GRC Economic and Military Rankings (COMMENT PERIOD)

Talk and plan things about the game with other players.

Re: GRC Economic and Military Rankings (COMMENT PERIOD)

Postby Corvo Attano » Thu May 03, 2018 7:27 pm

Yolo04 wrote:Okay does it matter
Okay I have two small aircraft carrier does that change anything?
Also it took us around 5-8 years
Production stalled during the Sørvestland insurgency and restarted when it ended

And do you have the money and industrial capacity to make those two carriers?
Fatherland Front

Nationmaster of Malivia
User avatar
Corvo Attano
 
Posts: 701
Joined: Thu Sep 04, 2014 6:16 pm

Re: GRC Economic and Military Rankings (COMMENT PERIOD)

Postby Yolo04 » Thu May 03, 2018 7:29 pm

Corvo Attano wrote:
Yolo04 wrote:Okay does it matter
Okay I have two small aircraft carrier does that change anything?
Also it took us around 5-8 years
Production stalled during the Sørvestland insurgency and restarted when it ended

And do you have the money and industrial capacity to make those two carriers?

We were an average power so I would say so
Plus these carriers are small so they wouldn’t have cost much
I based both off the Thailand Aircraft Carrier
List of Parties:
Image Keymon, Four Pillars Party (MQP): ACTIVE

Dankuk, Hwanghu Dang Party (4613): INACTIVE
User avatar
Yolo04
 
Posts: 940
Joined: Sat Dec 16, 2017 6:03 pm
Location: West Virginia, USA (haha country roads jokes are so funny)

Re: GRC Economic and Military Rankings (COMMENT PERIOD)

Postby Maxington » Thu May 03, 2018 7:31 pm

This is my personal opinion on this.
Now, Dankuk has claimed the following:-
1) Nuclear Weapons
2) An aircraft carrier
3) Exuberant numbers of combatant vessels

Now, in the past i have approached and confronted Yolo and Nasania where it pertains to these numbers. Even thought the situation with Klavia giving nuclear weapons to Dankuk should never be recognised by any player as it is unrealistic for a small power to give a middle power nuclear weapons (regardless of RP evidence; even though Klavia nor Dankuk provided evidence for the construction/development of said nuclear weapons), in a discussion with a Dankukin player where it pertained to the previous conflict with Kazulia and Dankuk, said player continued to push the sentiment that Dankuk possessed nuclear weapons, even though he could not provide evidence to support this claim. (this was the first strike). Roleplayers should know by now that nuclear weapons is an extremely sensitive topic and should be approached with great care and regard for realism. We don't want to see a repeat of Govenor12's tactics of making treaties with nation he is moving to next so that he could voice the claim that he had obtained nuclear weapons from another nation. When discussing nuclear weapons with any player i always use what i did as an example of how nuclear weapons RP should progress. Operation Northern Avalanche is something i've been pushing for players to replicate as a means of bringing realism to RP. When i did the rankings a while back, I introduced a change-log (however moderation has not brought it back for some unknown reason even though it had proven effective on multiple occasions). The change-log where it pertain to nuclear weapons said:
iii). A functional approach to nuclear weapons and aircraft carriers. To experienced players, having new
players enter into a roleplay event claiming numbers of extreme proportions with respect to aircraft carrier procurement and nuclear weapons procurement, it is extremely frustrating and a hindrance to roleplay throughout. As per usual, nations of the Great Power category should presume they can have nuclear weapons and/or aircraft carriers. Nations in the Regional Power category should approach this sensitive topic with caution, taking into consideration elements of roleplay such as (Where the nuclear technology which I need is going to come from. How am I going to construct these weapons? Am i going to approach another country to purchase or will I approach the black market (run by Global RP Team).

But i'm not going to complain about that. This wasn't the first time I spoke to Yolo and Nasania on the unrealistic numbers. Although Yolo was willing to bring the numbers to a realistic mark, Nasania was persistent championing that Dankuk had the finances, whereby he proceeding to try to push the narrative that RP should now take into consideration the cost of firearms, bullets, etc. Although i considered the idea, it was ridiculous in the long-run. I've told Yolo that he cannot be making claims to these exuberant numbers when his nation is a middle power. Claiming to construct 2 aircraft carriers as a middle power without sufficient evidence is ridiculous. In this post Dankuk purported to claim 2 aircraft carriers, 20 corvettes without sufficient RP to back it up.

If you want to see the whole changelog i introduced here
"The future of the Nation is in the children's school bags" ~ Dr. Eric Williams
President of the Trond Henrichsen Institute for International Affairs.
User avatar
Maxington
 
Posts: 2733
Joined: Mon Oct 14, 2013 11:37 pm
Location: Look Behind you.

