Definitely sounds like something I'd like to sign up for. The XCOM scenario sounds significantly more appealing to me, but I guess I could also whip up something for the alien side if that's what ends up happening.
If you're hoping to host a nation builder, you need to make a better first impression. It's painfully obvious English isn't your first language. The whole post is riddled with grammar errors, jumbled sentences and typos. It's barely comprehensible.
Your worldbuilding needs a lot of work as...
In case I wasn't clear enough earlier, nukes aren't my primary concern. Is there anything planned to level the playing field of conventional warfare? Because as it stands in reality, NATO and their allies are going to pretty much wipe the floor with everyone else.
That just gives free nuke pass to Russia and China, while doing nothing to help with the fact that NATO has way more conventional military strength than whoever might end up facing them. If you look at global firepower, NATO members count for three out of top ten largest militaries, represented...
I might be interested. Are there any plans to balance out the playing field among the players? Cause as it stands in reality, WW3 seems like it would be significantly in favour of NATO as long as nukes are not used.
I might be interested in it. Not quite sure yet, I don't know if I end up having the time for another RP. I took a look at the CS though, and I think you could have picked a better image to use as a basis for borders. In this one the stars are packed too tightly to really make borders around...
I'm not saying this is a bad setting, really. I can see you had fun doing that, and all power to you. I wish I could be a part of it since the beginning. But as it is now, everyone joining from scratch and not stealing someone else's blob will have a bad time, simply because those who have...
What even is this thing? Who is supposed to have fun here? Starting situation creates a massive imbalance in power between players, depending on who starts as what nation. There are portions of the world that are complete economic and political backwaters with no resources, and then there are...
Realism is when things in general obey the rules of reality.
For example, combat mechs are fairly popular in sci-fi. But realistically, they would be dogshit. They only work because writers want it to work.
And as I said, I wasn't specifically requesting realism. I just wanted to be sure which...
Yeah, sure. I'm not saying it's wrong. Just, if someone asks whether or not it will be realistic, don't say it will be realistic if it really won't be. It's misleading.
Okay, that doesn't help much. How far does rule of cool go? If I construct a bright red mech the size of a skyscraper, equip it with nothing but a sword and send it off against a platoon of main battle tanks, would I expect the realistic result of mech getting disabled with a single HEAT round...
There are a few solutions. Relax the requirements significantly, or at least adjust them based on unit type. Two weapons max works okay-ish in case of AFVs. It does not work well with a lot of other stuff.
You could just not limit slots, or raise the number of them. If someone ends up with a...
That's extremely limiting then. Just three of the slots will have to be wasted on getting basic infantry and then equipping them with ATGMs and shoulder-launched AA missiles if I want to get any sort of utility out of my army. And that's not all, because every sniper rifle, every SAW, every DMR...
Oooh, a sci fi nation builder gimme gimme.
On a serious note, I'll need a few clarifications here and there.
What counts as a unit?
Are non-combat or combat-adjacent roles also considered troops? Things like medics, combat engineers, logistics vehicles, AWACS aircraft, bridgelayers, mobile...