<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" version="2.0"><channel><title><![CDATA[[OOC] Proposal War System v.5 - Discussion]]></title><description><![CDATA[<p dir="auto">Hey guys! It's been quite awhile since the last war system update, about 5 or so years now I think, and that one was not rather functionally different from v.3.  I have quite a few ideas for a new system, and <a class="plugin-mentions-user plugin-mentions-a" href="http://165.22.228.80:80/uid/5"><a class="plugin-mentions-user plugin-mentions-a" href="http://165.22.228.80:80/uid/5">@Duxburian-Union</a></a> asked me to make a thread to showcase them for record keeping and to get public discussion going. I want to stress that the goal of my changes is to streamline the system as a whole, make military sizes more feasible. Total realism is not the goal, and unfairly nerfing specific sized nations is also not the goal.</p>
<p dir="auto">The basic war system concept that has existed for years remains, purchasing units through industrial credits, the key difference here is that there will be a new equation.</p>
<pre><code>[{(Euro GDP/275,000,000)x3}+250] x Econ Multiplier x Defense Multiplier = Total Industrial Credits
</code></pre>
<p dir="auto">The key difference here is that the reliance on nation-states population is directly removed from the system. The system would not rely on the size of a nations Euro GDP. I'm inclined to support the idea that a the larger the economy, the bigger and more advanced the military could be rather than population.</p>
<p dir="auto">The current Econ and Defense Multipliers fit perfectly fine enough, if people would like to see this included in any update I would prefer to focus on how the GDP is divided in beta testing potentially as well as how many "starting" credits. Beginning with 250 credits is placeholder from the previous system, but I am curious to see if people are interested in changing it at all.</p>
<p dir="auto">The way that this new equation is designed necessitates total changes to the pricing and sizes of purchasable units. The major things I'd like to highlight are that aircraft are not longer purchased in groups of thirty, and are instead single set purchases, except with helicopters which are purchased in groups of five. Also, various ground units are now different personnel sizes instead of the previous uniform 5,000. Upkeep is no longer uniform across all units and varies considerably depending on the unit.  Naval units also received price changes.</p>
<p dir="auto">To account for real world maintenance requirements and logistic support, new 'Support' units have been introduced in order to maintain a properly equipment and readied armed force. These support units are automatically purchased on the automatic sheet.</p>
<p dir="auto">The total personnel size of your military under proposal would be .75% of your total population in peace, and up to 5% in a total war economy. This no longer just applies to ground forces but applies to every branch.</p>
<p dir="auto">The reserve system has been removed for the time being; the system was not used previously by most people, and since there are varying definitions of reserves from inactive reserves seen in mainly conscription nations to active reserves which resembles the US model closely. Either there is two layers of reserves introduced, which I believe adds complexity or they removed as 'functional' parts of the system and simply remain as an aesthetic RP item for the time being. I'm open to hear ideas on the subject.</p>
<p dir="auto">The last final major change is the Producer system. To start with, there will be tiered producers, right now the system treats the United States and Sweden as equals in terms of cost to obtain, so there will be four main tiers of listed producers with new inclusions. Producer eligibility would be determined by the amount of Arms Manufacturing a nation has on NS.</p>
<p dir="auto">I would like to also introduce Local Variants, so if Producer A has a product from Producer but it is built for example on license or illegally in Producer A it counts as a new independent product from Producer A. The prime example for this is the F-15J, while the stock F-15 was designed in the US, the F-15J has components designed in and then mostly built in Japan thus making it a product of the Japanese producer slot. This allows for less competing production items especially among European producers <em>eyes the Eurofighter</em> .</p>
<p dir="auto">I would like to also make it so that companies who produced these items are associated with their RP producer as well, so Boeing would be based in the Duxburian Union for example. However, I do not think this has to be applied but I think it would definitely be a good rule of thumb.</p>
