America as an advanced base to attack Russia I see no problem if someone RP it like that)
Errr... no. Britain made her own nuclear warheads. We lease the missile delibery system from America, in exchange for giving Americans basing rights on our soil. Our indigenous ICBM, Bluestreak, actually worked, but it became too expensive for our 1960s - 1970s economy that was being destroyed by trade unions.

3) the number of warmonger states on NS will surly cause a nuclear winter (even if NS is bigger than Jupiter!)
No one RPs nuclear winters for the sake of gameplay. If we RPed nuclear winters, then there would be no more NS. Generally they are assumed to be confined to the nation(s) attacked.

5) nukes are the biggest way to get your nation conquered (you won’t even get my very kind nations help)
Errr... not really...

Anyone who attacks a nuclear power just because it has nuclear weapons has severe problems with sanity. Generally if the weapons are ever actually used, the nation that fired them would be destroyed pretty much instantly in retaliation anyway. That is how the nuclear deterrent works.

6) these "Bullshit" rules are to help keep a balance and to help RP's
No, they're a patronising way of imposing a largely dead concensus of what is 'reasonable' for someone to RP.

7) I don't think a larger nation would need to stop any smaller states having nukes because Nukes can be shot down and the larger nation can have more

8) a nuclear strike will mess up RP's e.g. enemy A invades but is killed by radiation
I dont see how these are arguments in favour of an age restriction.

1) America was rich for the time and had all the research of Britain, some of Germany's and the worlds best scientists might I remind you that at the end of the war America was poor?

2) err...Britain had help from America

3) what about players who like realism and maybe like the idea of (mostly) un-radioactive pacific water

4) as I stated before allot of nations have unstable leaders a nuclear attack is inevitable (even in RL albeit probly a long way away)

5) I disagree even when I was a small nation I agreed with this rule

p.s you can buy uranium with the right connections your point?I'm not going to adress your previous statements, since they're already countered and proved wrong by me and Praetonia. Still, this just shows you don't understand what I am trying to explain. I'll explain it here.

i. Every moron can buy weapons grade plutonium/uranium or any other dangerous radioactive metal.

ii. If terrorists can find a manual how to create simple nuclear devices from the internet, what is stopping a poor nation from building nukes the size of a suitcase? Hence the name 'suitcase nukes'.

iii. Detonation and delivery are not an issue when you can equip a simple bomber to drop small nuclear weapons. Or, like North Korea does, build ICBMs. That takes away the problems of aircraft and AA guns/missiles to take into consideration.

I wasn't talking about "dirty" bombs I was talking about large nuclear weapons its simple to make "dirty bombs" but more complicated weapons will require a large budget and time to test (A-bombs form the middle ground a brand new nation can't have it strait away but if the money is there they can develop it over a few NS years)

North Korea makes large nuclear weapons, and last time I checked Kim Jong Il's country, they're on a tight budget. While I agree announcing of the construction of nuclear weapons is much better RP, you cannot deny them. That's forcing your opinion onto others; which isn't a very nice way to RP. You can constitute this as godmodding on behalf of the players who deny, since you cannot tell what other people must do or can(not) have.

I never stated that I would enforce this rule I just ignore RP's/RP'ers that I think aren’t RP'ing there nations properly

I never stated that I would enforce this rule I just ignore RP's/RP'ers that I think aren’t RP'ing there nations properlyBut who are you to judge about one's roleplaying capabilities? Who are you to say a player isn't roleplaying his nation following your absurd rules and/or standards? Who are you to say someone isn't roleplaying properly?

Yes you did, you said it a couple of times to other players and you even agreed to the rule when you were a young player. So don't lie.

Excellent job.

As for the nukes thing, we should look more at the military budget the nation has than its population. A nation spending only $8 billion a year on defense probably won't be able to acquire too many nukes and keep its army running, while a nation spending $8 trillion can afford a full nuclear arsenal in addition to maintaining the army, navy, air force, etc.

Of course, this depends on whether or not you use NSEconomy/NSTracker/Sunset/Pipian/<insert name of your favorite calculator here>, which I don't... but still.

I think I have the right to ignore who I wish my reason for this is when the RP becomes unrealistic (yes I do check previous statements and nation information before I decide to do something)

I said I agreed with the rule when it was in force but mind you it was generally excepted as a rule then so that leaves the question when did I actually state that I wanted this rule to be enforced by mods?

I think I have the right to ignore who I wish my reason for this is when the RP becomes unrealistic (yes I do check previous statements and nation information before I decide to do something)
It depends on what you mean by 'unrealistic'. There are a lot of people who don't use NSEconomy's stats (or any other calculator's for that matter). Would you ignore them? I see no reason to.

