Deployment/Mobilizing/Upkeep changes

Page 1 of 3 1, 2, 3  Next

Go down

Should this be implemented in the current RP? (Running for 4 days)

43% 43% 
[ 3 ]
43% 43% 
[ 3 ]
14% 14% 
[ 1 ]
 
Total Votes : 7

Deployment/Mobilizing/Upkeep changes

Post by MysticPing on Sun Dec 14, 2014 6:13 pm

Growth
To make this system work better, and to not make kerbals sex crazy rabbits the growth rate should be lowered to 20,000 per cycle The farm buildings should keep their current effect for max population, but also give another 5,000 in growth each

Mobilization
Any army Consists of:

Standing Army:
This is your active army, it can be used for both defending and attacking. Needs to be payed for.

Mobilizing/Deploying
To mobilize a reserve unit you take it's mp and make it to pp. So a 1mp unit costs 1pp to mobilize. You can only mobilize 5 troops at any given time.

Upkeep
Each deployed MP costs 0.5MK each cycle. Meaning a 300MP army would cost 150MK each cycle.

Working Population
When you do your taxes simply take how much MP you have deployed and multiply it by 2000. Those are the people who will not pay taxes or contribute to the production. So if a nation with 1,000,000 people has a active army of 100MP. They will only have 800,000 people giving tax money and industrial production.
Losing one 1 PP = losing 1,000 kerbs. (You cant war forever)

MP cap
There will be no cap to the amount of soldiers you can have, as long as you can afford them. This means you have a choice, do you want to be a rich neutral Switzerland working towards space? Or do you want to be a large empire.

National Focus
Using this system the national focus system is abolished.

Trade
To compensate for making money scarcer you can now trade. Each agreement will always give 2MK per cycle. This makes it so while money is still going to be scarce you will have enough to do stuff. This also allows peaceful intervention by establishing embargoes, a.k.a forbidding trade with a certain nation.


Last edited by MysticPing on Mon Dec 22, 2014 1:46 pm; edited 7 times in total (Reason for editing : Changed 1000 to 2000 and fixed a calculation misstake)

_________________
ListerRimmer [18|Mar 06:01 PM]: what to post in VotDS | Caesar15 [18|Mar 06:02 PM]: Something sexy

Soccer [21|May 08:06 AM]: I'll be back >.>

Top8 [02|Mar 04:29 PM]: sounds like a naughty fellow, this professor Fux

[2014-07-13 20:10:06] MysticPing (Victor): Caesars extensive boob research? [2014-07-13 20:10:12] Stephen: Yes
[11:24:57 PM] Ryan Jones: I got nothing better to do than question peoples sex lives
Nah my dick was so confused nothing turned it on

[23:48] Yuriski (Ryan Jones): Then all of a sudden bam, it wants to fuck anything in sight
Tables, lampshades, food blenders
If it exists ill fuck it

[22:46:05] DeltaV: i sure am learning a lot about dino penises today

[21:27:10] DeltaV: you finally found my fetish
[21:27:13] DeltaV: yuri’s fully clothed dad

[23:36:40] Jay Dee: i joined the hitlerjugend
MysticPing
MysticPing

Posts : 767
Join date : 2014-05-23
Age : 19
Location : Sweden

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Deployment/Mobilizing/Upkeep changes

Post by Charzy on Sun Dec 14, 2014 6:18 pm

It also makes defending your country actually hard, which is nice.
Charzy
Charzy
Forum Terrorist

Posts : 493
Join date : 2014-05-23
Age : 20
Location : My sex dungeon

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Deployment/Mobilizing/Upkeep changes

Post by cziken20 on Sun Dec 14, 2014 6:24 pm

Yes.
cziken20
cziken20

Posts : 563
Join date : 2014-05-23
Location : Pomorskie, Poland (happily not even close to the hell which is sonsowiec, yay!)

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Deployment/Mobilizing/Upkeep changes

Post by Appe96 on Sun Dec 14, 2014 6:26 pm

Well I agree with this, but I also think PP should take a hit if you add more soldiers to your cause. Sure you could just have reserves and that would be the end of the story, but for the active army, these soldiers are not in the factories thus you need to take a PP hit.