<p dir="auto">I think I've gone over the vast majority of my changes, I wished to avoid completely doing word vomit with number specific changes here...I have a nifty google docs file located <a href="https://docs.google.com/document/d/17r6PqFw-YocBO-iUZ5j_WCDi0FLZJNyPjqrjFticGGY/edit?usp=sharing" rel="nofollow ugc">here!</a> That file contains all my changes to the system, as well as descriptions for a variety of new units.</p>
<p dir="auto"><a class="plugin-mentions-user plugin-mentions-a" href="http://165.22.228.80:80/uid/5"><a class="plugin-mentions-user plugin-mentions-a" href="http://165.22.228.80:80/uid/5">@Duxburian-Union</a></a> and I both discussed adding changes to unit descriptions and other aesthetic changes to make it easier to digest but I don't think those changes are rather pressing and would probably be a small aesthetic update if anything.</p>
<p dir="auto">What I would appreciate now is thoughts, comments, people filling out my proposed automatic sheets so I can see if any balance and stuff would be needed. or hey maybe no one wants to change it, but I thought I could at least present my mostly finalized ideas over to all.</p>
<hr />
<p dir="auto">TL:DR<br />
War system needs an major update, I have quite a few ideas to put in place. You can read them here;<br />
<a href="https://docs.google.com/document/d/17r6PqFw-YocBO-iUZ5j_WCDi0FLZJNyPjqrjFticGGY/edit?usp=sharing" rel="nofollow ugc">War System v.5.</a><br />
If you can please fill this out and send it to me! If something was not mentioned but appears to be changed let me know I probably forgot to include it or accidentally deleted it. Unless otherwise noted all things are unchanged.<br />
<a href="https://drive.google.com/file/d/1zOmoNeaJtgkWnJEzLb16uSkQt1VmCdIX/view?usp=sharing" rel="nofollow ugc">War Sheet v.5. Beta</a></p>
]]></description><link>http://165.22.228.80:80/topic/163/ooc-proposal-war-system-v-5-discussion</link><generator>RSS for Node</generator><lastBuildDate>Tue, 07 Apr 2026 08:48:35 GMT</lastBuildDate><atom:link href="http://165.22.228.80:80/topic/163.rss" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/><pubDate>Tue, 31 Dec 2019 04:41:45 GMT</pubDate><ttl>60</ttl><item><title><![CDATA[Reply to [OOC] Proposal War System v.5 - Discussion on Wed, 15 Apr 2020 23:01:38 GMT]]></title><description><![CDATA[<p dir="auto">The vote is 8-0 to AYE, which is, er, more than 75%, so the motion is approved!</p>
<p dir="auto">I'll get to work updating the warzone forum.</p>
]]></description><link>http://165.22.228.80:80/post/2317</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://165.22.228.80:80/post/2317</guid><dc:creator><![CDATA[Angleter]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Wed, 15 Apr 2020 23:01:38 GMT</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[Reply to [OOC] Proposal War System v.5 - Discussion on Sat, 11 Apr 2020 05:49:21 GMT]]></title><description><![CDATA[<p dir="auto">I vote <strong>AYE</strong></p>
]]></description><link>http://165.22.228.80:80/post/2268</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://165.22.228.80:80/post/2268</guid><dc:creator><![CDATA[Fayrrendel]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Sat, 11 Apr 2020 05:49:21 GMT</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[Reply to [OOC] Proposal War System v.5 - Discussion on Fri, 10 Apr 2020 15:48:27 GMT]]></title><description><![CDATA[<p dir="auto">I do vote <strong>AYE</strong>.</p>
]]></description><link>http://165.22.228.80:80/post/2251</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://165.22.228.80:80/post/2251</guid><dc:creator><![CDATA[Spain]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Fri, 10 Apr 2020 15:48:27 GMT</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[Reply to [OOC] Proposal War System v.5 - Discussion on Thu, 09 Apr 2020 06:42:04 GMT]]></title><description><![CDATA[<p dir="auto">I vote Aye</p>
]]></description><link>http://165.22.228.80:80/post/2243</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://165.22.228.80:80/post/2243</guid><dc:creator><![CDATA[Kingdom of Reitzmag]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Thu, 09 Apr 2020 06:42:04 GMT</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[Reply to [OOC] Proposal War System v.5 - Discussion on Thu, 09 Apr 2020 02:08:53 GMT]]></title><description><![CDATA[<p dir="auto">I vote <strong>AYE</strong>.</p>
]]></description><link>http://165.22.228.80:80/post/2242</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://165.22.228.80:80/post/2242</guid><dc:creator><![CDATA[Inquista]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Thu, 09 Apr 2020 02:08:53 GMT</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[Reply to [OOC] Proposal War System v.5 - Discussion on Wed, 08 Apr 2020 23:24:05 GMT]]></title><description><![CDATA[<p dir="auto">I vote <strong>AYE</strong></p>
