Future Tech Advice and Assistance Thread [O.O.C.]

[Imperial and Federal Union of States]

Thanks for the advice, it's good to hear. I'll try and get settled down quickly enough, and start trying to do RP related stuff.

Just for a little teaser though, I'm going to drop in some of the ships for my fleet I've done up in lineart.

Wallenstein class Line Cruiser
Enterprise class Fleet Carrier
J.17 Space Superiority Fighter

If anyone has any feedback or critique, please say so. Or if anyone wants to buy and import them feel free to ask. Nothing better to get started than economic sales.

[Volesia]

Thanks for the advice, it's good to hear. I'll try and get settled down quickly enough, and start trying to do RP related stuff.

Just for a little teaser though, I'm going to drop in some of the ships for my fleet I've done up in lineart.

Wallenstein class Line Cruiser
Enterprise class Fleet Carrier
J.17 Space Superiority Fighter

If anyone has any feedback or critique, please say so. Or if anyone wants to buy and import them feel free to ask. Nothing better to get started than economic sales.

What kind of weapons do you have on your cruiser? They look like rail guns or something similar to me.

[Imperial and Federal Union of States]

Thanks for the advice, it's good to hear. I'll try and get settled down quickly enough, and start trying to do RP related stuff.

Just for a little teaser though, I'm going to drop in some of the ships for my fleet I've done up in lineart.

Wallenstein class Line Cruiser
Enterprise class Fleet Carrier
J.17 Space Superiority Fighter

If anyone has any feedback or critique, please say so. Or if anyone wants to buy and import them feel free to ask. Nothing better to get started than economic sales.

What kind of weapons do you have on your cruiser? They look like rail guns or something similar to me.

The large turrets ventral and dorsal are intended to be 406 mm mass driver cannons. The guns embedded along the broadside and flanking the superstructure are plasma beam cannons, while the boxes are point defense missiles, and the small turrets are point defense guns.

[Canuckland]

Thanks for the advice, it's good to hear. I'll try and get settled down quickly enough, and start trying to do RP related stuff.

Just for a little teaser though, I'm going to drop in some of the ships for my fleet I've done up in lineart.

Wallenstein class Line Cruiser
Enterprise class Fleet Carrier
J.17 Space Superiority Fighter

If anyone has any feedback or critique, please say so. Or if anyone wants to buy and import them feel free to ask. Nothing better to get started than economic sales.

Be wary of fighters. Unless if they are a plot device, or can enter both Atmosphere and then head back up into space, they're essentially useless, due to nukes in space and stuff.

That's one of several things I learned on this thread.

[Volesia]

Thanks for the advice, it's good to hear. I'll try and get settled down quickly enough, and start trying to do RP related stuff.

Just for a little teaser though, I'm going to drop in some of the ships for my fleet I've done up in lineart.

Wallenstein class Line Cruiser
Enterprise class Fleet Carrier
J.17 Space Superiority Fighter

If anyone has any feedback or critique, please say so. Or if anyone wants to buy and import them feel free to ask. Nothing better to get started than economic sales.

Be wary of fighters. Unless if they are a plot device, or can enter both Atmosphere and then head back up into space, they're essentially useless, due to nukes in space and stuff.

That's one of several things I learned on this thread.

Space aircraft can work well if you use them properly. Most people just throw aircraft at ships in huge frontal attacks, which is obviously a bad idea. I like to think that nuclear weapons will be so advanced in the future that even a bomber sized missile could threaten a cruiser. I use my bombers to hit enemy ships while they are distracted fighting my own. The missiles necessary to break through heavy shields would need to be large, so my ships don't carry them (They'd probably get shot down in combat anyway). Fighters cover my bombers while they hit the enemy from behind, hopefully weakening their shields enough for my fleet's heavy laser batteries to break through and finish the job.

[SquareDisc City]

Nice art. Though I'm a bit unconvinced by those spiky bits, kinda look odd compared to the rest of the craft.

On fighters, well my nation thinks they're useful, and that's all I feel I need to excuse them.

[Volesia]

Nice art. Though I'm a bit unconvinced by those spiky bits, kinda look odd compared to the rest of the craft.

They remind me of the frontal beam cannons on the Kol battleship in Sins of a Solar Empire.

[Imperial and Federal Union of States]

Nice art. Though I'm a bit unconvinced by those spiky bits, kinda look odd compared to the rest of the craft.

They remind me of the frontal beam cannons on the Kol battleship in Sins of a Solar Empire.