This would remove the concept of economic, industrial, military and mixed focus. Also instead of having people having a super large reserve you can have it so that if you add people to your reserve, they are generally worse than your average soldier due to lack of full time training. Maybe have a manpower pool so that you don't have 1 000 000 kerbs in your army.

Also, yes please nerf growth because at this rate it is ridicolus. Instead of 200 000 per cycle, maybe have like 10 000-50 000 growth per cycle or something.
Appe96
Appe96

Posts : 144
Join date : 2014-12-14
Age : 22
Location : The dark side of ze Moon

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Deployment/Mobilizing/Upkeep changes

Post by MysticPing on Sun Dec 14, 2014 6:35 pm

As for pp the army not contributing to pp was a thing i meant, but forgot to state.
If having to mobalize reserves, even for defense is a not enough of a nerf i guess IF we decide to use Charzys system they could get some negative points compared to normal soldiers.

I do not agree to the manpower pool though. If you had a army of 1 million kerbals, you would lose all or one third (depending on how many kerbs you have) of your pp. AND the costs would be enough to nullify any income. So it is not needed in my opinion

_________________
ListerRimmer [18|Mar 06:01 PM]: what to post in VotDS | Caesar15 [18|Mar 06:02 PM]: Something sexy

Soccer [21|May 08:06 AM]: I'll be back >.>

Top8 [02|Mar 04:29 PM]: sounds like a naughty fellow, this professor Fux

[2014-07-13 20:10:06] MysticPing (Victor): Caesars extensive boob research? [2014-07-13 20:10:12] Stephen: Yes
[11:24:57 PM] Ryan Jones: I got nothing better to do than question peoples sex lives
Nah my dick was so confused nothing turned it on

[23:48] Yuriski (Ryan Jones): Then all of a sudden bam, it wants to fuck anything in sight
Tables, lampshades, food blenders
If it exists ill fuck it

[22:46:05] DeltaV: i sure am learning a lot about dino penises today

[21:27:10] DeltaV: you finally found my fetish
[21:27:13] DeltaV: yuri’s fully clothed dad

[23:36:40] Jay Dee: i joined the hitlerjugend
MysticPing
MysticPing

Posts : 767
Join date : 2014-05-23
Age : 19
Location : Sweden

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Deployment/Mobilizing/Upkeep changes

Post by Appe96 on Sun Dec 14, 2014 6:37 pm

Well one could just stockpile tonnes of MK then mobilize everything and yell UUUUURAAAA as they blindly charge down the hill. If we don't have some kind of cap, the reserves will be soo abused.
Appe96
Appe96

Posts : 144
Join date : 2014-12-14
Age : 22
Location : The dark side of ze Moon

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Deployment/Mobilizing/Upkeep changes

Post by MysticPing on Sun Dec 14, 2014 6:39 pm

That Mk would go down the drain very fast. And the nation would have almost no PP AND the soldiers would not be very well trained.

If Russia did it why cant we?

_________________
ListerRimmer [18|Mar 06:01 PM]: what to post in VotDS | Caesar15 [18|Mar 06:02 PM]: Something sexy

Soccer [21|May 08:06 AM]: I'll be back >.>

Top8 [02|Mar 04:29 PM]: sounds like a naughty fellow, this professor Fux

[2014-07-13 20:10:06] MysticPing (Victor): Caesars extensive boob research? [2014-07-13 20:10:12] Stephen: Yes
[11:24:57 PM] Ryan Jones: I got nothing better to do than question peoples sex lives
Nah my dick was so confused nothing turned it on

[23:48] Yuriski (Ryan Jones): Then all of a sudden bam, it wants to fuck anything in sight
Tables, lampshades, food blenders
If it exists ill fuck it

[22:46:05] DeltaV: i sure am learning a lot about dino penises today

[21:27:10] DeltaV: you finally found my fetish
[21:27:13] DeltaV: yuri’s fully clothed dad

[23:36:40] Jay Dee: i joined the hitlerjugend
MysticPing
MysticPing

Posts : 767
Join date : 2014-05-23
Age : 19
Location : Sweden

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Deployment/Mobilizing/Upkeep changes

Post by Appe96 on Sun Dec 14, 2014 6:40 pm

Russia has never mobilized 100% of their population nor had it in reserve.
Appe96
Appe96

Posts : 144
Join date : 2014-12-14
Age : 22
Location : The dark side of ze Moon

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Deployment/Mobilizing/Upkeep changes

Post by MysticPing on Sun Dec 14, 2014 6:43 pm

Keep in mind you still have to build the units. And mobilizing 100% means you have 0 pp, i repeat. 0 pp.

