Originally Posted by Rules
An exact method of transportation is not necessary in an attack, but a general method is needed. Troops may be transported across the world in a single turn, but the defender is allowed to attempt to stop them in transit as well. Again, remember other countries you are passing over/through.
They are the rules, I don't see the problem.
The fact is marsak if you start making this game ultra ultra realistic it will become shit, there has to be some element which makes it a game. Stop nitpicking and get on with it, I know you and qwert for some reason have taken an interest in defending hotaka (when in skype chats one or both have you have commented how he is shit) but keep pulling out such small things and you'll end up being the only one left playing the game.
Originally Posted by Rules
An exact method of transportation is not necessary in an attack, but a general method is needed. Troops may be transported across the world in a single turn, but the defender is allowed to attempt to stop them in transit as well. Again, remember other countries you are passing over/through.
They are the rules, I don't see the problem.
The fact is marsak if you start making this game ultra ultra realistic it will become not very good, there has to be some element which makes it a game. Stop nitpicking and get on with it, I know you and qwert for some reason have taken an interest in defending hotaka (when in skype chats one or both have you have commented how he is not very good) but keep pulling out such small things and you'll end up being the only one left playing the game.
There are significant disadvantages to amphibious assault. One of which being limited troop and equipment supply. That's fine if you don't want to be realistic, however, you can't just have 1,000,000 troops and a few thousand vehicles pop up on a beach. They have to come in shifts and all the equipment you have points to those being extremely small shifts.
As for your complaint against my nitpicking, no one has any issue against it when it helps them. It seems that whenever it is against them, the issue is found.
As for both Qwert and I discussing the quality of Hotaka, he's definitely getting better and I figured the best way to have him get better is to teach. Killing him off won't help improvement.
As for your claim that no one would play the game, my nitpicking is not ultra realistic. Its just realistic. As explained, there are significant disadvantages to amphibious assault. Its the main reason why D-Day casualties were so high and why the obviously outnumbered Germans weren't just completely swamped by the attackers. Its less of a realism thing than a logical thing.
As far as I am aware, the rules allow troops to get moved around with just a general method, and unless someone tries to kill them in transit then it is assumed that the troops arrive safely and pretty much instantly.
So the rules seem to make Marsak's argument invalid. (Unless of course someone is attacking the boats taking them, then it would seem that they would take heavy casualties due to the long time it takes)
It seems that the UN will not actively help hotaka, so if you want to stop rizzler, then send some military their and stop him, your's would also arrive instantly.
There are significant disadvantages to amphibious assault. One of which being limited troop and equipment supply. That's fine if you don't want to be realistic, however, you can't just have 1,000,000 troops and a few thousand vehicles pop up on a beach. They have to come in shifts and all the equipment you have points to those being extremely small shifts.
As for your complaint against my nitpicking, no one has any issue against it when it helps them. It seems that whenever it is against them, the issue is found.
As for both Qwert and I discussing the quality of Hotaka, he's definitely getting better and I figured the best way to have him get better is to teach. Killing him off won't help improvement.
As for your claim that no one would play the game, my nitpicking is not ultra realistic. Its just realistic. As explained, there are significant disadvantages to amphibious assault. Its the main reason why D-Day casualties were so high and why the obviously outnumbered Germans weren't just completely swamped by the attackers. Its less of a realism thing than a logical thing.
Pretty much. When writing an invasion plan that involves amphibious landings I thought that although you did not have to list hundreds of landing craft for a single invasion. You had to list at least more then one craft in your invasion plan xD
2 Tracks for high speed trains in between all capital cities and major ports of the countries Kenya, Somaliland, Uganda, DRC , Ethiopia and Djibouti
Republic of the Congo this will help get investors, tourists and civilians to all major locations in the African Federation pretty fast.
- 2 Tracks for high speed freight trains in between major industrial cities and ports of the countries, Kenya, Somaliland, Uganda, DRC , Ethiopia and Djibouti to get industrial and commercial freight to the major ports of the countries.