This is my last post directed to you, so read this and get this through your head. You know my opinion, and I know yours - and I want to leave it with that.

You have the right to ignore, but you said that you judge about someone's roleplay capabilities, which is according to you binding. That's what you said, phrased differently. You do not want to see young countries with nukes, yet you haven't put forth a conclusive reason why I am wrong. You ignore for reasons based on prejudice and misconceptions and that is wrong. You ignore because someone don't want to see young nations with nukes.

Secondly, you are wrong about this "rule"; because it isn't a rule. It's an unwritten thing, nowhere a mod endorses this "ruling". The word "rule" is used because a better word is lacking. So stop talking about this as a "rule".

leaves due to request and the idiot calling number reaching 2

1) America was rich for the time and had all the research of Britain, some of Germany's and the worlds best scientists might I remind you that at the end of the war America was poor?
No it wasnt. It was massively rich. It had just plundered the wealth of Europe in return for equipment, and had enough money to start a multi-billion dollar (in the money of the time) aid package to rebuild Europe.

2) err...Britain had help from America
British bombs were developed independently.

3) what about players who like realism and maybe like the idea of (mostly) un-radioactive pacific water
Ok then. RP your entire nation is dead because of nuclear explosions that happened before you joined the site.

4) as I stated before allot of nations have unstable leaders a nuclear attack is inevitable (even in RL albeit probly a long way away)
Why? Because you say so? Do you have any evidence of this? Feline Catfish, the famous "n00b nuke user" actually only fired weapons in defence of his own lands. Most conflicts involving small nations with nuclear weapons were caused by larger nations attacking the smaller nations in order to enforce the very 'rule' that you are proposing in order to prevent such weapons usages.

5) I disagree even when I was a small nation I agreed with this rule
As did I, because it was what was expected, but the rule is stupid and now that the "old guard" have gone, we can change it.

(Adding my own points)

1) Noobs aren't going to nuke you if you give them room to breath. Meaning that you can't try to pull rank and invade a 5 million nation with your 5 million soldiers. If you leave your population superiority out of it, they don't nuke your invading army. It's called a trade off. The majority of people wanting to stop noobs from having nukes are only afraid of losing their population-wank status, which may be all they can RP an advantage in.

2) Who says a nuclear attack means your nation is suddenly turned to green goo? Who says a nuclear attack makes the majority of your land unpassable? The media uses "scare tactics" to drive people away from ANYTHING nuclear in RL, it appears it's sinking into NS, now.

McKagan, you hit the nail right on its head. If n00bs weren't the target of bigger nations then why would they seek weapons to blow whole cities into orbit? Just ask yourself these simple questions.

But how to end this most annoying trend? Nine out of ten agree that this "rule" is bullshit. This is the most challenging part.

1. I think people suggested a 100 million population minimum to prevent people from just RPing "OMFG! Iev g0t 100000000000 nukes! I pwn J00!!!!!111+shift_one" because there was a glut of that some time before I joined NS. I can't say that definitively because I'd be pulling it from bullshit corner, but that seems to be the reason behind the "rule." If someone takes the time to RP the development of a nuclear programme ICly and they RP it well, I'd accept it from a 5 million population country. The trouble is that quite a few players don't take the time to develop a storyline. That doesn't justify a "rule" against a nation under 100 million population developing nukes, but it at least gives you an idea of where that might come from.

2. Populations of RL countries have absolutely no bearing on NS. A nation with 1.75 billion people on RL Earth would be the largest population in the world and would consume massive amounts of energy and resources. A nation of that same size playing this game is rather insignificant compared to the 6 billion population behemoths and don't consume even a fraction of the NS world's resources.

3. I don't deny the existence of ego in NationStates where it doesn't belong. Namely, the mentality that a 12 million population country should NEVER be able to defeat a 4 billion population country with designs on being a major power. People from all "sides" seem to forget that the name of this game isn't which country wins or loses; it's which player tells the better story. If you RP your forces never taking a single loss ever, you don't have very much credence, especially if your opponent "outsmarts" you.

I'll admit I hate pre-determined outcomes with a passion and I love the challenge of trying to outsmart another player in a "fight." Having said that, you gain more respect as a RPer if you take realistic losses and you RP problems your country has. That's not to say I can't enjoy RPing in a predetermined outcome (look at the Inkanan civil war RP), but in general, I'd rather have people earn their victories.

If a 100 million n00b uses nukes like the typical n00b stereotype, an ignore is justified of course. Same holds for a 5 million n00b stereotype. The ignore has a purpose. I'm willing to recognize a lot of stuff, provided its RPed well. Just outright denying WMDs to new players is, in my opinion, a kind of godmod.

