2013 Modern RP (MT/OOC/Signup) OPEN!

[New Ecopia]

NS Name: New Ecopia
Faction Name: New Zealand
Faction Leader: John Key
Faction Capital (or base of power, if not nation): Wellington
Military Strength: 13,477
Economic Strength* (Bankrupt/Developing/Semi-Developed/Developed): Developed
Total Population*: 4,445,436

Allies at start: Australia, United States & NATO

RP Sample: This is my first time Roleplaying here, I've RP'ed on a different site - http://10000islands.proboards.com/index ... 655&page=2
Projected Availability (1-10): 5-6 (depends on my holiday plans)

[Delanshar]

NS Name: New Ecopia
Faction Name: New Zealand
Faction Leader: John Key
Faction Capital (or base of power, if not nation): Wellington
Military Strength: 13,477
Economic Strength* (Bankrupt/Developing/Semi-Developed/Developed): Developed
Total Population*: 4,445,436

Allies at start: Australia, United States & NATO

RP Sample: This is my first time Roleplaying here, I've RP'ed on a different site - http://10000islands.proboards.com/index ... 655&page=2
Projected Availability (1-10): 5-6 (depends on my holiday plans)

Accepted

[Delanshar]

Ok so how does this sound for the first roll:

First role: Argentine strike on Falklands
0-10: Strikes do major damage, but significant amount of planes intercepted
10-20: Strikes do major damage, and few planes intercepted
20-50: Strikes do moderate damage, and significant amount of planes intercepted
50-75: Strikes do moderate, but few planes intercepted
75-85: Strikes do mild damage, and few planes intercepted
85-100: Strikes do mild damage, but significant amount of planes intercepted

I think it should change based on the Rapier missiles I have.

Additionally, a situation where the Argentinians have few casualties does not seem logical. You have island SAM's and a good bit of coalition fighters

The way this works is their is a chance for all possible outcomes. But if you really don't like these odds I can tweak it (tho the Germans seemed to accept it)

[Kryskov]

The way this works is their is a chance for all possible outcomes. But if you really don't like these odds I can tweak it (tho the Germans seemed to accept it)

I don't. That was before I reminded everyone that I had SAM's (Rapier 2000's).

[Delanshar]

The way this works is their is a chance for all possible outcomes. But if you really don't like these odds I can tweak it (tho the Germans seemed to accept it)

I don't. That was before I reminded everyone that I had SAM's (Rapier 2000's).

Ok fine I'll redo the stats

[Vehemia]

I think it should change based on the Rapier missiles I have.

Additionally, a situation where the Argentinians have few casualties does not seem logical. You have island SAM's and a good bit of coalition fighters

The way this works is their is a chance for all possible outcomes. But if you really don't like these odds I can tweak it (tho the Germans seemed to accept it)

The ground SAMs change things

[Delanshar]

Revised for SAMs

First roll: Argentine strike on Falklands
0-10: Strikes do major damage, but significant amount of planes intercepted/shot down
10-15: Strikes do major damage, and few planes intercepted/shot down
15-40: Strikes do moderate damage, and significant amount of planes intercepted/shot down
40-55: Strikes do moderate, but few planes intercepted/shot down
55-70: Strikes do mild damage, and few planes intercepted/shot down
70-100: Strikes do mild damage, but significant amount of planes intercepted/shot down

Better?

[Kryskov]

Better, thanks.

[Machtergreifung]

The way this works is their is a chance for all possible outcomes. But if you really don't like these odds I can tweak it (tho the Germans seemed to accept it)

I don't. That was before I reminded everyone that I had SAM's (Rapier 2000's).

Isn't Rapier a bit of a fail missile? It's already been just about phased out, and if it managed to do so bad against Skyhawks (!!!!) then no upgrades or fancy tech can make horsecrap gold.

[Greater Nilfgaard]

Wait, but u already rolled b4 they lodged a complaint
That seems unfair

What if they just didn't like the outcome

[Machtergreifung]

Also, coup de main against Ascension Island. You've got no more than a few dozen garrison, perhaps 200 plus the service staff. Surrender and they all go free on the next flight home.

[Delanshar]

So basically, Argentina and Macht, are u vetoing the new stats or is it acceptable?

[Greater Nilfgaard]

So basically, Argentina and Macht, are u vetoing the new stats or is it acceptable?