]]></description><link>http://165.22.228.80:80/post/2237</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://165.22.228.80:80/post/2237</guid><dc:creator><![CDATA[Vayinaod]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Wed, 08 Apr 2020 23:24:05 GMT</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[Reply to [OOC] Proposal War System v.5 - Discussion on Wed, 08 Apr 2020 22:25:49 GMT]]></title><description><![CDATA[<p dir="auto"><strong>I vote AYE</strong></p>
]]></description><link>http://165.22.228.80:80/post/2235</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://165.22.228.80:80/post/2235</guid><dc:creator><![CDATA[Fremet]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Wed, 08 Apr 2020 22:25:49 GMT</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[Reply to [OOC] Proposal War System v.5 - Discussion on Wed, 08 Apr 2020 18:21:05 GMT]]></title><description><![CDATA[<p dir="auto">Sure, Aye.</p>
]]></description><link>http://165.22.228.80:80/post/2232</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://165.22.228.80:80/post/2232</guid><dc:creator><![CDATA[California]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Wed, 08 Apr 2020 18:21:05 GMT</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[Reply to [OOC] Proposal War System v.5 - Discussion on Wed, 08 Apr 2020 17:03:57 GMT]]></title><description><![CDATA[<p dir="auto">First of all I'd like to thank <a class="plugin-mentions-user plugin-mentions-a" href="http://165.22.228.80:80/uid/16">@Vayinaod</a> for his work on this and for being patient with me taking ages to get around to moving this process forward.</p>
<p dir="auto">I think this system is great. It adds a dose of realism to our war system and makes us think about how we structure our armed forces and how we fight military conflicts. The reality is this works <em>in favour</em> of smaller countries – what this system does more than anything else, especially combined with population rules, is severely limit the ability of larger countries to field massive armed forces that can successfully attack any smaller nation anywhere in the region.</p>
<p dir="auto">I'm glad that we've found a way for this to dovetail with a budget system as well. That should make us all think about how much we're spending on our militaries – even if it's possible to sustain a military of X size, it might not be <em>desirable</em> to do so – and act accordingly. Most RL countries, especially in Europe, do not put a huge portion of their GDP towards defence because doing so would harm their ability to do all the other things a modern Western government wants to do.</p>
<p dir="auto">In short, this system will, I think, allow for a lot more realism and much better military and economic RP, and I think we should all support it.</p>
<hr />
<p dir="auto">I'd like, therefore, to initiate a vote on replacing the current war system with this one. Voting starts now and ends <strong>17.00 GMT on April 15th</strong>. One vote per <em>player</em>. 75% threshold for approval.</p>
<p dir="auto">I vote <strong>AYE</strong></p>
]]></description><link>http://165.22.228.80:80/post/2231</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://165.22.228.80:80/post/2231</guid><dc:creator><![CDATA[Angleter]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Wed, 08 Apr 2020 17:03:57 GMT</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[Reply to [OOC] Proposal War System v.5 - Discussion on Wed, 01 Apr 2020 05:06:41 GMT]]></title><description><![CDATA[<p dir="auto">OKAY I got another update lmao.</p>
<p dir="auto">Angleter asked me to look into adding a budget feature to the war system...and after some eye twitching and hours of frantic hours in google spreadsheets I figured out a way to convert IC's to a hard military budget.</p>
<p dir="auto">The equation:<br />
[Total ICs/5]* 10,000,000 = Budget in EUROS</p>
<p dir="auto">As a part to accommodate this, you are not allowed to spend more than 5% of your EURO GDP on defense without war admin approval. Also Defense Multipliers have now been changed to where you may choose how much of your budget you spend on defense, but the max is 25% without War Admin approval. The multipliers themselves have been changed to accommodate this.</p>
<p dir="auto">Uhhh at the request of <a class="plugin-mentions-user plugin-mentions-a" href="http://165.22.228.80:80/uid/5">@Duxburian-Union</a> I added to the War Sheet to declare whether you met the requirements for certain units or not to make it clear before you post it that you have all that you need.</p>