Re: GRC Economic and Military Rankings (COMMENT PERIOD)

Postby Yolo04 » Thu May 03, 2018 7:36 pm

Maxington wrote:This is my personal opinion on this.
Now, Dankuk has claimed the following:-
1) Nuclear Weapons
2) An aircraft carrier
3) Exuberant numbers of combatant vessels

Now, in the past i have approached and confronted Yolo and Nasania where it pertains to these numbers. Even thought the situation with Klavia giving nuclear weapons to Dankuk should never be recognised by any player as it is unrealistic for a small power to give a middle power nuclear weapons (regardless of RP evidence; even though Klavia nor Dankuk provided evidence for the construction/development of said nuclear weapons), in a discussion with a Dankukin player where it pertained to the previous conflict with Kazulia and Dankuk, said player continued to push the sentiment that Dankuk possessed nuclear weapons, even though he could not provide evidence to support this claim. (this was the first strike). Roleplayers should know by now that nuclear weapons is an extremely sensitive topic and should be approached with great care and regard for realism. We don't want to see a repeat of Govenor12's tactics of making treaties with nation he is moving to next so that he could voice the claim that he had obtained nuclear weapons from another nation. When discussing nuclear weapons with any player i always use what i did as an example of how nuclear weapons RP should progress. Operation Northern Avalanche is something i've been pushing for players to replicate as a means of bringing realism to RP. When i did the rankings a while back, I introduced a change-log (however moderation has not brought it back for some unknown reason even though it had proven effective on multiple occasions). The change-log where it pertain to nuclear weapons said:
iii). A functional approach to nuclear weapons and aircraft carriers. To experienced players, having new
players enter into a roleplay event claiming numbers of extreme proportions with respect to aircraft carrier procurement and nuclear weapons procurement, it is extremely frustrating and a hindrance to roleplay throughout. As per usual, nations of the Great Power category should presume they can have nuclear weapons and/or aircraft carriers. Nations in the Regional Power category should approach this sensitive topic with caution, taking into consideration elements of roleplay such as (Where the nuclear technology which I need is going to come from. How am I going to construct these weapons? Am i going to approach another country to purchase or will I approach the black market (run by Global RP Team).

But i'm not going to complain about that. This wasn't the first time I spoke to Yolo and Nasania on the unrealistic numbers. Although Yolo was willing to bring the numbers to a realistic mark, Nasania was persistent championing that Dankuk had the finances, whereby he proceeding to try to push the narrative that RP should now take into consideration the cost of firearms, bullets, etc. Although i considered the idea, it was ridiculous in the long-run. I've told Yolo that he cannot be making claims to these exuberant numbers when his nation is a middle power. Claiming to construct 2 aircraft carriers as a middle power without sufficient evidence is ridiculous. In this post Dankuk purported to claim 2 aircraft carriers, 20 corvettes without sufficient RP to back it up.

If you want to see the whole changelog i introduced here


Nasania is not the RP guy for Dankuk. Most RP go’s through me
And yes I have made exuberant numbers and I have as you stated corrected those
Also these aircraft carriers are small only capable of holding 20 airplanes per carrier
Thailand a significantly smaller nation militarily and economically made one similar to ours
Also I have done away with military statistics and have instead decided to occasionally bring up military number as suggested by moderation
List of Parties:
Image Keymon, Four Pillars Party (MQP): ACTIVE

Dankuk, Hwanghu Dang Party (4613): INACTIVE
User avatar
Yolo04
 
Posts: 940
Joined: Sat Dec 16, 2017 6:03 pm
Location: West Virginia, USA (haha country roads jokes are so funny)

Re: GRC Economic and Military Rankings (COMMENT PERIOD)

Postby cm9777 » Thu May 03, 2018 7:47 pm

Let’s keep this civil guys thanks,
cm9777
 
Posts: 1574
Joined: Sat Jul 08, 2017 6:05 pm

Re: GRC Economic and Military Rankings (COMMENT PERIOD)

Postby Corvo Attano » Thu May 03, 2018 8:06 pm

Yolo you make some damn good political RP but and here is the kicker you have no freaking idea on how to build a proper military don't ya...

Look I am gonna be honest with ya because it is like 23:00 where I live and I am sleepy as hell.

Your entire military is shit.You have way too much arty and tanks. Not enough APC and IFV I don't even know what you use for long range sams.