- 1.5 billion for this major plan, gather construction experts from across the world to help lead this mega-project.
ETA 1 year
Aim to start construction of the http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bridge_of_the_Horns. Train construction workers from Djibouti to help with their unemployment problem. - 1 billion dollars (ETA 3 years)
Start modernizing the health care system of Angola and Zambia. Modernize old hospitals and purchase new medial equipment. Also train medical staff to a higher standard. Ask for assistance from the WHO and Soviet Union- 1 billion dollars
Start modernizing the transport system of Central African Republic. According to the sources on wikipedia. The transport infrastructure of the Central African Republic really sucks. Repair existing roads and construct new roads, focusing on major economic centres and major cities and large towns. - 1 billion dollars
Angola is the worlds third largest producer of diamonds for export, although the mining sector of the country is plagued with corruption and human rights issues. Start and investigation into the corruption and human rights issues going on in the Angolan mining industry with assistance from the United Nations. Mines that have found to be corrupt and breaking human rights will have their mines seized and their assets merged into the African Federation Mining Company. - 500 million dollars
Angolan diamond assets that have been seized, their mining equipment will be modernized and their workers will be trained to a higher standard to increase production and the prestige of Angolan diamonds. - 1 billion dollars
Zambia used to have a thriving copper mining industry, however in recent years the mining sector has under-gone under investment. Subsidize the modernization of mining equipment in the copper mining sector and the training of workers to a higher standard to increase production. Mines in the country will full under the control of the African Federation Mining Company. - 1 billion dollars
The forestry industry used to be the dominant industry in the Republic of Congo, however in recent years the country has been faced with under investment, the same problems have also hampered industry and the agriculture industry. To solve these problems start the following modernization programme -
- Improve the quality of the road network in the Republic of the Congo, aiming to make it easier for traders to get their goods to various centres over the country
- Subsidizing the modernization of equipment and higher standards of training in the nations timber industry to solve the timber industries problem with fallen productivity.
- The planting of various tree farms to make the countries industry self-sufficient - 1 billion dollars
(ETA 1 years)
Modernize all existing power plants within the African Federation (Apart from Kenya which I updated and modernized a few years ago). Aim to increase current power production, fix and repair damaged plants and provide electricity to every home in the African Federation. Ask for funding and assistance from various African charity organizations and the United Nations - 1 billion dollars
Ask for assistance from the UN and WTO organization in tacking the corruption in the country. Have entire sweeps of the African Federation government. Any person caught dealing in corruption will face trial and anyone found guilty will be put in jail for 10 years and banned from taking government positions. - 500 million dollars
Foreign Relations
United Nations - Joint Speech with the United North African diplomats at UN. Our diplomats should trade off speaking, and finish by shaking hands and showing signs of unity
"Countries of the United Nations, we stand before you today after numerous tragedies have occurred throughout this past year. We implore you to take heed to Africa's warning.
During this past year, South America has bled both militarily and economically. The sheer horror of the war crimes and brash military action of the South American nations is a disgrace to modern day. Paraguay is guilty of firing on civilians as well as taking a bold invasion of Ecuador after an explosion at their Dam as well as a discovery of plans for an attempt on President Olly's life. While we in Africa feel that these things do weigh some, Paraguay's actions after these events must be taken into consideration. We would also like to direct attention to the destruction of the Panama Canal. This travesty against one of mankind's greatest engineering marvels must be looked into. We cannot, as a community, allow for these such acts to go unpunished.
We, the diplomats of Africa, would also like to point the international community to the tensions rising in Southeast Asia. Last year, the Malaysian Peninsular was invaded in an act of sheer military aggression by Cambodia, led by President Rizzler. The Philippines and President Hotaka acted submissively and took no action against this. We would like to point out the similarities of this action to the appeasement of the 1930's. In order to avoid certain military outbreak, we must stop this assault now. Although we are not attempting to push the blame on anyone, we find it coincidental that the destruction of the Panama Canal happened just in time to distract the world's attention from this invasion.