<p dir="auto">You can see all these changes here:<br />
<a href="https://docs.google.com/document/d/17r6PqFw-YocBO-iUZ5j_WCDi0FLZJNyPjqrjFticGGY/edit?usp=sharing" rel="nofollow ugc">War System v5 Changes</a><br />
<a href="https://drive.google.com/file/d/1aghDQZAM5F1fRoFR20eII3fFBkr6KPzF/view?usp=sharing" rel="nofollow ugc">War Sheet v5 VERSION 10</a><br />
<a href="https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1sffhOqgUNVhvdnd1fIIXgkPhDEY-A9Eg?usp=sharing" rel="nofollow ugc">Nation Tests</a></p>
<p dir="auto">The Nation Tests use the v9 war sheet but I added the necessary test features of the new Budget System to all of the necessary budget numbers. You Can find it at the way bottom under TEST FEATURE.</p>
<p dir="auto">Overall I think the numbers are Representative of a real military budget for all nations so far I looked at. It also creates an IC limit that way you don't necessary outspend your economy. This is to help balance it out so that BIG states with a big economy and population don't exhaust their manpower while their IC's just remain fairly untouched.</p>
]]></description><link>http://165.22.228.80:80/post/2041</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://165.22.228.80:80/post/2041</guid><dc:creator><![CDATA[Vayinaod]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Wed, 01 Apr 2020 05:06:41 GMT</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[Reply to [OOC] Proposal War System v.5 - Discussion on Sat, 21 Mar 2020 04:51:19 GMT]]></title><description><![CDATA[<p dir="auto">Only units accounted for on the new system would exist, whether the admins want to consider this a sort of retcon or something is on them. But for war system purposes only things accounted for/supported would be allowed for gameplay purposes.</p>
]]></description><link>http://165.22.228.80:80/post/1631</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://165.22.228.80:80/post/1631</guid><dc:creator><![CDATA[Vayinaod]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Sat, 21 Mar 2020 04:51:19 GMT</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[Reply to [OOC] Proposal War System v.5 - Discussion on Sat, 21 Mar 2020 04:24:38 GMT]]></title><description><![CDATA[<p dir="auto">My question is what would happen to the old units when this is implemented. If I had 450 planes on the old one, and 94 on the new one...</p>
]]></description><link>http://165.22.228.80:80/post/1630</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://165.22.228.80:80/post/1630</guid><dc:creator><![CDATA[Kingdom of Reitzmag]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Sat, 21 Mar 2020 04:24:38 GMT</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[Reply to [OOC] Proposal War System v.5 - Discussion on Sat, 21 Mar 2020 04:11:04 GMT]]></title><description><![CDATA[<p dir="auto">After a rather thought provoking discussion with @Gallorum , I was inspired to adjust the producer tiers to introduce Omega Tier that would house the US and Russia.  There was also other movements of the producers to accommodate the newly adjusted tiers.  Alpha Tier was adjusted to a price tag of 17,500 Arms Manufacturing. I believe a one year grandfather period for all current producers not meeting their requirements is more than fair.</p>
<p dir="auto">I thought about adjusting defense multipliers but for the moment those are fine pending possible a future update (I think the overall effect would honestly be negligible for most people in terms of the total amount of ICs they own).</p>
<p dir="auto">I also finalized all my thoughts on the producer system, and reached a rather pretty end result for the War Sheet. You can view these and example war sheets covering multiple nations here:</p>
<p dir="auto">I honestly think its ready to be put to a vote from everyone and there has been more than enough time I think for people to put forward their thoughts. I would like to hear more if people have qualms, but I believe we should vote on it.</p>
<p dir="auto"><a href="https://docs.google.com/document/d/17r6PqFw-YocBO-iUZ5j_WCDi0FLZJNyPjqrjFticGGY/edit?usp=sharing" rel="nofollow ugc">War System v5 Changes</a><br />
<a href="https://drive.google.com/file/d/1aghDQZAM5F1fRoFR20eII3fFBkr6KPzF/view?usp=sharing" rel="nofollow ugc">War Sheet v5</a><br />
<a href="https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1sffhOqgUNVhvdnd1fIIXgkPhDEY-A9Eg?usp=sharing" rel="nofollow ugc">Nation Tests</a></p>
