New NESes, ideas, development, etc

[flyingchicken]

The Soviet Union, America and France are there, too.

The lack of a solid border should be enough, and the descriptions (updates/backgrounds) should be enough to make you realize that oh, that's an occupation zone. Unless you don't actually bother to read some stuff in a NES, and prior experience tells me that you have the propensity to do so.

 

[Supermath]

Shouldnt occupuied zones be indicated as such? It not like Germany was owned completly by the UK as the map implys..

I've always assumed that occupied zones were coloured with that of the occupying power. Also, Britain, the Soviet Union, and Japan are usually coloured red.

Anyway, any factual errors that you guys found (EDIT: Other than British Honduras)? There's probably something somewhere that I missed.

@Symphony: I can't seem to find the duplicate colour.

 

[sp1023]

I have to clean up the map the bit, but most of the work is in text now.

Spoiler :

Working title is The Long Drum Roll, but I'm looking for a better one.

Seem's kinda like Bomb's NES, doesn't it?

 

[Supermath]

Seem's kinda like Bomb's NES, doesn't it?

Wait -- how? The only thing that they have alike is that they take place within five years of each other.

 

[Azale]

Seem's kinda like Bomb's NES, doesn't it?

No...not really.

 

[Symphony D.]

Don't be an ass Symph, Russia not count as major anymore? An there are at least 10 nations all on a red that is very close to another.

My apologies Abaddon, I thought living in Britain and all you might have been aware of the British Empire which, you know, controlled all those areas, which is why they are not reds that are "very close to another"--they're the same damn red.

Also, Russia isn't red, by any but the loosest definitions of the word, it's more of a salmon or peach and Canada is closer. So, the only "red" countries on the map, by even your wildly loose standards, are Canada, Japan, Russia, and the British Empire. Maybe Cuba if you have a hard time telling orange from red. So I don't think I'm being the ass here, sorry. Five! Ooh, tricksy! So difficult to figure out, or, god forbid, to go and get an actual historical map and compare against...

Shouldnt occupuied zones be indicated as such? It not like Germany was owned completly by the UK as the map implys..

Considering the Allies wielded more or less total power and Germany ceased to exist as a country until the FRG and GDR showed up in 1949, I'd say it's accurate.

I've always assumed that occupied zones were coloured with that of the occupying power.

As I said, he doesn't know what he's talking about; ignore him.

@Symphony: I can't seem to find the duplicate colour.

Third stack, front row, center two. Both are (0.102.102). The right one should be (0.153.102). It's tricky because they look like different colors (because of the surrounding colors) but they're not. I have to go through and fix it on the posted maps.

 

[Symphony D.]

Retroactive deletion.

 

[flyingchicken]

I never thought of "Multirole Armored Combat Systems." I placed all my bets on heavy powered infantry.

rectify: fc bellyfeel sd uul

 

[das]

Unless, of course, the god is trying to bring some specific event about in the world (like the God of Chaos wanting to bring darkness across the land), he's not going to require too many followers.

Bring temptation, and people will follow unwittingly.

I have a friend who has designed a game called "playing gods" and he hopes to have it for sale in August. It could easily be turned into a NES and it uses a world map. His website is not up yet (www.playinggods.com). Players take the role of Buddha, Christ, not Mohammed, Shiva, or Moses. The goal is to get converts on a risk like world map.

Interesting, but has he heard of the Dominions series? Pretty similar concept.

 

[Symphony D.]

HPIs can only carry--and therefore do--so much. A MACS can carry a much larger array of weaponry (imagine, if you will, crossing Metal Gear Rex and the Nod Redeemer, with weapon systems like the former and a profile sort of like the latter) and therefore do a lot more, both in an artillery, anti-armor, and assault roles. HPIs take over most of the duties of an MBT but some of them fall to a MACS, which also does artillery (backed up by orbital fire and Variables, which do CAS). LPI comes in as "Infantry" (and get shuttled around in MICS or transports) while MI are "Marines" and generally show up from orbit. HACS are just sort of generic land transports. SpecFor use alternate, less clunky technologies.

