OOC: What is your military's greatest strength?

[The Grand World Order]

Competence, technology, insano-grade training.

The biggest strength, however, is modularity. GWO military technology for the most part is designed to be cheaply and quickly modified to fit any situation; this creates a well-rounded, highly skilled force.

Plus, our military planners don't just watch the History Channel or play video games and go "OMG COOL" and try to use them in actual combat. But then again, that loops back to competence.

[Herminia]

A powerful force, a strong navy, air force, and tank corps, and very competent commanders and officers.

[The Chtorr]

Uses biowarfare, namely seeding the target with germs, then setting chtorran worms lose at them.

[The Junkions]

It's getting 'em to stay down that's the trick!

[Iyndolen]

Mobility and rapid response/redeployment. My nations not capable of sustaining a long drawn out war so we capitalize on technology, training, and tactics to strike a quick killing blow.

[Sungai Pusat]

We can't have a thread on your military's greatest weakness unless we have a thread on your military's greatest strength!

Bafuria is surrounded by ocean, the only way the enemy can invade us is by sending his navy against us.
And with our massive, state-of-the-art Navy; our soil is almost untouchable.

Well, we are in space, so unless someone owns a galatic force, they can't touch us. Also, with our environmental usage in the military, it will cause less problems for the military like the tendacy to leak oil out.

[Lemonius]

We can't have a thread on your military's greatest weakness unless we have a thread on your military's greatest strength!

Bafuria is surrounded by ocean, the only way the enemy can invade us is by sending his navy against us.
And with our massive, state-of-the-art Navy; our soil is almost untouchable.

Well, we are in space, so unless someone owns a galatic force, they can't touch us. Also, with our environmental usage in the military, it will cause less problems for the military like the tendacy to leak oil out.

I have a galactic force!

[Sungai Pusat]

We can't have a thread on your military's greatest weakness unless we have a thread on your military's greatest strength!

Bafuria is surrounded by ocean, the only way the enemy can invade us is by sending his navy against us.
And with our massive, state-of-the-art Navy; our soil is almost untouchable.

Well, we are in space, so unless someone owns a galatic force, they can't touch us. Also, with our environmental usage in the military, it will cause less problems for the military like the tendacy to leak oil out.

I have a galactic force!

Well, do you own an entire planet?

[Dimoniquid]

We can't have a thread on your military's greatest weakness unless we have a thread on your military's greatest strength!

Bafuria is surrounded by ocean, the only way the enemy can invade us is by sending his navy against us.
And with our massive, state-of-the-art Navy; our soil is almost untouchable.

Well, we are in space, so unless someone owns a galatic force, they can't touch us. Also, with our environmental usage in the military, it will cause less problems for the military like the tendacy to leak oil out.

I have a galactic force!

Well, do you own an entire planet?

I do.

[Lemonius]

We own 6...

Lemonius
Vie (Moon)
Alexus
Plomoxia
Cruikal
Hiele

-They're on the ns galaxy map, it's a wonderful thing...

[Sungai Pusat]

We can't have a thread on your military's greatest weakness unless we have a thread on your military's greatest strength!

Bafuria is surrounded by ocean, the only way the enemy can invade us is by sending his navy against us.
And with our massive, state-of-the-art Navy; our soil is almost untouchable.

Well, we are in space, so unless someone owns a galatic force, they can't touch us. Also, with our environmental usage in the military, it will cause less problems for the military like the tendacy to leak oil out.

I have a galactic force!

Well, do you own an entire planet?

I do.

Exuse me? Asking Lemonius here.

[Dimoniquid]

We can't have a thread on your military's greatest weakness unless we have a thread on your military's greatest strength!

Bafuria is surrounded by ocean, the only way the enemy can invade us is by sending his navy against us.
And with our massive, state-of-the-art Navy; our soil is almost untouchable.