]]></description><link>http://165.22.228.80:80/post/1628</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://165.22.228.80:80/post/1628</guid><dc:creator><![CDATA[Vayinaod]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Sat, 21 Mar 2020 04:11:04 GMT</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[Reply to [OOC] Proposal War System v.5 - Discussion on Fri, 13 Mar 2020 02:41:39 GMT]]></title><description><![CDATA[<p dir="auto">Unfortunately, the entire system is designed around single purchases for aircraft. Helicopters are different since they are generally cheaper, this could be expanded to drones however. I've seen no issue so far with aircraft numbers in the war sheets I've received so far. Those nations are reflective of a real life nation of a similar size/scale. One of the main issues for years in the war system is air force size.</p>
<p dir="auto">Aircraft are really really really expensive to even consider purchase in real life. Really we should switch to a system of buying tanks in single purchases, but I do not believe that is necessary at the moment.  Back to the matter at hand, I get what you are trying to do, preserve your air force size. Right now most of the major powers in the European Union have air forces having tens of thousands of planes. The US Military itself only has like 13,000 and that is across all branches and including helicopters. China and Russia do not even come close, they have like 3,000ish a piece. Most of this I attribute to Fighters / Fighter-Bombers being so cheap to buy.</p>
<p dir="auto">For the sack of balance and realism, aircraft outside of helicopters and potentially drones should remain single-use purchases in any war system update.</p>
<p dir="auto">QUICK EDIT: I should note for everyone, smaller air forces benefit everyone. You're about to do more practical thinking about how to use your aircraft without just throwing dozens of entire squadrons at your enemy.</p>
]]></description><link>http://165.22.228.80:80/post/1501</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://165.22.228.80:80/post/1501</guid><dc:creator><![CDATA[Vayinaod]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Fri, 13 Mar 2020 02:41:39 GMT</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[Reply to [OOC] Proposal War System v.5 - Discussion on Fri, 13 Mar 2020 02:32:17 GMT]]></title><description><![CDATA[<p dir="auto">I suggest these for the updates regarding the unit strength/amount for the air fleet:<br />
Fighter, Superiority - 30<br />
Fighter, Multirole - 20<br />
Fighter, Strike -10<br />
Attack - 10<br />
Helicopter, Transport -10<br />
Helicopter, Multi-use  - 5<br />
Helicopter, Attack - 5<br />
AWACS/EW/RECON - 1<br />
Tanker - 1<br />
Drone, Attack * - 2<br />
Drone, Recon * - 2<br />
Transport -5<br />
Bomber - 3<br />
Bomber, Heavy - 2<br />
Strategic bomber* - 1<br />
Maintenance/Logistic Unit - 2,500</p>
]]></description><link>http://165.22.228.80:80/post/1500</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://165.22.228.80:80/post/1500</guid><dc:creator><![CDATA[Kingdom of Reitzmag]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Fri, 13 Mar 2020 02:32:17 GMT</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[Reply to [OOC] Proposal War System v.5 - Discussion on Thu, 05 Mar 2020 16:04:43 GMT]]></title><description><![CDATA[<p dir="auto"><a class="plugin-mentions-user plugin-mentions-a" href="http://165.22.228.80:80/uid/16">@Vayinaod</a> Please never mind the IC things, in fact, my IC actually was larger in this new one. I input the wrong info in one of the cells.</p>
]]></description><link>http://165.22.228.80:80/post/1400</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://165.22.228.80:80/post/1400</guid><dc:creator><![CDATA[Kingdom of Reitzmag]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Thu, 05 Mar 2020 16:04:43 GMT</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[Reply to [OOC] Proposal War System v.5 - Discussion on Thu, 05 Mar 2020 15:56:37 GMT]]></title><description><![CDATA[<p dir="auto">@Reitzmag said in <a href="/post/1384">[OOC] Proposal War System v.5 - Discussion</a>:</p>
<blockquote>
<p dir="auto">My IC became much limited unlike the previous ones.</p>
</blockquote>
<p dir="auto">Covering this point, the entire war system equation was redone to avoid constant re-balances with pop growth changes. I'm more inclined to believe and support the notion that /typically/ a nation's military might and quality is based on its economy's size and quality rather than the size of its population.  Obviously extreme examples exist with countries like North Korea, but those are outside the norm and should be disregarded for the sack of balance.</p>
<p dir="auto">Without this context it looks like your IC's get unfairly hit but really everyone is going to take what /looks/ to be a massive hit but the changes to pricing and upkeep help to reflect this.  Please send me your sheet so I can take a proper look to see if its fair or not that's the whole point of me gathering data. I need proof that its too low.</p>
