NationStates Jolt Archive

To: All Foreign Nations
From: Gordonopian Arms, THE choice for the Gordonopian army for over 26 years

Greetings, and welcome to the Gordonoian Arms Storefront.

About Us: Founded 53 years ago as a civilian arms maker, we became the Gordonopian Military's supplier 26 years ago, and have been since. Now we have gone global, and are willing to sell our most up to date products to militaries worldwide!

We have for sale items in the following categories

Small Arms
Vehicles and Tanks
Planes
Ships

Sincerely,
James Thorpe, C.E.O., Gordonopian Arms

P.S. As We have just recently opened to the world market, we do not have many items for sale as many of our weapons are partially owned by the Gordonopian Government and are not for sale. We expect to have more soon.
P.S.S. If you are the original creator of a product sold, and have a problem with us selling it, feel free to contact us.

And for our weapons buying program, visit http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?p=13899738&posted=1#post13899738

Small Arms

HCC (High Caliber Combat) Sub-Machine Gun: 3000 USD {Gordonopian Original}
Developed in 2004, this sub-machine gun is used in all Gordonopian Embassies worldwide. It is also the main armament of Gordonopian infantry soldiers. A high rate of fire combined with a long range and a high caliber bullet, this sub-machine gun is a great choice for infantry.

HCD (High Caliber Defense) Assault Rifle: 4000 USD {Gordonopian Original}
Developed in 2005, this assault rifle is the second most common primary weapon for soldiers and embassy security in Gordonopia. It has a higher caliber bullet, a longer range, but a lower rate of fire than that of the HCC sub-machine gun.

LR50 (Long Range .50) Sniper Rifle: 7500 USD {Gordonopian Original}
This Sniper Rifle was developed in 2002. It has a high powered scope and a range of 5000 feet. It also includes semi-automatic feature that increases rate of fire, but reduces accuracy.

SR45 (Short Range .45) Handgun: 500 USD {Gordonopian Original}
This handgun is carried by all military and government employed security personnel. It is semi-automatic, and is accurate up to 600 feet. The maximum range is 700 feet.

Vehicles and Tanks

Humvee: 70000 USD {Gordonopian Original}
This is the primary vehicle of the Gordonopian Military. Armed with a .50 caliber Machine Gun, this vehicle has the capability to navigate almost any terrain.

Unarmed Transport Humvee: 60000 USD {Gordonopian Original}
This is exactly the same as a regular Humvee, except that it has no machine gun and slightly thicker armor. It's main uses are to transport troops quickly and safely, and, because of its lack of armament, embassy transportation.

A-6B Main Battle Tank: 6.5 Million USD {Gordonopian Original}
This tank is currently in use in the Gordonopian Military. With a 105mm Gun as its primary weapon, as well as 2 .50 caliber machine guns this tank is a formidable weapon. It's 70mm a strong protection for the crew.

A-34/85: 80000 USD {Developed By Restoration International} Bargain
A modified version of the T-34/85 Tank with a 180 degree field of fire, and a large troop compartment on the back, capable of carrying approximately 8 passengers. Great for new nations with low budgets.

T-34/120: 100000 USD {Developed By Restoration International} Bargain
A modified T-34 chassis, with the turret replaced with a stryker MGS-style 120mm Cannon. Gunner gains seat behind driver and Pintle MG (You must choose the MG on your own). Great for new nations with low budgets.

Aircraft

ASLS (Air Sea Land Superiority) Cessna Citation Columbus: 40 Million USD {Gordonopian Original}
This new aircraft was created in 2007. It functions as a mobile command post. With room for 20 people, and a complex computer system, this aircraft is a must for modern warfare.

CF-1 (Combat Fighter): 100 Million USD {Gordonopian Original}
Designed in 2003, this is the first in the new CF class of fighters. It carries 1 super high rate of fire Gattling gun, 10 AAM's, and 4 ASM's. It's top speed is Mach 1.75.

TB-1 (Tactical Bomber): 115 Million USD {Gordonopian Original}
This bomber, released at the same time as the CF-1 is the latest bomber designed by us. It can carry up to 30,000 lbs. of bombs, and can be ordered from us with smart bomb capabilities.

OOC: Good basis but you dont have enough to start a storefront yet. Add more and make them, well, better so people actualy want to buy them.

Ships

Perkins Class Carrier: 4 Billion USD {Gordonopian Original}
This Carrier has the capability to hold 100 aircraft and 3000 crew members. In addition to it's aircraft, it contains 16 SAMs for air defense and 5 close-in-weapons-systems. It is equipped with the most up to date Radar and Sonar systems available.

Lincoln Class Cruiser: 1 Billion USD {Gordonopian Original}
This Modern Missile Cruiser contains 60 missiles of varying purposes. It has room for a crew of 350. It is equipped with the most up to date Radar systems available.