The first one was already tilted in their favor

[Machtergreifung]

So basically, Argentina and Macht, are u vetoing the new stats or is it acceptable?

It's not my call, Greater Nilf can call it, but I was under the impression that the Rapier wasn't exactly the most sucessful missile in the British SAM pile.

[Kryskov]

Also, coup de main against Ascension Island. You've got no more than a few dozen garrison, perhaps 200 plus the service staff. Surrender and they all go free on the next flight home.

You realize that USAF personnel are also on Ascension, right? You are attacking American military installations.

Secondly, I would like to point out that while I may not like the outcomes, I will follow them. I was making the point about the Rapiers. The fact is that the first set did not account for them. They are present on the island IRL.

[Machtergreifung]

Also, coup de main against Ascension Island. You've got no more than a few dozen garrison, perhaps 200 plus the service staff. Surrender and they all go free on the next flight home.

You realize that USAF personnel are also on Ascension, right? You are attacking American military installations.

Secondly, I would like to point out that while I may not like the outcomes, I will follow them. I was making the point about the Rapiers. The fact is that the first set did not account for them. They are present on the island IRL.

Ascension Island is governed by Britain, and the American's have a base there. However, between you both, I don't see any ORBAT's mentioning the Island, so the default garrison is something like a hundred men so I assumed that there is no aircraft stationed there.

[Delanshar]

Also, coup de main against Ascension Island. You've got no more than a few dozen garrison, perhaps 200 plus the service staff. Surrender and they all go free on the next flight home.

You realize that USAF personnel are also on Ascension, right? You are attacking American military installations.

Secondly, I would like to point out that while I may not like the outcomes, I will follow them. I was making the point about the Rapiers. The fact is that the first set did not account for them. They are present on the island IRL.

To be fair to Britain he never said he liked the first stats, only Germany did.
Once he brought up the SAMs they both decided that the new stats were fairer.

So I think we should do a reroll with the new stats.

[Minnysota]

I'd recommend doing away with the "roll" system. It restricts roleplay and honestly, it can make almost impossible outcomes just as likely as the probable outcomes.

[Machtergreifung]

Also, coup de main against Ascension Island. You've got no more than a few dozen garrison, perhaps 200 plus the service staff. Surrender and they all go free on the next flight home.

You realize that USAF personnel are also on Ascension, right? You are attacking American military installations.

Secondly, I would like to point out that while I may not like the outcomes, I will follow them. I was making the point about the Rapiers. The fact is that the first set did not account for them. They are present on the island IRL.

To properly clear up the Ascension Island US base issue.

There is only one airstrip on the island, which is controled by the UK.
The US has a base, but it is (from what google earth shows) just a collection of buildings.

[Kryskov]

To properly clear up the Ascension Island US base issue.

There is only one airstrip on the island, which is controled by the UK.
The US has a base, but it is (from what google earth shows) just a collection of buildings.

Still a base.

[Delanshar]

I'd recommend doing away with the "roll" system. It restricts roleplay and honestly, it can make almost impossible outcomes just as likely as the probable outcomes.

I think it has potential. As long as we tweak the possible outcomes to be biased towards whats more likely.

The reason I'm trying it out is because too often on NS, you will have RPs where everyone is arguing about what should happen and then battles precede subjectively. Everyone is trying so hard to win the battle that they let the quality of their posts degrade.

This way people already know the outcome, it's non-negotiable, so that they can focus instead on RPing to make the battle interesting, well written and fun to read.

[Minnysota]

Might I mention that you can't just waltz up to a base? You think that you can sneak an entire fucking fleet up to a military base? No; that's pure horseshit. This entire Falklands Issue is horseshit.

1) Good luck to NATO people keeping up their logistics. 2
2) Brazil/Argentina: Good luck maintaining a naval offensive past your territorial waters.

[New Ecopia]

I'd recommend doing away with the "roll" system. It restricts roleplay and honestly, it can make almost impossible outcomes just as likely as the probable outcomes.

Actually the "roll" system simplifies the RP process and deters god modding.

[Greater Nilfgaard]

Fine do the reroll with the new stats

[Machtergreifung]

To properly clear up the Ascension Island US base issue.

There is only one airstrip on the island, which is controled by the UK.
The US has a base, but it is (from what google earth shows) just a collection of buildings.

Still a base.

Certainaly, but it's a non-entity in trying to take the island, the demands were made of the governing body of the Island (Britain), so America really has no say provided I don't carpet bomb the base.