Well, we are in space, so unless someone owns a galatic force, they can't touch us. Also, with our environmental usage in the military, it will cause less problems for the military like the tendacy to leak oil out.

I have a galactic force!

Well, do you own an entire planet?

I do.

Exuse me? Asking Lemonius here.

Whoops.

[Station 12]

At the moment, Hooks are a sort of "jack of all trades but also quite insane" army. They're very efficient because they can adapt very quickly to situations. There are very few specialized troops or weapons within the Hook ground force. Plus they have their robotic troops, which are quite powerful.

[The Anglo-Saxon Empire]

The first and most important one is numbers. Our entire infantry force (only infantry, not counting any supporting men or vehicles) consists out of just 600 men. All of them have recieved 2 years of training, but still they are almost always outnumbered. Which brings us at a significant disadvantage; spread the forces too wide, and all their technology won't help them out against enemy numbers. Focus defense at a single point, and the enemy might outflank our men.

1. You would be raped in any war. Even the nations whose armies are 5% of their population and are armed with AK-47s will be able to crush your army for very few losses.
2. Two years of training confers almost no advantage over a year of training, or 9 months of training. I assume your soldiers are using guns, which once you know how to use them you can't get much better. Knights and Spartans had an actual reason to train for years because a person could keep on improving his abilities with a sword or spear, but for modern soldiers once you know how to fire and move effectively there is not much more to learn. That is not to say that you can't practice just to get more used to stuff, but they will not greatly improve their abilities.

[Crookfur]

The first and most important one is numbers. Our entire infantry force (only infantry, not counting any supporting men or vehicles) consists out of just 600 men. All of them have recieved 2 years of training, but still they are almost always outnumbered. Which brings us at a significant disadvantage; spread the forces too wide, and all their technology won't help them out against enemy numbers. Focus defense at a single point, and the enemy might outflank our men.

1. You would be raped in any war. Even the nations whose armies are 5% of their population and are armed with AK-47s will be able to crush your army for very few losses.
2. Two years of training confers almost no advantage over a year of training, or 9 months of training. I assume your soldiers are using guns, which once you know how to use them you can't get much better. Knights and Spartans had an actual reason to train for years because a person could keep on improving his abilities with a sword or spear, but for modern soldiers once you know how to fire and move effectively there is not much more to learn. That is not to say that you can't practice just to get more used to stuff, but they will not greatly improve their abilities.

Depends entirely on what is covered in the training, there are several specialisations and trades in western militaries that can take 2-3 years to qualify in. Also a lot depends on how the trainign period is measured i.e. does this refer to a simple basic course followed by the infantry course or does it include that and the all the time spent doing section, platoon, company and battalion work ups and exercises?

Also shooting is very much a perishable skill that does improve vastly the more time and effort you put in, not that the operation of a firearm stops a tthe shooting part, there are just as many complicated physical moves and techniques to master to get the most out of a firearm as there are with melee weapons.

[Dystopianus]

The first and most important one is numbers. Our entire infantry force (only infantry, not counting any supporting men or vehicles) consists out of just 600 men. All of them have recieved 2 years of training, but still they are almost always outnumbered. Which brings us at a significant disadvantage; spread the forces too wide, and all their technology won't help them out against enemy numbers. Focus defense at a single point, and the enemy might outflank our men.

1. You would be raped in any war. Even the nations whose armies are 5% of their population and are armed with AK-47s will be able to crush your army for very few losses.
2. Two years of training confers almost no advantage over a year of training, or 9 months of training. I assume your soldiers are using guns, which once you know how to use them you can't get much better. Knights and Spartans had an actual reason to train for years because a person could keep on improving his abilities with a sword or spear, but for modern soldiers once you know how to fire and move effectively there is not much more to learn. That is not to say that you can't practice just to get more used to stuff, but they will not greatly improve their abilities.

Maybe you're right, I would get eliminated very easely, and training or bodyarmour wouldn't make much of a difference. How does 1300 sound? It's a little more then twice the amount we have right now. Or will even more be neccesary?