Hyperion Class Destroyer: 800 Million USD {Gordonopian Original}
This Destroyer hs room for a crew of 300 and is armed with 30 missles of varying purposes, as well as 4 anti-submarine torpedo tubes. It is equipped with the most up to date Sonar systems available.

OOC: Tip on the navy. Mainly you want it to require less crew as to not strain the country's military so much.

-Bump-

Vehicles and Tanks

A-6B Main Battle Tank: 65 Million USD {Gordonopian Original}
This tank is currently in use in the Gordonopian Military. With a 105mm Gun as its primary weapon, as well as 2 .50 caliber machine guns this tank is a formidable weapon. It's 70mm a strong protection for the crew.

A-34/85: 80000 USD {Developed By Restoration International}
A modified version of the T-34/85 Tank with a 180 degree field of fire, and a large troop compartment on the back, capable of carrying approximately 8 passengers.


OOC: $65 million is WAY too much for a single tank, especially one that's really not that good.

As for the T-34, it's completely useless against any halfway modern tank. Also, I'm curious as to just how you cram eight people in the tiny rear space at the rear without increasing the tank's size significantly?

OOC: $65 million is WAY too much for a single tank, especially one that's really not that good.

As for the T-34, it's completely useless against any halfway modern tank. Also, I'm curious as to just how you cram eight people in the tiny rear space at the rear without increasing the tank's size significantly?
For the T-34, don't ask me, I didn't design it, it's being sold through me.
As for he 65 million tank, that was a typo, it's meant to be 6.5 million, thanks for letting me know.

-bump-

-bump-

I'm the guy who made the T-34/120 and A-34/85, Both of them are fitted with modern day Composite armor, like on the M1

-bump-

That wouldn't make it possible to store eight people in one tank.

mabye it includes crew?

That could be true, since an average tank runs on four people meaning it's got four passengers at any one time if that's the case.

OOC: Hi there. Nice to see you've taken the step to setting up your own storefront and things, but some friendly advice first. You should really go to the NationStates Draftroom (link) (http://z4.invisionfree.com/nsdraftroom) where all the good designers take their designs to be critiqued and improved. To be polite, the best I can say is your designs have some issues.

No-one with any experience of design will buy something that is entirely described with one short paragraph. It also seems incredibly badly researched, you've ripped off the united states military, and some of these things are simply unfeasible. By Draftroom standards, my designs are in the average to good bracket. However, look how detailed my designs are compared to yours. (Link 1 (http://z4.invisionfree.com/NSDraftroom/index.php?showtopic=3925)) (Link 2 (http://z4.invisionfree.com/NSDraftroom/index.php?showtopic=3718))

And I'm not even a good designer. Sorry to break this to you, but maybe better to come back when you truly know how to design. Thanks.

*Passes by and notices heated debate of T-34s..*
As for this enlightened discussion of "passengers", it never said anything about placing them isnide, so I'd lean towards Tank-Descent troopers (Tank-riders) (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tank_desant) as a plausable explanation, which was insanely common in early USSR (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wyfhYa8fNRA), and in Vietnam involving M113s as it is in my country (for other reasons [protection]).

Anyways, you've got "concepts" of weapons, nothing really definite on them, yet. You could let it idle and have imagination run wild; use closest RL design avaialable; or go for broke and detail the shit out of everything to the point you and the reader can visualize the interior of the tank when the commander bites a bullet and slumps down to the bottom of the turret basket, maybe even getting caught in the autoloader...

Hell, I didn't even go into much detail and I'm sure Antigr there has a mental image of some poor Ruskie caught in some mechanised gearworks with a lump of flesh getting force-fed into the breech...

occ: this is a REALLY old post, see, the last one one was in august of last year. I have a new storefront, "Gordonopian Arms Storefront" (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=562739&highlight=gordonopia) with all the details.

May want to edit your sig then...:$

OOC: Hi there. Nice to see you've taken the step to setting up your own storefront and things, but some friendly advice first. You should really go to the NationStates Draftroom (link) (http://z4.invisionfree.com/nsdraftroom) where all the good designers take their designs to be critiqued and improved. To be polite, the best I can say is your designs have some issues.

No-one with any experience of design will buy something that is entirely described with one short paragraph. It also seems incredibly badly researched, you've ripped off the united states military, and some of these things are simply unfeasible. By Draftroom standards, my designs are in the average to good bracket. However, look how detailed my designs are compared to yours. (Link 1 (http://z4.invisionfree.com/NSDraftroom/index.php?showtopic=3925)) (Link 2 (http://z4.invisionfree.com/NSDraftroom/index.php?showtopic=3718))

And I'm not even a good designer. Sorry to break this to you, but maybe better to come back when you truly know how to design. Thanks.