<p dir="auto">@Reitzmag said in <a href="/post/1384">[OOC] Proposal War System v.5 - Discussion</a>:</p>
<blockquote>
<p dir="auto">I suggest that the war system be updated for more opportunities in establishing a strong national force that would be able to protect a nation from foreign invasion.</p>
</blockquote>
<p dir="auto">What exactly would that entail? Not every nation has a strong national force, nor should they. They should have a military reflective of their true size. Growing your economy and defense spending through NS can result in a bigger military. I should note that what you're asking for just cause an endless circles of updates since if I work out a way to let armed forces be bigger than impacts everyone. Not just small nations. So even if you grow 5%, the Duxburian Union is likely to grow by 15% by the virtue of his stats. As Ireland mentioned, some air forces can already literally BLOT OUT THE SUN, and have bigger air forces than the entire world already possesses in real life.</p>
<p dir="auto">Really foreign invasion is such a terrible reason to redesign the war system to what is specifically meant to not do. If you get invaded for a wrong reason or illegally people will help you, now if you brought it on yourself its more open to what's it called. Interesting RP.  If you can provide specific ideas or improvements I would be glad to hear them out but I make no promises on my or others support for them.</p>
<p dir="auto">@Reitzmag said in <a href="/post/1384">[OOC] Proposal War System v.5 - Discussion</a>:</p>
<blockquote>
<p dir="auto">Also, addition of new producer slots with names of RL countries could have issues. For example, I have already claimed RL companies from Japan and Brazil, and making these RL nations as producer slots will strip me off of my control over my claims that I declared even before these updates could exist. The only way that no conflict between my claims (maybe other countries would also have) and the proposed war system v.5 is to either not make producer slots of these names or give me control over the producer slots I claimed already (which I believe no one is in favor of).</p>
</blockquote>
<p dir="auto">I noticed this the other day and this is my personal stance:</p>
<p dir="auto">Claims in the war system are never permanent due to a revolving door of joining and leaving EU members. The current system even says if you are not able to support being a producer nation you will lose your slot. That said, I believe there is not some binary solution. My belief is that even though you are well below my proposed standards, you can be grandfathered in as the Brazil producer and receive the same one year grace period as the others. If that occurs you will not receive the Japan/SK companies. My other option is that you do not receive the Brazil producer slot, but you retain a certain level of guarantee from whoever does take those producer slots to receive some level of support and production of their products. Either one of these I believe is fair to you, future producers taking those slots. I honestly prefer the former for yourself, but the latter as a person making the system so that can be used to cover other people.</p>
<p dir="auto">I want to make it clear I will not support trapping a producer nation into nothing. Their companies/products are theirs and that should be final.</p>
<p dir="auto">That is only my personal stance, the admin team and the current war system Admin might have a different solution from mine they wish to propose and I leave that to them but that is how I envision fixing the issue.</p>
]]></description><link>http://165.22.228.80:80/post/1399</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://165.22.228.80:80/post/1399</guid><dc:creator><![CDATA[Vayinaod]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Thu, 05 Mar 2020 15:56:37 GMT</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[Reply to [OOC] Proposal War System v.5 - Discussion on Thu, 05 Mar 2020 14:38:08 GMT]]></title><description><![CDATA[<p dir="auto"><a class="plugin-mentions-user plugin-mentions-a" href="http://165.22.228.80:80/uid/343">@Ireland</a> By the way, thanks for helping me out so far on these RP things. I'd like to learn more if you please...</p>
]]></description><link>http://165.22.228.80:80/post/1394</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://165.22.228.80:80/post/1394</guid><dc:creator><![CDATA[Kingdom of Reitzmag]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Thu, 05 Mar 2020 14:38:08 GMT</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[Reply to [OOC] Proposal War System v.5 - Discussion on Thu, 05 Mar 2020 14:35:41 GMT]]></title><description><![CDATA[<p dir="auto"><a class="plugin-mentions-user plugin-mentions-a" href="http://165.22.228.80:80/uid/343">@Ireland</a> it's only these parts of the proposed war systems v.5 update would have issues against me. I have agreed to some other parts nonetheless.</p>