Also remember that it's never just the numbers that make the difference. War isn't a simple game of "I have more tanks then you, so I win and you lose". Operation Desert Storm has proven that with the use of superior technology and overall well tactics above superior numbers. Our soldiers get training on the areas of marksmanship, CQC, pistol use, melee weapon training and self defense, physical training, RPG firing (every soldier has a light AT weapon), basic first aid, undercover operations, communication, tactics, morale, company-level logistics, basic field repairs and improvised fortifications, breeching tactics, and combined arms (working together with artillery, tanks, transports, and close air support).

Even then, most soldiers also get a secondary function, such as combat engineer, medic, army chaplain, mini-UAV controller, or NCO. All of these special functions come with even more training...

If they get through all that, there are real-live practices, where an all-out conflict is being simulated in a large test envoirement with paintball guns and an OpFor, and where the officers will have to figure out themselves what strategy to employ. These tests tend to be full of surprises, such as paintball mines, road blockades, or purposely sabotaged equipment, so that in a real-life situation the soldiers know how to improvise.

If you put it that all together, those 2 years of training are definatly not wasted on the firing range alone.

[The Anglo-Saxon Empire]

The first and most important one is numbers. Our entire infantry force (only infantry, not counting any supporting men or vehicles) consists out of just 600 men. All of them have recieved 2 years of training, but still they are almost always outnumbered. Which brings us at a significant disadvantage; spread the forces too wide, and all their technology won't help them out against enemy numbers. Focus defense at a single point, and the enemy might outflank our men.

1. You would be raped in any war. Even the nations whose armies are 5% of their population and are armed with AK-47s will be able to crush your army for very few losses.
2. Two years of training confers almost no advantage over a year of training, or 9 months of training. I assume your soldiers are using guns, which once you know how to use them you can't get much better. Knights and Spartans had an actual reason to train for years because a person could keep on improving his abilities with a sword or spear, but for modern soldiers once you know how to fire and move effectively there is not much more to learn. That is not to say that you can't practice just to get more used to stuff, but they will not greatly improve their abilities.

Maybe you're right, I would get eliminated very easely, and training or bodyarmour wouldn't make much of a difference. How does 1300 sound? It's a little more then twice the amount we have right now. Or will even more be neccesary?

Also remember that it's never just the numbers that make the difference. War isn't a simple game of "I have more tanks then you, so I win and you lose". Operation Desert Storm has proven that with the use of superior technology and overall well tactics above superior numbers. Our soldiers get training on the areas of marksmanship, CQC, pistol use, melee weapon training and self defense, physical training, RPG firing, (every soldier has a light AT weapon with the exception of squad leaders), basic first aid, undercover operations, communication, tactics, morale, basic field repairs and improvised fortifications, breeching tactics, and combined arms (working together with artillery, tanks, transports, and close air support).

If they get through all that, there are real-live practices, where an all-out conflict is being simulated in a large test envoirement with paintball guns and an OpFor, and where the officers will have to figure out themselves what strategy to employ. These tests tend to be full of surprises, such as paintball mines, road blockades, or purposely sabotaged equipment, so that in a real-life situation the soldiers know how to improvise. If you put it that way, those 2 years of training are definatly not wasted on target practice alone.

1. At least try to field 1 full division of your soldiers.
2. The Coalition in desert storm were not outnumbered by 1,000 to 1. Your army would be so small that ir would have to be everywhere at once.
3. First off paint balls are probably not the best way to simulate a war (I imagine laser sensors would be better), secondly you can't truley get your soldiers used to war by training. You could train with your paint balls in a 2 year long simulated war, but on day one you might be horrified to actually see your friends (who you had trained with for two years) and end up in a fetal position crying your eyes out due to fear.
4. No matter how well trained your soldiers are, no matter how prepared for war they are (they could have 3,000 years of military experience, have killed 10,000,000 men, and have the body of a 20 year old Olympian) they can be killed by artillery, machine guns, and hundreds of other weapons that they have no way to train for.