((OOC: You've put a bunch of useless crap in there to take up space... to be honest, I think the weapons are graded on NSD by how much clutter the post describing the product has. It's not your fault.

The only things that really matter are how much it costs, what it looks like, and the classic "Stat Table" of the weapon (I.e., rails, barrel length, caliber, RoF, etc.). We don't really care about the fact that Mister Bates said the rifle looked inappropriate before his manservant kicked him in the balls. We also don't need 6 paragraphs explaining something that exists in RL, because we can look that up ourselves. For example, you spend A LOT of time explaining the armor and armament of your MT-85, when we can simply look up the concepts and put the idea together ourselves. For example, when I released the Divine Tiger, I didn't spend time explaining how Chobham works, because everyone generally knows how it does. Nor did I explain the 120mm cannons. Nor did I explain about Mister Bates saying that the Divine Tiger is misclassified (As it is labeled a Main/Heavy Battle Tank) before being kicked in the balls.))

(OOC: GWO, if you want to draw inspiration from ridiculous, unrealistic and LULZy Red Alert 2 stuff and have twin-barreled tanks, you should stop criticizing NSD for the wrong reasons and stick to PMT/NFT. Your divine tiger failed because you refused to improve it based on suggestions. I've made failed designs before too, and the only time I felt somewhat bad for being criticized was when I putted real effort into them, but I still took the criticisms... you refused well-founded criticisms and even suggestions to convert it into a self-propelled mortar with two-barrels like the AMOS to then design another practical heavy tank, and insisted on the RULE OF COOL (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/RuleOfCool), while I made a statblock with a couple of paragraphs of description (http://forums3.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=13944658&postcount=25) which isn't tl;dr at all but still respectable, and I had minigun-wielding heavy infantry back when I was a n00b.

Once I did a rifle (http://z4.invisionfree.com/NSDraftroom/index.php?showtopic=1831) which started as bad in practicality as your tank, but open to feedback, I turned it into something which could probably be manufactured IRL with the results from the LSAT research.)

((OOC: TSS, I was talking about the fact that a lot of NSDers have seemingly endless amounts of clutter describing stuff nobody cares about. I wasn't talking about the design, though if you want to bring up ridiculous stuff, how about the claim by a group of NSDers that said .50BMG sniper rifles aren't useful at all?

Not once in my post did I actually bring up the Divine Tiger or the results of its release. I simply referred to the fact that I didn't spend 3 paragraphs explaining the armor on it (Chobham composite armor) or the specifics of the cannon used on it. And I decided to ignore people because first of all, they were trying to change the entire concept of the tank, and second of all, they were posting the SAME THING repeatedly in the wrong thread. That thread was supposed to be strictly IC and basic questions, with suggestions and whatnot being TGed to me. The Divine Tiger is meant for late MT and PMT, and still is very feasible. If it was almost combat-worthy with a heavier model in WWII, I think today's tech would be able to make it suitable for today. Either way, that's unrelated to this thread. So stop waving your ego around when it has nothing at all to do with the subject at hand. Trust me, your entire country's system is beyond unrealistic, far more than you think the Divine Tiger is.

By the way, I've never played Command and Conquer, and I've said that multiple times.)

Take it outside you two...

occ: this is a REALLY[dead thread], see, the last one one was in august of last year. I have a new storefront, "Gordonopian Arms Storefront" (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=562739&highlight=gordonopia) with all the details.

((OOC: TSS, I was talking about the fact that a lot of NSDers have seemingly endless amounts of clutter describing stuff nobody cares about. I wasn't talking about the design, though if you want to bring up ridiculous stuff, how about the claim by a group of NSDers that said .50BMG sniper rifles aren't useful at all?

Not once in my post did I actually bring up the Divine Tiger or the results of its release. I simply referred to the fact that I didn't spend 3 paragraphs explaining the armor on it (Chobham composite armor) or the specifics of the cannon used on it. And I decided to ignore people because first of all, they were trying to change the entire concept of the tank, and second of all, they were posting the SAME THING repeatedly in the wrong thread. That thread was supposed to be strictly IC and basic questions, with suggestions and whatnot being TGed to me. The Divine Tiger is meant for late MT and PMT, and still is very feasible. If it was almost combat-worthy with a heavier model in WWII, I think today's tech would be able to make it suitable for today. Either way, that's unrelated to this thread. So stop waving your ego around when it has nothing at all to do with the subject at hand. Trust me, your entire country's system is beyond unrealistic, far more than you think the Divine Tiger is.

By the way, I've never played Command and Conquer, and I've said that multiple times.)

OOC:

http://z4.invisionfree.com/NSDraftroom/index.php?showtopic=1416&hl=?

I'm unaware of any other topic on NSD that involves you. .50 cal weapons, and usefulness. So I don't know what you're going on about.