]]></description><link>http://165.22.228.80:80/post/1393</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://165.22.228.80:80/post/1393</guid><dc:creator><![CDATA[Kingdom of Reitzmag]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Thu, 05 Mar 2020 14:35:41 GMT</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[Reply to [OOC] Proposal War System v.5 - Discussion on Thu, 05 Mar 2020 14:33:03 GMT]]></title><description><![CDATA[<p dir="auto">@Reitzmag said in <a href="/post/1391">[OOC] Proposal War System v.5 - Discussion</a>:</p>
<blockquote>
<p dir="auto"><a class="plugin-mentions-user plugin-mentions-a" href="http://165.22.228.80:80/uid/343">@Ireland</a> Addition of Japan/Korea and Brazil as producer slots would really conflict against my initial declaration. The claim was publicized in a <a href="http://nseuropeanunion.com/post/1376" rel="nofollow ugc">news article</a> last March 3 2020 GMT+8. I understand the rules but this significant portion of this war system update proposal would definitely be against something that already existed before this would be applied.</p>
</blockquote>
<p dir="auto">You have to understand that these rules are in place for EVERYONE involved. Take the Duxburian Union or Angleter...if they behaved the way you are, there would be nothing stopping them from turning the sky black with the amount of airplanes they could amass or the amount of nukes they could stockpile and use against a nation like mine or yours.</p>
<p dir="auto">You have to be willing to compromise what your vision for your nation is and the realities that is a RP where there are rules of the road that everyone must follow.</p>
]]></description><link>http://165.22.228.80:80/post/1392</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://165.22.228.80:80/post/1392</guid><dc:creator><![CDATA[The United Kingdom]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Thu, 05 Mar 2020 14:33:03 GMT</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[Reply to [OOC] Proposal War System v.5 - Discussion on Thu, 05 Mar 2020 14:31:04 GMT]]></title><description><![CDATA[<p dir="auto"><a class="plugin-mentions-user plugin-mentions-a" href="http://165.22.228.80:80/uid/343">@Ireland</a> Addition of Japan/Korea and Brazil as producer slots would really conflict against my initial declaration. The claim was publicized in a <a href="http://nseuropeanunion.com/post/1376" rel="nofollow ugc">news article</a> last March 3 2020 GMT+8. I understand the rules but this significant portion of this war system update proposal would definitely be against something that already existed before this would be applied.</p>
]]></description><link>http://165.22.228.80:80/post/1391</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://165.22.228.80:80/post/1391</guid><dc:creator><![CDATA[Kingdom of Reitzmag]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Thu, 05 Mar 2020 14:31:04 GMT</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[Reply to [OOC] Proposal War System v.5 - Discussion on Thu, 05 Mar 2020 14:21:55 GMT]]></title><description><![CDATA[<p dir="auto">@Reitzmag said in <a href="/post/1384">[OOC] Proposal War System v.5 - Discussion</a>:</p>
<blockquote>
<p dir="auto">I agree to the idea of having requirements for custom space vehicles, this would support the European Space Exploration Act of 2020. Though, I have some issues when I tested the proposed automatic war sheet. My IC became much limited unlike the previous ones.<br />
I suggest that the war system be updated for more opportunities in establishing a strong national force that would be able to protect a nation from foreign invasion. Also, addition of new producer slots with names of RL countries could have issues. For example, I have already claimed RL companies from Japan and Brazil, and making these RL nations as producer slots will strip me off of my control over my claims that I declared even before these updates could exist. The only way that no conflict between my claims (maybe other countries would also have) and the proposed war system v.5 is to either not make producer slots of these names or give me control over the producer slots I claimed already (which I believe no one is in favor of).</p>
</blockquote>
<p dir="auto">The thing is, this entire RP is based on rules. You can't just claim things because you want it. Your complaint about not being able to claim things is moot. I have personally said several times you can have a force but they just can't make specifically the products of the producer nations.</p>