I understand the fact that you want to have super soldiers who are a cross between Soap, Captain Price, and Master Chief (don't we all), but you need to think about efficiency. I would recommend that you think about what you plan to face and design your army around that threat. For example, my nation is a rather small nation (rp with a population of 850 million which is small by NS standards). I also have a history of facing Western style armies (good training, decent equipment), so I decided that I would have a tiny elite army that can outmaneuver and out fight most ns armies. However my tactics came with one major flaw, my army could never hope to fight a defensive war. The end result I formed a two tier army (similar to the Imperium of Man if you have ever play Warhammer 40k) with my Imperial Army being a tiny elite force that could defeat most armies man for man (similar to the space marines) and my National Militia which is a massive force that relies on overwhelming numbers and powerful equipment (pretty much 1 hit kill weapons) (slightly similar to the imperial guard). The end result is that my army can fight offensively with our tiny (but still massive by your standards) Imperial Army, and defend the homeland with our much larger National Militia.

Now I assume you want to give your men the best equipment (high powered weapons, fancy body armour, night vision, and something akin to the Land warrior system). I can help you find some good equipment, but you need to remember that balance is key, too small and your army will be wiped out regardless of skill, too large and you will lose swarms of soldiers (which a nation as small as you cannot afford). So I think you should have a minimum army of around 20,000 soldiers, and perhaps a backup force, even if it is just a bunch of rednecks armed with hunting rifles, numbering in the hundreds of thousands.

[Andorianus]

Reply: Anglo Saxon Empire.

So this is going to be a very long comment, so I'll just put it in a spoiler so it won't clog up half the page.

1. At least try to field 1 full division of your soldiers.

Allright then, I have a little difficulty in estimating infantry numbers. I know that 600 planes would be a lot while 600 infantry is very few, but I didn't knew that the difference in numbers-to-power ratio (that's not even a real word, :-P) was that big.

2. The Coalition in desert storm were not outnumbered by 1,000 to 1. Your army would be so small that ir would have to be everywhere at once.

That's true, but remember, our most air force is much larger and they can cover a much larger area of ground. Sorry for the desert storm comparison, I didn't meant it that way.

Still, I agree that one full division is neccesary. I estimate that with highly equipped soldiers who can do multiple functions at the same time, the numbers could be reduced to 8000 per division, with two divisions in total, making the total number of infantry soldiers 16000. Slightly below your advice, but I'll expand as soon as my economy gets better. If I only has infantry, this would allow me to spend 6 million USD's per soldier (cost of an Abrams MBT!) but I probably will spread the budget more equally so that the air force and navy also have quite a bit of money to spend. Considering the average US Army soldier costs 200.000 United States Dollars (inluding training and ammunition over a year), 400.000 Universal Standard Dollar per infantry soldier will do.

3. First off paint balls are probably not the best way to simulate a war (I imagine laser sensors would be better), secondly you can't truley get your soldiers used to war by training. You could train with your paint balls in a 2 year long simulated war, but on day one you might be horrified to actually see your friends (who you had trained with for two years) and end up in a fetal position crying your eyes out due to fear.

Allright, laser tag then. Sorry for that one, I forgot that paintball guns don't have a very long range. To simulate explosives however, you can't use lasers though.

4. No matter how well trained your soldiers are, no matter how prepared for war they are (they could have 3,000 years of military experience, have killed 10,000,000 men, and have the body of a 20 year old Olympian) they can be killed by artillery, machine guns, and hundreds of other weapons that they have no way to train for.

So the solution is, don't let them exposed in the field. Urban warfare, combined arms, and situational awereness my friend :-). No one is just going to send their men to machine gun nests without any cover! You have artillery for that. Or tanks. And against artillery, you put air power. Everyone who has ever played a decent RTS game knows that! (I heard you played starcraft, though RTS games rarely get so realistic you can use them for RL tactics.)