Likewise the DT isn't feasible as any form of combat ready weapon, especially not in WW2. The Ratte, the closest analogy I can think of, was intended as little more then heavy artillery, not really a tank (Especially not in the sense that the Panther was), it's hardly comparable.

If you're unwilling to accept valid criticism, then it will generally be repeated. Which will mean people say the same thing. This is especially true of people who try to help you, when they bring up an issue then deffer to someone else to better expand on the issue. I don't get why you're fixated on people bringing up "the same thing", when it's a normal process of a discussion. I can understand if every other comment is "lulz it has a minigun for fail" or something like that, but there is a huge difference between repetitive nonsense and actual debate.

OOC:

http://z4.invisionfree.com/NSDraftroom/index.php?showtopic=1416&hl=?

I'm unaware of any other topic on NSD that involves you. .50 cal weapons, and usefulness. So I don't know what you're going on about.

Likewise the DT isn't feasible as any form of combat ready weapon, especially not in WW2. The Ratte, the closest analogy I can think of, was intended as little more then heavy artillery, not really a tank (Especially not in the sense that the Panther was), it's hardly comparable.

If you're unwilling to accept valid criticism, then it will generally be repeated. Which will mean people say the same thing. This is especially true of people who try to help you, when they bring up an issue then deffer to someone else to better expand on the issue. I don't get why you're fixated on people bringing up "the same thing", when it's a normal process of a discussion. I can understand if every other comment is "lulz it has a minigun for fail" or something like that, but there is a huge difference between repetitive nonsense and actual debate.

((OOC: My. Post. Wasn't. About. The. Divine Tiger.

Actually, there was a tank called the Maus with the same idea. The only reason it wasn't widely used was because they started being made at the end of the war before Hitler canceled it to pursue things like the Ratte. The main flaw of it was that they didn't have any engines back then powerful enough to lug it around, which was partially due to the fact that it had an insane amount of armor with the two cannons. Today, of course, that's different.

And the DT thread? Just about every other post was essentially copypasta of the same arguments, bringing THE SAME POINTS AFTER I ACKNOWLEDGED THEM AND EVENTUALLY TOLD THEM TO STOP.

Either way, the Divine Tiger is irrelevant to the fact that most NSDers put a huge amount of useless info that ultimately hides the useFUL info about their products.))

Just about every other post was essentially copypasta of the same arguments, bringing THE SAME POINTS AFTER I ACKNOWLEDGED THEM AND EVENTUALLY TOLD THEM TO STOP.
That was one person, and it was Antigr...

Anyways, you're kinda grudging this onto a thread best left forgotten.

((OOC: My. Post. Wasn't. About. The. Divine Tiger.

Actually, there was a tank called the Maus with the same idea. The only reason it wasn't widely used was because they started being made at the end of the war before Hitler canceled it to pursue things like the Ratte. The main flaw of it was that they didn't have any engines back then powerful enough to lug it around, which was partially due to the fact that it had an insane amount of armor with the two cannons. Today, of course, that's different.

And the DT thread? Just about every other post was essentially copypasta of the same arguments, bringing THE SAME POINTS AFTER I ACKNOWLEDGED THEM AND EVENTUALLY TOLD THEM TO STOP.

Either way, the Divine Tiger is irrelevant to the fact that most NSDers put a huge amount of useless info that ultimately hides the useFUL info about their products.))

OOC: The Maus had one, count them, one main gun. In fact it was intended to come in two versions with a 150mm gun as a later option. The coaxial cannon was barely any more powerful then the gun mounted on early StuG IIIBs and early model PzKpFw IVs, it was little more then an anti-infantry gun, and was far smaller in size and capability (In fact the modern equivilant is the AMX-30B2, which has a coaxial 20mm cannon to the main 105mm gun). This is a far, far cry from two guns of the same caliber.

Also, the Ratte was canceled almost a year before the Maus. It's not likely the Maus was canceled to concentrate on it. Perhaps on the E-100. But then again, the E-100 had one gun too, and it used the same armament as the Maus.

As to useful and useless info. All info is useful, especially if you know what the intent is. Historical/developmental issues are usually there because this happens to be a game revolving around a story-line, and those are plot aids. Suspended seats? Climate control? Coffee maker? Crew amenities, which make fighting in a tank for longer periods far easier (A modern crew can operate from within their tank for 24 hours (Except in some cases like cramped Soviet tanks and the LeClerc) if they need to, in all weather. You couldn't do that in a Panther, not even an M-60A3. Longer time the crew can spend in the tank the more effective they can be because they don't have to leave the line so often. And suspended seats are normally an anti-mine issue involving not breaking bones when a mine goes off but fails to penetrate. Or do you have other subject matter in mind?