That was what inspired them, but IC the frontal spikes are the main shield emitters on the vessel.

As for fighters, I've done a little bit of writing on how I envision them to act within the fleet. I'd think that they would mostly be a harassing agent, as they wouldn't be able to launch the kind of weapons that could damage a full strength capital ship shield, so they are held to both harass smaller vessels, surgically strike key targets on capital ships that have had their shield damaged or collapsed by capital ship fire.

[Alouria]

I'd like some critique on the general info of my nation and species. You'll find it identical in layout to the one that Denengrad posted a few pages back. http://www.nationstates.net/nation=alouria/detail=factbook/id=212992

Now, there's a lot of information in that factbook, so I don't expect anyone to break down the entire thing (unless you really want to :D), but I would like for some critique on it. Even if it's just one point or one section, I'm fine with it; any critique is better than none.

I also lack a 'soopah powah', which I guess is just some piece of really powerful equipment.

[Volesia]

They remind me of the frontal beam cannons on the Kol battleship in Sins of a Solar Empire.

That was what inspired them, but IC the frontal spikes are the main shield emitters on the vessel.

As for fighters, I've done a little bit of writing on how I envision them to act within the fleet. I'd think that they would mostly be a harassing agent, as they wouldn't be able to launch the kind of weapons that could damage a full strength capital ship shield, so they are held to both harass smaller vessels, surgically strike key targets on capital ships that have had their shield damaged or collapsed by capital ship fire.

Your carrier doctrine is somewhat similar to what I envision my own navies to be. There's no reason why your bombers can't carry a nuclear weapon capable of doing decent damage to enemy shields as long as you recognise the obvious drawbacks such aircraft would have. Your bombers aren't going to be taking out entire battleships on their own like in Star Wars, but if you escort and support them properly they could deal some good damage.

[Canuckland]

No matter what I do or say, I swear, people always find a way to tell me I'm wrong, even if it's right.

I swear sometimes. Like, it's odd. Not complaining, just find it odd.

[Volesia]

No matter what I do or say, I swear, people always find a way to tell me I'm wrong, even if it's right.

I swear sometimes. Like, it's odd. Not complaining, just find it odd.

What are you referring to?

[Soviet Hive]

No matter what I do or say, I swear, people always find a way to tell me I'm wrong, even if it's right.

I swear sometimes. Like, it's odd. Not complaining, just find it odd.

You could try using fewer definites. For an example, saying that fighters "simply don't work" at all, is wrong, no matter what you may personally believe. Life isn't black and white. Neither is the realm of FT. There is no such thing as a totally right or wrong answer--just ones that make more sense, and just about everybody gets corrected on this advice thread. It's not just you. There's no reason to play the wounded victim.

Also, "people always find a way to tell me I'm wrong, even if it's right." comes off as full of hubris. Volesia had a good point, and if you disagree with him, then instead of simply whining about it (and yes, you most certainly were whining) you should engage him in a TG debate or such instead of moaning about how you always get contradicted. I'm sorry if this comes off a bit harsh or such, but I mean it in the friendliest way possible.

---

Anyways, I would like an opinion on the use of cavalry. I've been conceptualizing a unit of bug riders, and would like a simple opinion on how people view cavalry in general.
Also, I would appreciate a scale of relative fleet sizes and such for building my own tin foil army.

[Volesia]

Anyways, I would like an opinion on the use of cavalry. I've been conceptualizing a unit of bug riders, and would like a simple opinion on how people view cavalry in general.
Also, I would appreciate a scale of relative fleet sizes and such for building my own tin foil army.

Whenever I think of cavalry in FT I always imagine horses equipped with power armour and riders armed with energy lances. If Warhammer 40k can get away with Rough Riders then you could probably do something similar. It's not beyond the scope of FT by any means, although I doubt the such units would be effective in most situations. I remember reading a military article a while back that said the Red Army's cavalry units during WWII weren't actually completely useless and were found to be good at breaking up infantry formations, so they may find some use (Several of the divisions where elevated to Guards status so they must have done something right. I'm not sure if they where horse or mechanised cavalry though, so I could be wrong). I'd imagine cavalry units might be good for ambushes as well, so long as you equip them with the right gear. The ability to quickly move over hard terrain is a good advantage too, although supplies for the animals could strain your logistics.

[Arkotania]

Use of animals for cavalry can make sense. Compared to machines, animals could be stealthier and harder to detect(as a threat). They might also have abilities of their own to contribute(For non-equine species). So if the risers have to dismount, the creature they were riding on will still have some use beyond a form of transportation.