I understand the fact that you want to have super soldiers who are a cross between Soap, Captain Price, and Master Chief (don't we all), but you need to think about efficiency.

I didn't just play a cool computer game and thought like: "Hey, so if they can use exoskeletons and liqiud bodyarmour (seriously, what's the benefit of that?) and HUD's and active camoflage systems, and don't get hit by bullets whathowever (that's just because the game needs some very moving scenes when a hind blows up the bridge and everyone is trapped), why can't I?" Serously, I really put some focus on the affordability (there are exoskeletons, but nightvision is replaced by flashlights, and there are no other useless systems like the ones listed above), but I thought I just was a small nation who couldn't afford so much of this crap!

I would recommend that you think about what you plan to face and design your army around that threat. For example, my nation is a rather small nation (rp with a population of 850 million which is small by NS standards). I also have a history of facing Western style armies (good training, decent equipment), so I decided that I would have a tiny elite army that can outmaneuver and out fight most ns armies. However my tactics came with one major flaw, my army could never hope to fight a defensive war. The end result I formed a two tier army (similar to the Imperium of Man if you have ever play Warhammer 40k) with my Imperial Army being a tiny elite force that could defeat most armies man for man (similar to the space marines) and my National Militia which is a massive force that relies on overwhelming numbers and powerful equipment (pretty much 1 hit kill weapons) (slightly similar to the imperial guard). The end result is that my army can fight offensively with our tiny (but still massive by your standards) Imperial Army, and defend the homeland with our much larger National Militia.

I suppose that would fit perfectly for Dystopianus considering it's a dictatorship and such...

Now I assume you want to give your men the best equipment (high powered weapons, fancy body armour, night vision, and something akin to the Land warrior system). I can help you find some good equipment, but you need to remember that balance is key, too small and your army will be wiped out regardless of skill, too large and you will lose swarms of soldiers (which a nation as small as you cannot afford). So I think you should have a minimum army of around 20,000 soldiers, and perhaps a backup force, even if it is just a bunch of rednecks armed with hunting rifles, numbering in the hundreds of thousands.

It would be awesome if you could help, and with that help regarding a homeland militia you surely helped me out. Most of the money will still go on the elite however.

If you have any more tips, please reply.

[Satirius]

^Try Simunitions instead of paintballs.

[The Anglo-Saxon Empire]

Reply: Anglo Saxon Empire.

So this is going to be a very long comment, so I'll just put it in a spoiler so it won't clog up half the page.
If you have any more tips, please reply.

First off I will deal with Equipment

All infantry weapons- The R2 weapon systems are arguably the best infantry weapons on NS. As you can see from the start these weapons are expensive as hell, but these expenses are less important when you look at the weapons' capabilities. Each rifle can fire several different rounds with no need to swap out the barrel or the chamber, you can penetrate pretty much any body armour, as well as some vehicle armour with your weapons. Of course the sheer costs would limit your army further, but you want quality over quantity.

Main weapon for your national militia- The ISR-MkIV is an excellent gun to give to a third rate army, it is chaep, powerful, and cheap. It can be chambered in one of many different rounds, all of which are very powerful. Perfect gun for your home defence force.

A mortar syatem I came upon while looking for Sumner's storefront-Looks pretty good, but it costs a butt load of money. I have never seen or used this system in any rps, so yeah.

Lyran arms-IFVs, APCs, medium tanks, Lyran arms has pretty good vehicles for low prices. Some I would like to point out are LY219 'Ironheart' Armoured Multirole Tactical Vehicle which has many variants, from IFV, to APC, to Self Propelled Artillery, to Anti-Tank missile launching platform. The LY6 'Werewolf' Heavy Assault Gun/Tank Destroyer could be used effectively as a heavy tank, tank destroyer, or assault gun. I do not use the LY6 largely because I use the Ironheart ATGM platform for anti-tank purposes. The LY7/222 King Shepherd Anti-Aircraft System is a pretty good mobile AA system, and Lyran battlehounds are just plain awesome. Note that there are some weapons that Lyras will not sell to you unless you are his ally.