All in all, our world was shaken by numerous events and must stay strong as a single community if we have a hope to avoid certain war. We, the diplomats of Africa, implore you as a community to listen to us and take action!"
United North Africa - Accept their most gracious offer to join AEMPO. A peaceful Africa is a prosperous Africa.
Namibia - Approximately half the population lives under the poverty line and the population and it's population is badly effected by AIDs/HIV and according to the wiki the cost of living is extremely high due to high transportation costs. I offer you a chance to merge into the African Federation and have the same improvements that the African Federation has done to it's citizens.
Cameroon - The African Federation can offer benefits to the economy of Cameroon, the African Federation has poured billions into upgrading and modernizing the infrastructure of the countries under it's controls. I can upgrade the infrastructure in Cameroon the same way, for example connecting the country to the high speed rail network. I offer Cameroon a chance to merge into the African Federation.
Mozambique - Send the leader of the country gifts relating to the varied culture of the African Federation. Offer Mozambique a chance to join AEMPO.
South Africa - Offer assistance to help with the growing crime and HIV/Aids rate in the country.
Research - 500 million dollars
Project X-1 - 500 million dollars.
Military - 870 million dollars
25 x J-25's for 870 million dollars
Summary
Improve infrastructure
Improve agriculture in Somalia
Get ready for Olympics
Bid for all african games
Promote the Novi.
I think I spent 9.65 billions
There are significant disadvantages to amphibious assault. One of which being limited troop and equipment supply. That's fine if you don't want to be realistic, however, you can't just have 1,000,000 troops and a few thousand vehicles pop up on a beach. They have to come in shifts and all the equipment you have points to those being extremely small shifts.
As for your complaint against my nitpicking, no one has any issue against it when it helps them. It seems that whenever it is against them, the issue is found.
As for both Qwert and I discussing the quality of Hotaka, he's definitely getting better and I figured the best way to have him get better is to teach. Killing him off won't help improvement.
As for your claim that no one would play the game, my nitpicking is not ultra realistic. Its just realistic. As explained, there are significant disadvantages to amphibious assault. Its the main reason why D-Day casualties were so high and why the obviously outnumbered Germans weren't just completely swamped by the attackers. Its less of a realism thing than a logical thing.
Originally Posted by Rules
An exact method of transportation is not necessary in an attack, but a general method is needed. Troops may be transported across the world in a single turn, but the defender is allowed to attempt to stop them in transit as well. Again, remember other countries you are passing over/through.
It seems onion has no problem with the invasion transports so i don't see what the problem is? A CTW isn't going to be realistic in every single way, at some point something that couldn't happen in rl will happen. The game is run by the GM so just accept their decision
It seems onion has no problem with the invasion transports so i don't see what the problem is? A CTW isn't going to be realistic in every single way, at some point something that couldn't happen in rl will happen. The game is run by the GM so just accept their decision
Well. When someone can launch a massive amphibious invasion using one landing craft? It does really take the biscut. I mean when I was planning my landing into Africa I spent a few billion dollars on my final turn purchasing around 10-20 amphibious landing craft, to pump some minor logic into the landing.
Of course Rizzlers magical landing ship and helicopters and aircraft with unlimited rangle and weight load. :lol:
Well. When someone can launch a massive amphibious invasion using one landing craft? It does really take the biscut. I mean when I was planning my landing into Africa I spent a few billion dollars on my final turn purchasing around 10-20 amphibious landing craft, to pump some minor logic into the landing.
Of course Rizzlers magical landing ship and helicopters and aircraft with unlimited rangle and weight load. :lol:
The rules basically state transport info isn't needed when landing. If Rizzlers wants them to swim, then they shall swim, and get there in under a year!
The GM will make the best decision and if he feels that Rizzler needs to specify landing crafts, then HE will tell him so. It is not your place to tell someone what they can and can't do. That's up to the GM.
You've made your objections clear, now I suggest you close the case.