In fact an interesting idea would be a form of cavalry where the specie being used for riding is also a sentient and intelligent one, thus when not transporting, it can stand up straight and handle weapons and equipment. You dont have to have simple animals.

[Canuckland]

No matter what I do or say, I swear, people always find a way to tell me I'm wrong, even if it's right.

I swear sometimes. Like, it's odd. Not complaining, just find it odd.

What are you referring to?

Just in threads like this I post in. In the Tank thread, I get scolded for pointing out a vehicle has four treads. Well, wow...
And this. Look through the older threads, people will tell other people to just not use fighters. So it just makes it feel like I'm wrong when I'm right.

So.
Yeah.
Sorry to rant and go off topic.

No matter what I do or say, I swear, people always find a way to tell me I'm wrong, even if it's right.

I swear sometimes. Like, it's odd. Not complaining, just find it odd.

You could try using fewer definites. For an example, saying that fighters "simply don't work" at all, is wrong, no matter what you may personally believe. Life isn't black and white. Neither is the realm of FT. There is no such thing as a totally right or wrong answer--just ones that make more sense, and just about everybody gets corrected on this advice thread. It's not just you. There's no reason to play the wounded victim.

Also, "people always find a way to tell me I'm wrong, even if it's right." comes off as full of hubris. Volesia had a good point, and if you disagree with him, then instead of simply whining about it (and yes, you most certainly were whining) you should engage him in a TG debate or such instead of moaning about how you always get contradicted. I'm sorry if this comes off a bit harsh or such, but I mean it in the friendliest way possible.

Maybe I just spend too much time in the Tank thread, where it is black and white to them.

On topic: After a civil war AND then an annexation, should a nation be forced into a galaxy scale war? And if so, should they expect to survive under the annex? This is currently happening to me.

[Volesia]

On topic: After a civil war AND then an annexation, should a nation be forced into a galaxy scale war? And if so, should they expect to survive under the annex? This is currently happening to me.

Ideally no, it shouldn't see war until it's recovered. The civil war alone would have caused some damage, but if you've conquered then forget about it. You might have a chance if your protector rebuilt your military for you (I'm assuming it was destroyed if you were annexed), but you could easily use it to try and liberate yourself. I'd say you're more or less a puppet at this point, and if your protector loses you're dead if you don't rebel and switch sides. It might be bit different if they've basically just occupied you and conscripted a bunch of your people to use as cannon fodder. If they have then I'd expect quite a few of your conscripts to defect to the enemy side and set up some sort of government in exile. They would probably petition their host government to aid the liberation of your nation in this case, although you'd most likely be expected to make some concessions after the war (Money, resources, technology ect) in return.

[SquareDisc City]

On topic: After a civil war AND then an annexation, should a nation be forced into a galaxy scale war? And if so, should they expect to survive under the annex? This is currently happening to me.

I'll need an expansion on the exact situation.

[Soviet Hive]

On topic: After a civil war AND then an annexation, should a nation be forced into a galaxy scale war? And if so, should they expect to survive under the annex? This is currently happening to me.

In short. No. You really should not be forced to do anything. Your nation is yours, and yours only. It is your intellectual property, and nobody but yourself has any claim to it or its path in the immediate future.

That being said, it might depend. You do have the right to simply not interact with other players because it is your nation, but do remember that you also need to demonstrate a degree of cooperation and rationality.

[Thrashia]

On topic: After a civil war AND then an annexation, should a nation be forced into a galaxy scale war? And if so, should they expect to survive under the annex? This is currently happening to me.

I'll need an expansion on the exact situation.

Seconded. If it is part of an RP story, then the following applies:

Was the annexation peaceful or violent? Was the country further devastated by the process of annexation? How much time passed between the process of annexation to being used in a galaxy-wide war? Are they considered a puppet state or servile to the country that annexed them and obviously controls their foreign policy? Are they considered autonomous in any fashion or just another facet of the country that originally annexed them? Does the annexed country have a choice in whether or not they participate in this galaxy-wide war? How are they expected to participate? What is the current state of the economy and military of the annexed state and the state that annexed them?

Answer those questions and you might be able to get some useful replies. But if its about one player forcing another to join in an RP, then just say "no thanks bro" and go on with your life.