It's worth noting good roleplayers always announce the construction of nuclear weapons, and the n00bs assume they already own them.

It's worth noting good roleplayers always announce the construction of nuclear weapons, and the n00bs assume they already own them.Touche'.

It's worth repeating the story I like to tell of Praetonia developing a nuclear programme. He had a population of 97 million at the time and one of the "old timers" actually mentioned his population being under the 100 million threshold even though he'd pass that artificial mark the next day. Even though Praetonia did a fine job of RPing the development of the nuclear programme.

It's time to dump the "rule" of 100 million population = some magic "right" to develop nuclear weapons. If some 5 million population nation can RP the development well, I'll accept it.

Someone should set up a WMD Storefront that sells all types of nukes and just to nations that have under 100 million people.

It's time to dump the "rule" of 100 million population = some magic "right" to develop nuclear weapons. If some 5 million population nation can RP the development well, I'll accept it.Amen.

Someone should set up a WMD Storefront that sells all types of nukes and just to nations that have under 100 million people.

What would be the point?

You can develop nukes at practically just any population (which then leads to my next point, talked later), but the fact is that you still won't be able to build too many of them , that they aren't going to be too advanced if you are going into the double or triple-digit range (yet still with a small population), and that your choice of delivery systems is relatively limited.

Also, just a note - the capability for a nation to build nukes and population are two completely separate principles. Take China for example - being practically the largest nation in the world in terms of population, it still had some difficulties in developing a nuclear bomb, and took more than ten years to do so. Instead, one needs to note that a nation's economy however, will affect how successful the nation is at building nucler weapons & associated delivery systems. Israel has a much smaller population than North Korea yet it was quite successful in developing and producing nukes in a fair quantity, yet being able to develop an effective delivery system of their own (the Jericho 1/2/and the future 3) as well.

What would be the point?

If a large nations sold nukes at a a dirt cheap price like that, all the people who talk about how noobs can't have nukes would be screwed.

I agree utterly with Guffingford.

Allemande developed nuclear devices (officially, Allemande does not have a nuclear "weapon") when its population was between 50 and 60 million. Since Allemande started the game with a Strong economy and was modelled after your archtypical NATO member c.2000, I saw nothing wrong with this and refuse to accept accusations that I "godmodded" this as legitimate.

At the time Allemande developed nukes, I came up with a rule for determining when a new nation can have nukes. It was based on the issues one answers each day: if you answered "yes" to developing nuclear power, then you could have nukes within 2-3 weeks (15-20 NS years) thereafter. It you answered "yes" to developing WMD's, you could have them within the week (5-10 NS years). You might not have ballistic missiles (that would only come a week or so [5-10 NS years] after you said "yes" to a space program or space weapons), but at least you'd have nukes.

Or are the issues "b_llsh_t"?

Sorry, but from my POV the game play and the engine trump anything RP'ers may come up with in the way of "house rules".1) a nuke age licence makes sense considering all nations will have enormous difficulty funding nuclear weapon programme from scratchAnswered above. If the issues give you nuclear power plants, you can start enriching materials (as Iraq, Iran, India, Pakistan, and North Korea all did). If the issues give you WMD's, then you have WMD's).2) those "Godmodding" nations have all either stole or taken information from America which may I remind you spent allot of time and money developing Nukes (also U.K nukes was provided by America as an advanced base to attack Russia I see no problem if someone RP it like that)This is blatant revisionism of the sort usually displayed by Americans with an intense need to prove that America is the be-all and end-all of civilisation (I say this as an American who does not feel such a need, thank you).3) the number of warmonger states on NS will surly cause a nuclear winter (even if NS is bigger than Jupiter!)All nuclear winter studies ever done are extremely speculative at best.

It is true that a large enough explosion or set of explosions will cool the atmosphere. But humans are arrogant in comparing their puny little nukes to asteroid strikes or even massive volcanic eruptions, events which generate as much force as thousands or even millions of H-Bombs. A massive exchange involving thousands of weapons would probably have no more severe effect than the destruction of Krakatoa did. Look it up in the scientific literature if you don't believe me.4) I hope you can back up those 6 assumptionsThey seem pretty sound to me.5) nukes are the biggest way to get your nation conquered (you won’t even get my very kind nations help)And this is relevant to the debate exactly how?

If what you say is true, then we don't really need to worry about newbies with nukes, now do we? ;)6) these "Bullshit" rules are to help keep a balance and to help RP'sYou just contradicted yourself, but even leaving that aside, how does it keep balance to allow the older nations to swat smaller, newer countries like flies?