<p dir="auto">You claiming things doesn't matter if it's not officially made through the systems we have. Your false choice between either just giving you producer slots or having no producer slots is something I strongly disagree with. There is a third option, which is you just follow the rules as they are written like how you are supposed to accept our rules when you begin role playing with us.</p>
]]></description><link>http://165.22.228.80:80/post/1390</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://165.22.228.80:80/post/1390</guid><dc:creator><![CDATA[The United Kingdom]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Thu, 05 Mar 2020 14:21:55 GMT</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[Reply to [OOC] Proposal War System v.5 - Discussion on Thu, 05 Mar 2020 09:41:33 GMT]]></title><description><![CDATA[<p dir="auto">I agree to the idea of having requirements for custom space vehicles, this would support the European Space Exploration Act of 2020. Though, I have some issues when I tested the proposed automatic war sheet. My IC became much limited unlike the previous ones.<br />
I suggest that the war system be updated for more opportunities in establishing a strong national force that would be able to protect a nation from foreign invasion. Also, addition of new producer slots with names of RL countries could have issues. For example, I have already claimed RL companies from Japan and Brazil, and making these RL nations as producer slots will strip me off of my control over my claims that I declared even before these updates could exist. The only way that no conflict between my claims (maybe other countries would also have) and the proposed war system v.5 is to either not make producer slots of these names or give me control over the producer slots I claimed already (which I believe no one is in favor of).</p>
]]></description><link>http://165.22.228.80:80/post/1384</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://165.22.228.80:80/post/1384</guid><dc:creator><![CDATA[Kingdom of Reitzmag]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Thu, 05 Mar 2020 09:41:33 GMT</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[Reply to [OOC] Proposal War System v.5 - Discussion on Thu, 05 Mar 2020 04:53:40 GMT]]></title><description><![CDATA[<p dir="auto">Some specific notes I want to put out real quick that I've noticed at least for myself for the war sheets and notes people have personally sent to me thus far:</p>
<p dir="auto">Air Maintenance Units: Their manpower looks to be a little too low at 2500; with the limited pool of sheets to play around with I think 3250 might be a good place.  Another way in addition and I think to help simplify the system as well is to make the base total for AMUs is to support every 20 aircraft instead of every 23.</p>
<p dir="auto">Shore Support units for the navy have similar issue as above, though increasing these to 1750 may be all that's necessary if needed.</p>
<p dir="auto">Ground Forces: Overall I've noticed ground forces continue to dominate in overall size more so than I'm comfortable with personally, making Mechanized and Motorized Infantry 4000 manpower alleviates it pretty good, though I'm not too sure yet if that is a necessary change.</p>
<p dir="auto">Right now to verify the changes I'm looking at right now data from the following would be appreciated.<br />
These represent major powers that I need to balance one end of the spectrum right now;</p>
<ul>
<li>Inquista</li>
<li>Duxburian Union</li>
<li>Angleter</li>
</ul>
<p dir="auto">Followed by more small/medium sized countries such as:</p>
<ul>
<li>Spain</li>
<li>Reitzmag</li>
<li>Ireland</li>
<li>Malborya</li>
</ul>
<p dir="auto">I should stress this is not a homework assignment, and its only a request if you happen to have some free time or something. I've already found technical issues with the war sheet I posted that are now fixed thanks to the people who have submitted sheets to thank you to those so far who participated.</p>
<p dir="auto">Final note is that I am still working on a more cohesive presentation on the producer system, but for the most part the thoughts previously outlined in the thread with my conversation with Inquista is where it is definitely headed. But again this entire thing is just a suggestion to the community, and if not comes from it but conversation that is still more than okay with me!</p>
]]></description><link>http://165.22.228.80:80/post/1383</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://165.22.228.80:80/post/1383</guid><dc:creator><![CDATA[Vayinaod]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Thu, 05 Mar 2020 04:53:40 GMT</pubDate></item></channel></rss>