[Canuckland]

Elaboration:

After a civil war between the Dictator and the Democratics, Canuckland was broken and battered. After the major war that occurred, an Ally, Vortukia, annexed us for "protection" (He really just forced us into a war). This led to being sucked into laws we weren't comfortable with, and a huge bump in reserves due to Vortukia's military laws. But with the remnants of the Military forced to fight in a different galaxy, it seemed semi necessary. However, after the casualty numbers started to flow in, many civilians were skeptical. But the war dragged on, and our limited economy was suffering. So now we're facing total collapse and getting our freedom after the war.

[OMGeverynameistaken]

Santh told me to post an NSball:
http://i.imgur.com/hnkNh9c.jpg

Serious advice for serious thread. Build catapult to fire peasants. Good fun. Good defense. Become stronk country like glorious Russia. Good advice, you follow. Now.

[SquareDisc City]

From an IC perspective:
Does Canuckland retain its own government? If yes, most likely it will be reconsidering the situation. Outright refusing to continue supporting Vortukia's wars seems a bit unlikely. A declaration of neutrality might be accepted by Vortukia; they're in one war, it'd be a bit silly to start another (but then plenty of NSers are a bit silly). However, it might not be heeded by the enemy who moments ago were fighting against Canuckland's soldiers; at the very least said enemy may seek concessions of their own.

You could pull a side switch, if you think Vortukia's side is going to lose and the others side can adequately protect Canuckland, but that's not going to bring peace.

Most reasonable, I think, would be behind-the-scenes dealmaking. Vortukia should want trained and motivated soldiers and a strong industrial base; from their point of view, they'd rather stay together. Canuckland wants its economy propping up and its civilian morale improving, and indeed given a sufficient carrot might be more inclined to maintain the alliance.

If Canuckland does not retain its own government, the situation is different. You'll be looking much more at the actions of your people - potential civil disorder, resistance against occupying forces, that sort of stuff. Canuckland soldiers are also likely to be very demotivated, and you may even have mass defections, whole units taking the chance to switch to backing the other side. Indeed, the soldiers and the civilians might seek in Vortukia's enemy a liberator of Canuckland. (Whether that liberator truly brings freedom or is just a new oppressor is up to whoever's RPing them, of course).

From an OOC perspective:
If you want to RP the situation as it stands, there's no problem. If you don't, I think you have a few options.

Best would be to agree with Vortukia's RPer an ending of the annexation, and RP it out quickly.

Next best, if you're not interested in the RPing, would be to just let Vortukia's RPer also RP the Canuckland forces. He gets his IC advantages, you don't have to worry OOC about a thread you're not interested in.

Worst would be to tell Vortukia to sod off, and unilaterally have the annexation be other. You're within your rights to do that, but you'll burn OOC bridges.

[Avenio]

And this. Look through the older threads, people will tell other people to just not use fighters. So it just makes it feel like I'm wrong when I'm right.

Getting into arguments about the utility or lack thereof of fighters in a FT setting is a surefire recipe for alcoholism, spiraling depression and an early grave. It's that pointless, solipsistic and doomed to pedantry.

Ultimately, the only rules that matter in dealing with fighters is the Rule of Cool/Code of Bro. Nothing more and nothing less.

[Thrashia]

Elaboration:

After a civil war between the Dictator and the Democratics, Canuckland was broken and battered. After the major war that occurred, an Ally, Vortukia, annexed us for "protection" (He really just forced us into a war). This led to being sucked into laws we weren't comfortable with, and a huge bump in reserves due to Vortukia's military laws. But with the remnants of the Military forced to fight in a different galaxy, it seemed semi necessary. However, after the casualty numbers started to flow in, many civilians were skeptical. But the war dragged on, and our limited economy was suffering. So now we're facing total collapse and getting our freedom after the war.

Still not enough detail to my liking but I'll go with what you gave me.

1) Still need clarification on the state of affairs concerning the governance of your nation. Are you a version of Puerto Rico? A self-governing state but still subject to the laws and diktats of another nation? Or is your entire government suborned and filled with turn-coats who are serving the wishes of the new regime and not the interests of the Canuckese people?

2) How exactly was the remnant of your military fighting in another galaxy seen as (any level of) necessary? Did the Vortukians claim that if you didn't send soldiers then everyone was going to die and be conquered by someone else? What existential crisis or propagandist reasoning was used?

3) If they can force you to fight in another galaxy and control your nation, how are casualty figures filtering back at all? If they are totalitarian in nature, then control of information would be their number one concern in this situation.

4) You're facing economic collapse from the strain of equipping and supplying an army a galaxy away. Check.

5) How do you know that you are getting your freedom? On whose assurances?