The rules basically state transport info isn't needed when landing. If Rizzlers wants them to swim, then they shall swim, and get there in under a year!
The GM will make the best decision and if he feels that Rizzler needs to specify landing crafts, then HE will tell him so. It is not your place to tell someone what they can and can't do. That's up to the GM.
You've made your objections clear, now I suggest you close the case.
It's the players task to point out problems to the GM. I'm just point out certain flaws in the rules that I feel need to be addressed. You need to post the general specifics on how your getting across the massive gap of ocean between the two land masses.
Of course purchasing enough landing craft to land a massive amphibious landing the size of Rizzlers would be completely impracticable. I would recommend listing at least 10-20 craft that be considered landing craft in order to not take the biscuit.
I'm alive, but with no power The weathers knocked it out, so I'm on my phone.
I see no problem with pointing out mistakes to the GM, but this was taken to far. I had already stated my views on this matter and directed the arguement but it has just been slung back. Even persons not playing this CTW are here to shout! I have said Rizzlers troops will get there. Simple. To point things out is helpful and will give me good favour, but to argue directly to me? That will get you into bother. I haven't issused hurricanes or anything in this CTW, the most that has happened for a few secret ops by players, but I'm willing to give them a go if this continues. The rules state the GM's words are law, so follow that law. If I say the UN are split, they're split. If I say Britain back Rizzler's invasion and the Soviets back Hotaka's defence, then that happened. End off. If you want to add something in there, get your troops in there on a side instead of female dogging about the entire issue.
I'm alive, but with no power The weathers knocked it out, so I'm on my phone.
I see no problem with pointing out mistakes to the GM, but this was taken to far. I had already stated my views on this matter and directed the arguement but it has just been slung back. Even persons not playing this CTW are here to shout! I have said Rizzlers troops will get there. Simple. To point things out is helpful and will give me good favour, but to argue directly to me? That will get you into bother. I haven't issused hurricanes or anything in this CTW, the most that has happened for a few secret ops by players, but I'm willing to give them a go if this continues. The rules state the GM's words are law, so follow that law. If I say the UN are split, they're split. If I say Britain back Rizzler's invasion and the Soviets back Hotaka's defence, then that happened. End off. If you want to add something in there, get your troops in there on a side instead of female dogging about the entire issue.
Although on the CTW note, I haven't played it as long as some people here that's for sure. But I think the rules do need clarifying specifically around the invasion area.
I'm just saying for further CTW games;
1. Terrain can play a big part in invasions, climate even more so. Look at Russia-Germany for an example. Seasons aren't specified, so the defending country is already at an advantage/disadvantage. Maybe that should be rectified by say if the plan is put up half a day after big post it's spring... or something like that.
2. Posting attack plans then defence plans is extremely advantageous to the defending party. They've seen the attack, even the secret pincer moves, so they can plan against it. Giving away the element of surprise.
3. Every ctw seems to follow the same route, I'm starting to find them quite boring recently because it's the same backstory of USA/UK/USSR all powerful fighting against each other etc etc. We spread to other countries via doubtful mergers, invade under very doubtful reasons that wouldn't happen irl (ehem...Somalia), Don't specify how things are to be done. People were picking me up on small things like my biofuel, yet I see people throwing in "Improve fishing - 500m" ..... How?!
4. A lot can happen in a year. Why not give people larger more realistic budgets, make them put more detail into their turns and instead do a big post every 4 days. This gives more time to do events and such as well.
5. Inject some intriguing backstory into the CTW, have a full 10 year spread filled out so that the story doesn't have to be made on the spot. Put exciting things that maybe wouldn't happen irl or would in there. For example... I've never seen anyone use a biological weapon! Yes, it is high risk, but UK, USA and China all have them. China even own a small part of the smallpox virus yet nobody has unleashed it on the world yet?
I'm just saying; there are quite a lot of flaws that have been neglected for a while and that to bring the experience to a new level, maybe they have to be rectified.