Let's just keep it as simple as we can.

_________________
ListerRimmer [18|Mar 06:01 PM]: what to post in VotDS | Caesar15 [18|Mar 06:02 PM]: Something sexy

Soccer [21|May 08:06 AM]: I'll be back >.>

Top8 [02|Mar 04:29 PM]: sounds like a naughty fellow, this professor Fux

[2014-07-13 20:10:06] MysticPing (Victor): Caesars extensive boob research? [2014-07-13 20:10:12] Stephen: Yes
[11:24:57 PM] Ryan Jones: I got nothing better to do than question peoples sex lives
Nah my dick was so confused nothing turned it on

[23:48] Yuriski (Ryan Jones): Then all of a sudden bam, it wants to fuck anything in sight
Tables, lampshades, food blenders
If it exists ill fuck it

[22:46:05] DeltaV: i sure am learning a lot about dino penises today

[21:27:10] DeltaV: you finally found my fetish
[21:27:13] DeltaV: yuri’s fully clothed dad

[23:36:40] Jay Dee: i joined the hitlerjugend
MysticPing
MysticPing

Posts : 767
Join date : 2014-05-23
Age : 19
Location : Sweden

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Deployment/Mobilizing/Upkeep changes

Post by Charzy on Sun Dec 14, 2014 6:45 pm

It's called levies, and they were pretty much used everywhere for many, many hundreds of years IRL.
Besides, you'd very quickly become bankrupt.

Another thing I'd like to see would be allowing units to be built in parallel. If you're losing population every time you make them, there's no reason to prevent people from making loads very quickly. They won't be able to sustain it for any length of time.
Charzy
Charzy
Forum Terrorist

Posts : 493
Join date : 2014-05-23
Age : 20
Location : My sex dungeon

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Deployment/Mobilizing/Upkeep changes

Post by MysticPing on Sun Dec 14, 2014 6:46 pm

Well, maybe a certain amount of units at the same time. IIRC one MP = one PP. That means if you have ca 300PP you could build 300 infantry regiments in ONE hour.

_________________
ListerRimmer [18|Mar 06:01 PM]: what to post in VotDS | Caesar15 [18|Mar 06:02 PM]: Something sexy

Soccer [21|May 08:06 AM]: I'll be back >.>

Top8 [02|Mar 04:29 PM]: sounds like a naughty fellow, this professor Fux

[2014-07-13 20:10:06] MysticPing (Victor): Caesars extensive boob research? [2014-07-13 20:10:12] Stephen: Yes
[11:24:57 PM] Ryan Jones: I got nothing better to do than question peoples sex lives
Nah my dick was so confused nothing turned it on

[23:48] Yuriski (Ryan Jones): Then all of a sudden bam, it wants to fuck anything in sight
Tables, lampshades, food blenders
If it exists ill fuck it

[22:46:05] DeltaV: i sure am learning a lot about dino penises today

[21:27:10] DeltaV: you finally found my fetish
[21:27:13] DeltaV: yuri’s fully clothed dad

[23:36:40] Jay Dee: i joined the hitlerjugend
MysticPing
MysticPing

Posts : 767
Join date : 2014-05-23
Age : 19
Location : Sweden

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Deployment/Mobilizing/Upkeep changes

Post by Charzy on Sun Dec 14, 2014 6:53 pm

If you're gearing your entire economy towards it, why not? You still have to pay a pile of money to train those guys, and an ungodly amount every week to keep them, and it still doesn't change the fact that regular infantry is terrible and will be crushed by any invading force with incredible ease.
Besides, nobody ever said infantry units had to cost a measly 1 PP.
Charzy
Charzy
Forum Terrorist

Posts : 493
Join date : 2014-05-23
Age : 20
Location : My sex dungeon

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Deployment/Mobilizing/Upkeep changes

Post by Crichton on Sun Dec 14, 2014 6:58 pm

It's a good idea in principle, but it could get both difficult to balance and overly complicated.
Crichton
Crichton

Posts : 468
Join date : 2014-05-24

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Deployment/Mobilizing/Upkeep changes

Post by The Cobbler on Mon Dec 15, 2014 8:10 am

Mobilisation should definitely stay, and ought to cost more if anything, and I agree that a base cost for having MP may be a good idea considering how easy it was to have a huge army with barely no effort. Should we have this base cost in, we could indeed remove an MP cap. As for reserves, considering one needed to mobilise their troops first, I always considered all troops reserves, which was often the case for big armies in small countries IRL, and I dont really think adding them will add much to war but complication.