Do you want us to make you a proper military so nobody can bitch about it?
Fatherland Front

Nationmaster of Malivia
User avatar
Corvo Attano
 
Posts: 701
Joined: Thu Sep 04, 2014 6:16 pm

Re: GRC Economic and Military Rankings (COMMENT PERIOD)

Postby FPC » Thu May 03, 2018 8:14 pm

Ok this is going off the rails very quickly, so I'm going to call a halt and lock this thread for now, until we have time to sort it. I will unlock it as soon as possible.
Used to be relevant
User avatar
FPC
 
Posts: 746
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2016 6:14 am
Location: Scotland

Re: GRC Economic and Military Rankings (COMMENT PERIOD)

Postby General.M » Fri May 04, 2018 1:23 pm

Okay, I am not going to make a statement about the actual rankings, but I will try to coordinate the mess.

A:
Maxington wrote:When i did the rankings a while back, I introduced a change-log (however moderation has not brought it back for some unknown reason even though it had proven effective on multiple occasions). The change-log where it pertain to nuclear weapons said:
iii). A functional approach to nuclear weapons and aircraft carriers. To experienced players, having new
players enter into a roleplay event claiming numbers of extreme proportions with respect to aircraft carrier procurement and nuclear weapons procurement, it is extremely frustrating and a hindrance to roleplay throughout. As per usual, nations of the Great Power category should presume they can have nuclear weapons and/or aircraft carriers. Nations in the Regional Power category should approach this sensitive topic with caution, taking into consideration elements of roleplay such as (Where the nuclear technology which I need is going to come from. How am I going to construct these weapons? Am i going to approach another country to purchase or will I approach the black market (run by Global RP Team).


Sorry about that, we all agreed on the change-log but we all forgot to put it here. Expect to see this on this page soon (maybe with minor edits).

B:
Yolo04 wrote:Nasania is not the RP guy for Dankuk. Most RP go’s through me
And yes I have made exuberant numbers and I have as you stated corrected those
Also these aircraft carriers are small only capable of holding 20 airplanes per carrier
Thailand a significantly smaller nation militarily and economically made one similar to ours
Also I have done away with military statistics and have instead decided to occasionally bring up military number as suggested by moderation

I want to state that we as the GRC acknowledge that you have been willing to cooperate, not always as much as requested maybe but we see your willingness to help.

C:
Yolo04 wrote:Also these aircraft carriers are small only capable of holding 20 airplanes per carrier
Thailand a significantly smaller nation militarily and economically made one similar to ours

Thailand, an interesting example (and the only one possible). The Thai carrier is officially an aircraft carrier. However, Thailand wasn't able to build the carrier themself, it was done by Spain, a country we think of as a regional power. Neither has Thailand got the resources or knowledge to actually keep it working. Nowadays it is considered a very expensive royal yacht as it isn't fit for military service. Source: http://www.military-today.com/navy/chakri_naruebet.htm
Libertären Partei (Dorvik)(inactive)
Republikeinse Partij / Rekvaknsé Prta (Vanuku)(inactive)
Alianța Liberalilor (New Endralon/Kizenia)(active)
Natsional'naya Liga Patriotov (Trigunia)(inactive)
User avatar
General.M
 
Posts: 343
Joined: Sun Jan 15, 2017 7:42 pm
Location: The Netherlands

Re: GRC Economic and Military Rankings (COMMENT PERIOD)

Postby cm9777 » Fri May 04, 2018 1:25 pm

The Thread has now been reopened. In the future please address each other in a civil and diplomatic manner. Being overly aggressive and foolhardy will achieve nothing apart from making certain players dislike each other more. I'm sure all of you mean well but there is a line here as to how we act in order to achieve the appropriate compromises.

Future Behaviour of this kind will result in sanctions being applied to said players.


Regards
Cm9777
cm9777
 
Posts: 1574
Joined: Sat Jul 08, 2017 6:05 pm

Re: GRC Economic and Military Rankings (COMMENT PERIOD)

Postby lewiselder1 » Fri May 04, 2018 4:00 pm

Unfortunately, Yolo4, the links you provided were often dating back up to eight real life years ago and therefore cannot he considered relevant. As always, will look over your RP and especially any links provided, but for the moment I don’t believe we’ve seen a strong argument in favour of re-assessing the rankings.

As always, not trying to seem like a douche, but we must be fair. Definitely appreciate co-operation however, and definitely agree with General.Ms points in his statement on behalf of the GRC.

Also would like to apologise on behalf of I think the views of the whole GRC about the way the debate went earlier, we all have to remember this is just a game, and arguing helps nobody :)
I go by Ashley now and use she/her pronouns. This is a really old account, I don’t play now.

I was a mod in classic for a bit, then I helped make Marcapada and WM there for a while. As of 2020 I’m co-ordinating Pachapay’s development.
User avatar
lewiselder1
 
Posts: 647
Joined: Thu May 04, 2017 8:35 pm

PreviousNext

Return to General

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 14 guests

cron