NationStates

Themiclesia wrote:

Oaledonia wrote:lol wut? Do you even understand that picture?

Alternate posts have different colour backgrounds, such as my post's background will be of a slightly different shade than that of Oaledonia's. Modifying that colour will be tremendously difficult, as well as changing the flag, because Dragonmnere's flag and Yggdrasil9000's flags are of a different shape.

Actually, Photoshopping is not hard, I can do it decently.

Alright, we're getting back on track.

I concur that the newly published military stats are reasonable.

I agree.

How does the empire combat communism?

Deemos wrote:How does the empire combat communism?

We embrace it, as a democratic society.

Dragomere wrote:

Deemos wrote:How does the empire combat communism?

We embrace it, as a democratic society.

Hah, embracing communism. So do you fully embrace it or do you play mind games with the communist leaders to slowly drive them insane, like us? Obviously our way is the better way, but to each his own..,

Dragomere wrote:

Deemos wrote:How does the empire combat communism?

We embrace it, as a democratic society.

The True Republic of Deemos declares war against your communist ways.

I would still question having 45 Battleships. As an example, between 1890 (USS Indiana BB-1) and 1944 (USS Wisconsin BB-64) the US Navy had a total of 57 BB's. That is all of them. Just sayin'

(Also, it isn't difficult to post with 2 nations online at the same time. Again, just sayin')

Nope, it's not

Grays Harbor wrote:I would still question having 45 Battleships. As an example, between 1890 (USS Indiana BB-1) and 1944 (USS Wisconsin BB-64) the US Navy had a total of 57 BB's. That is all of them. Just sayin'

(Also, it isn't difficult to post with 2 nations online at the same time. Again, just sayin')

I have tried having Dragomere and Mamoth online at the same time, but when I log on to one, and change tabs to the other one, when I do something, it automatically changes to the new one on the original tab.

I'm on with 2 right now, as you can see

can you teach me how to do that.

Dragomere wrote:

Grays Harbor wrote:I would still question having 45 Battleships. As an example, between 1890 (USS Indiana BB-1) and 1944 (USS Wisconsin BB-64) the US Navy had a total of 57 BB's. That is all of them. Just sayin'

(Also, it isn't difficult to post with 2 nations online at the same time. Again, just sayin')

I have tried having Dragomere and Mamoth online at the same time, but when I log on to one, and change tabs to the other one, when I do something, it automatically changes to the new one on the original tab.

Off topic but you have to have two different browsers up at once to do it I think.

yup, I am. But that's neither here nor there. The question is about the 45 battleships, which are an obsolete class, and actually far too many for a nation your size with the navy you say you have, and are nothing but a cash dumper. You may want to rethink that part of your OB. Seriously.

(and no, I won't teach you how to do it.)

oooooooooooooooh, that explains why I could not do it.


Channelview: Battleships were designed to take heavy hits, that it why I have them=They are harder to destroy than regular ships.

Dragomere wrote:oooooooooooooooh, that explains why I could not do it.


Channelview: Battleships were designed to take heavy hits, that it why I have them=They are harder to destroy than regular ships.

Well yes, but carriers really mad them obsolete, since they could just send all the planes to take down the ships. Plus, now that you have missile cruisers, stealth destroyers and nuclear submarines, a ship which can only defeat the enemy head on is pretty useless.

Oh and this is Asuiop

I found out how to do it now!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Oh, and this is Dragomere.

Dragomere wrote:oooooooooooooooh, that explains why I could not do it.


Channelview: Battleships were designed to take heavy hits, that it why I have them=They are harder to destroy than regular ships.

Yeah, fine, whatever. But 45 of them? Nearly as many as the USN and Royal Navy built? More than Japan ever built? And Skappola is right, aircraft made them obsolete as early as 1923 when Billy Mitchell sank the Virginia, Ostfriesland, Alabama and New Jersey using antiquated bombers. The Yamato was sunk solely by air power. Pearl Harbor. Now there are missiles with devastating accuracy. Keep some battleships, whatever, I don't care. They are obsolete and money sinks. But 45 of them is just far too many for any budget to withstand.

Dragomere wrote:

Deemos wrote:How does the empire combat communism?

We embrace it, as a democratic society.

That's..... Actually reasonable. Good on you.

Dragomere wrote:oooooooooooooooh, that explains why I could not do it.


Channelview: Battleships were designed to take heavy hits, that it why I have them=They are harder to destroy than regular ships.

Overall I am pretty happy with your new military numbers. But, I must say, you still have too many ships in your navy. Battleships especially. Also, they have been obsolete for about 60-70 years, so it is probably best to replace those with something modern like guided missile destroyers or cruisers. or anti-submarine warfare frigates. You will find battleships to be pretty useless now adays.

They may have been designed to take heavy hits from 20th century weaponry, but they are little use against modern jets and high velocity guided missiles. Similarly, a stone wall was effective against siege weaponry until the introduction of gunpowder. they are an outdated design of a bygone era, and not worth the money.

Dragomere wrote:oooooooooooooooh, that explains why I could not do it.


Channelview: Battleships were designed to take heavy hits, that it why I have them=They are harder to destroy than regular ships.

Actually, not really. Modern ships are entirely reliant on their radar and sensors to be useful in combat. If they can't detect the enemy, they can't fire on the enemy. But radar mounts cannot be armored. Covering them would prevent them from detecting anything.

Thus, they are just as vulnerable as any other ship to getting hit by a missile, losing their electronics, and being absolutely worthless. Well, even more worthless than they were before, since their guns don't have the range to be useful in modern naval combat anyway. A gun with a 40 km range vs. a guided missile with a 500+ km range? I'm betting on the latter.

The Akasha Colony wrote:

Dragomere wrote:oooooooooooooooh, that explains why I could not do it.


Channelview: Battleships were designed to take heavy hits, that it why I have them=They are harder to destroy than regular ships.

Actually, not really. Modern ships are entirely reliant on their radar and sensors to be useful in combat. If they can't detect the enemy, they can't fire on the enemy. But radar mounts cannot be armored. Covering them would prevent them from detecting anything.

Thus, they are just as vulnerable as any other ship to getting hit by a missile, losing their electronics, and being absolutely worthless. Well, even more worthless than they were before, since their guns don't have the range to be useful in modern naval combat anyway. A gun with a 40 km range vs. a guided missile with a 500+ km range? I'm betting on the latter.

Well my battleships are pretty absolute and are replaced by missile destroyers and battlecruisers but they still have a place in my navy as they do have the capability to launch missiles including ASBM's.

New Tyran wrote:

The Akasha Colony wrote:
Actually, not really. Modern ships are entirely reliant on their radar and sensors to be useful in combat. If they can't detect the enemy, they can't fire on the enemy. But radar mounts cannot be armored. Covering them would prevent them from detecting anything.

Thus, they are just as vulnerable as any other ship to getting hit by a missile, losing their electronics, and being absolutely worthless. Well, even more worthless than they were before, since their guns don't have the range to be useful in modern naval combat anyway. A gun with a 40 km range vs. a guided missile with a 500+ km range? I'm betting on the latter.

Well my battleships are pretty absolute and are replaced by missile destroyers and battlecruisers but they still have a place in my navy as they do have the capability to launch missiles including ASBM's.

I agree. But before another argument ensues, I think having an inefficient military (such as mine) is better than an unrealistic one.

New Tyran, how many battleships do you maintain?