From my perspective, creating an international caste system of überpowers and munchkins is anything but balanced.7) I don't think a larger nation would need to stop any smaller states having nukes because Nukes can be shot down and the larger nation can have moreAgain, you just contradicted yourself - assuming strategic missile defenses are not in fact PMT.8) a nuclear strike will mess up RP's e.g. enemy A invades but is killed by radiationWhat? Your army doesn't have lead-lined, hermetically sealed tanks and APC's? You don't have bunny suits or decontamination units? Shame on you. ;)

No, I'm sorry. What Guffingford says makes too much sense.

oohhhh man, radiation suit warfare? One helluva RP opportunity. I wouldn't pass that up, imagine writing it out?

"The suit.... orange, plated. The dust... the dust would kill a man in minutes.

Red dust. This was the site of catastrophy. But the beating of war drums go on, undisturbed.

The geiger counter cracked. This was a high risk zone, he had only 30 minutes to finish his objective. Get past the rubble. Join with camp at the decom zone.

His boots pressed into the soft ground. The red dust gave way. He could not go swiftly here - there was no way.

A new crack opened up his senses. Gun fire.

SHIT!

He spun his head around - he faced the direction of the shots. More came. He saw the flash of the muzzle. This was his time. He lifted his weapon. Past shoulder level. The caked dirt on the gun few into the air. A quick burst. Silence fell. The sound of the falling shells muffled by the deep, red dust.

He made his way quickly. He could not run, but he had to get out quick. If there was one, there must be more."


Dayumn! How could that screw up an RP? Too much awesome?

oohhhh man, radiation suit warfare? One helluva RP opportunity. I wouldn't pass that up, imagine writing it out?

"The suit.... orange, plated. The dust... the dust would kill a man in minutes.

Red dust. This was the site of catastrophy. But the beating of war drums go on, undisturbed.

The geiger counter cracked. This was a high risk zone, he had only 30 minutes to finish his objective. Get past the rubble. Join with camp at the decom zone.

His boots pressed into the soft ground. The red dust gave way. He could not go swiftly here - there was no way.

A new crack opened up his senses. Gun fire.

SHIT!

He spun his head around - he faced the direction of the shots. More came. He saw the flash of the muzzle. This was his time. He lifted his weapon. Past shoulder level. The caked dirt on the gun few into the air. A quick burst. Silence fell. The sound of the falling shells muffled by the deep, red dust.

He made his way quickly. He could not run, but he had to get out quick. If there was one, there must be more."


Dayumn! How could that screw up an RP? Too much awesome?

DUUUDE!!!!! I'm FT and I think that sounds kick-ass!!!

It almost makes me wish most of the Radiation issues hadn't been solved by FT...

Jupiter has been called into being to suit the needs for a measurment of mass.Jupiter was the example used when the largest nation in the game hadn't yet broken the 1 billion mark. It's just as outdated as the nuke "rules".

Jupiter was the example used when the largest nation in the game hadn't yet broken the 1 billion mark. It's just as outdated as the nuke "rules".Thanks for clarifying - I didn't knew it was thát old. And thanks for the support people, it's good to know I'm not a single person shouting in a desert.

Speaking as an "ancient" with a 6+ billion population nation tucked away somewhere and a long history of sorting out RPs...

It really doesn't matter what population your nation is when you come out with nukes. If you want to play "by the numbers" you should have a good reason in mind as to why your nation has nukes. When you use nukes, or threaten to use nukes, you should have a very good idea why, and what the political consequences might be. In some cases, this can be hideously overblown - turn part of someone's invading army into a glass crater while they're invading a third country (as I did during Melkor's invasion of Rukemia, IIRC) could be just shrugged off. Or attacker (or defender) could flip out completely.

Realistically, use of nukes invites the further use of nukes, and make wars end fairly quickly. If people are willing to play out the consequences, I see nothing wrong with using nukes in NS.

At times, we've talked about chopping the per-nation population down by a factor of 10 or more, that would make things much simpler for RP purposes. I'm going to go out on a limb and suggest to those of you aiming for a "realistic" flavor that you try implementing something like that in your RPs.

I wasn't talking about "dirty" bombs I was talking about large nuclear weapons its simple to make "dirty bombs" but more complicated weapons will require a large budget and time to test (A-bombs form the middle ground a brand new nation can't have it strait away but if the money is there they can develop it over a few NS years)

Ah, but what is an "NS year", C2P? It's so open-ended that it is impossible to define. All a nation has to do is say " one day = one year," wait a few days, and voila! A nuclear weapon. It's almost as retarded as age and population limits.