Nineven International home of the MCA-7E- Contrary to what I just said I will not only talk about the MCA-7E, but also the TD-7. Frist off, the MCA-7E is one of the best tanks in NS, although as with the real world people have their preferences. The MCA-7E has two main disadvantages, weight and cost. The MCA-7E is a heavy MBT, or heavy tank if you want to classify it as that, weighing in at over 86 tons. As you can imagine this is not a tank for countries with poor infrastructure, but it does have the distinction of being one of the few well armoured MBTs that have a 140mm gun that people will sell to you. The MCA-7E is painfully expensive, costing a whopping 18 million each if bought individually. Overall if you can afford it go for the MCA-7E. Next is the TD-7, the same self propelled artillery system I use. The TD-7 is rather low cost compared to some systems, and has the benefits of firepower (a 180 mm gun) and a decent rate of fire (for a 180mm gun at 3 rpm). Overall it is a good choice.

If you happen to be one of those people that like rocket artillery (for some godforsaken reason), look at Lyran arms, he has a pretty popular multiple rocket system.

For ships visit
viewtopic.php?f=6&t=24986

Other popular storefronts
viewtopic.php?f=6&t=153
viewtopic.php?f=6&t=26801
viewtopic.php?f=6&t=37283 (not really popular, but looks good, plus Satirius has been on these gun threads a lot)
viewtopic.php?f=6&t=475
viewtopic.php?f=6&t=12107
viewtopic.php?f=6&t=22848 (recently LG came back from the dead, truthfully I just don't like his storefront, and I do not think his technologies are draftroom approved)

Nsdraftroom
http://z4.invisionfree.invalid.com/NSDraftroom/ ... d2&act=idx
If you want to make your own weapons, or make sure a weapon is realistic, or useful, post it here where people check it. A little warning, some people can supposedly be harsh (I have never noticed it).

Now onto dividing your military.
Look through this link and all of the other ones on the side bar, decide for yourself how to set up your squads, and what weapons to give them.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fire_team

[Jeuna]

No bloody bolshies.

[Veceria]

Thanks to the high budget of the Vecerian' Military, we got a real modern army. Also, our army is extremely well trained and specialized in urban warfare.

[United Earthlings]

Bafuria is surrounded by ocean, the only way the enemy can invade us is by sending his navy against us. And with our massive, state-of-the-art Navy; our soil is almost untouchable.

Aww, to be young, naive and full of hubris.

With what I have in my military inventory and planned, your massive, state-of-the-art Navy will be rendered redundant. And furthermore, I don't need a massive navy to bring the pain to the shores of your soil. What I have in store is so much more sinister.

However, you can take a deep breath and relax, my nation is filled with a bunch of isolationist pacifists who abhor war.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

As to your question, my military's greatest strength is probably also its greatest weakness. With no nation ever having encounter our military forces in battle since the founding of our nation, the tactics and equipment our forces use would come in the beginning as a total shock, which if used right would probably lead to an early victory as effective countermeasures would take time to implement. However, the reverse also applies to us in developing effective countermeasures against possible foreign adversary’s tactics and equipment.

[Lhazastan]

the fact that they don't get deployed to every ass-end-of-nowhere nation for little reason, no gain, and enormous waste of resources

[Machina Haruspex]

Training and " real world " experience. From regional deployments into hellholes, to international deployments. The Haruspex Legions have had their noses bloodied early on and lived to put those experiences to use so that they are rare in happening again.

With effective training combining ground, aero, and naval forces, we'll give as good as we get should diplomacy fail.