Militia and Technicals stick around forever because they will.

 

[flyingchicken]

A bit "out there:" Thoughts on unmanned fighting vehicles (AI or remote control)?

Edit: ... That asked because I was thinking fireteams/squads of heavily-armed guys can do as much as any specialized heavy machinery, and saves a lot of overkill, except maybe they would be costlier in terms of manpower.

 

[Symphony D.]

A bit "out there:" Thoughts on unmanned fighting vehicles (AI or remote control)?

Autonomous is the only way to go unless you have quantum encryption, and even if you do it only works for localized stuff because beyond that you start to deal with light-lag. If you've got an FTL communications system you can go back to remote control (assuming it's q-encrypted) but you want autonomous anyway because the kind of reaction times you'll generally want exceed human capabilities.

Short of some sort of massive breakthrough in the realm of AI (and even then, they'd be expensive and time-consuming to train, so this still applies) you're going to want drones to go in and kill dangerous stuff so you can send in humans, because although the human will be slower, it's also more flexible and innovative, and going to have lots of computer systems helping it anyway--and it's generally cheaper and more disposable than the human-level AIs.

Edit: ... That asked because I was thinking fireteams/squads of heavily-armed guys can do as much as any specialized heavy machinery, and saves a lot of overkill, except maybe they would be costlier in terms of manpower.

A suit of powered armor is never going to be able to lob a magnetic bottle of plasma toward a target 500mi away or shoot defense platforms out of orbit. A MACS, if you have the right technology and engineering, conceivably can. Its main vulnerability would be to orbital systems but unlike ships it would have a much smaller profile (and places to hide or reduce its visibility) in addition to being able to strike back.

 

[flyingchicken]

By "Space Dominance Vehicle," is it safe to assume that you really mean "space-faring drone-fighter factory with resource-gathering/scavenging equipment--IN SPACE" (as opposed to just a carrier in the seafaring sense)?

 

[Symphony D.]

By "Space Dominance Vehicle," is it safe to assume that you really mean "space-faring drone-fighter factory with resource-gathering/scavenging equipment--IN SPACE" (as opposed to just a carrier in the seafaring sense)?

That entirely depends upon the size of the vehicle and its intended purpose. It's generally assumed that space vehicles will get larger over time and so innate manufacturing suites might develop, but at first it will be the latter.

Two names are provided for the same thing because I don't think a unit table should implicitly settle the Space Navy vs. Space Force debate; that kind of organization should be left up to players (or depending on the scenario, handed to them by the history).

 

[Disenfrancised]

Autonomous is the only way to go unless you have quantum encryption, and even if you do it only works for localized stuff because beyond that you start to deal with light-lag. If you've got an FTL communications system you can go back to remote control (assuming it's q-encrypted) but you want autonomous anyway because the kind of reaction times you'll generally want exceed human capabilities.

Quantum? Meh, one time-pads loaded into the drone at release would be fine for localised control - even if you only have empirical security, if the opponent has the computing resources to crack the bias in your pad on the fly you're probably going lose anyway .

 

[Symphony D.]

Quantum? Meh, one time-pads loaded into the drone at release would be fine for localised control - even if you only have empirical security, if the opponent has the computing resources to crack the bias in your pad on the fly you're probably going lose anyway .

Or, they just have a quantum computer. Something idling around doing a mission is much easier to crack than something just screaming at a target anyway. Even if you discount both these problems and the problems of OTPs, you can also still just be jammed.

 

[Birdjaguar]

Interesting, but has he heard of the Dominions series? Pretty similar concept.

I do not know, but I will bring it to his attention. Thanks.

 

[Lord_Iggy]

The Gods NES sounds like fun. I'd use Szok (the god I created for dldnjstjr's NES that was DoA), god of Manipulation/Wisdom/etc)

 

[Abaddon]

Ooh, I remeber that NES.. wonder if I created a god.. can't remeber!

 

[dldnjstjr]

Well, that NES was marked with "come here and god-mod" sign. (Although, it in itself is highly ironic). It never worked out.

@Iggy: Is the SteamNES dead?