And as Kryten said, all of this would be very hard to balance, meaning wed have to give such a drastic change plenty of thought at first.
The Cobbler
The Cobbler

Posts : 512
Join date : 2014-05-23
Age : 21
Location : Netherlands

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Deployment/Mobilizing/Upkeep changes

Post by MysticPing on Mon Dec 15, 2014 9:19 am

Well the current system is completely flawed. It's ridiculously easy to defend, and unless you are fighting someone incompetent or have super soliders you cannot win an offensive war.

This can be made simple without being overpowered. Say 1 mp costs 0.4 MK per cycle for maintenance. That means an army of 300MP would cost 120MK each cycle. This would make armies smaller and more possible to use for offense.

For using men up you could simply say each MP = 1,000 kerbals. So 300MP = 300,000 kerbals not providing PP.

Reserves do give PP but require to be mobalized both for defending and attacking

For parallel construction not being overpowered you could make it so that you only build max 100,000 troops every cycle (100MP). 

This is not perfect but simple enough to work.
And it is not very realistic either, but i think it would work

_________________
ListerRimmer [18|Mar 06:01 PM]: what to post in VotDS | Caesar15 [18|Mar 06:02 PM]: Something sexy

Soccer [21|May 08:06 AM]: I'll be back >.>

Top8 [02|Mar 04:29 PM]: sounds like a naughty fellow, this professor Fux

[2014-07-13 20:10:06] MysticPing (Victor): Caesars extensive boob research? [2014-07-13 20:10:12] Stephen: Yes
[11:24:57 PM] Ryan Jones: I got nothing better to do than question peoples sex lives
Nah my dick was so confused nothing turned it on

[23:48] Yuriski (Ryan Jones): Then all of a sudden bam, it wants to fuck anything in sight
Tables, lampshades, food blenders
If it exists ill fuck it

[22:46:05] DeltaV: i sure am learning a lot about dino penises today

[21:27:10] DeltaV: you finally found my fetish
[21:27:13] DeltaV: yuri’s fully clothed dad

[23:36:40] Jay Dee: i joined the hitlerjugend
MysticPing
MysticPing

Posts : 767
Join date : 2014-05-23
Age : 19
Location : Sweden

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Deployment/Mobilizing/Upkeep changes

Post by Appe96 on Mon Dec 15, 2014 9:43 am

The problem with 1 MP = 1 000 kerbals is that 25 tanks at best holds 100 kerbals
Appe96
Appe96

Posts : 144
Join date : 2014-12-14
Age : 22
Location : The dark side of ze Moon

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Deployment/Mobilizing/Upkeep changes

Post by The Cobbler on Mon Dec 15, 2014 9:44 am

MysticPing wrote:Well the current system is completely flawed. It's ridiculously easy to defend, and unless you are fighting someone incompetent or have super soliders you cannot win an offensive war.

This can be made simple without being overpowered. Say 1 mp costs 0.4 MK per cycle for maintenance. That means an army of 300MP would cost 120MK each cycle. This would make armies smaller and more possible to use for offense.

For using men up you could simply say each MP = 1,000 kerbals. So 300MP = 300,000 kerbals not providing PP.

Reserves do give PP but require to be mobalized both for defending and attacking

For parallel construction not being overpowered you could make it so that you only build max 100,000 troops every cycle (100MP). 

This is not perfect but simple enough to work.
And it is not very realistic either, but i think it would work

Arent you part of the nation that won numerous offensive wars? And didnt you lose a defensive war yourself?

and 1MP is 1000 kerbals just isnt realistic. More like 400 kerbals to the MP.

Why make a difference between reserves and normal troops though? Just call unmobilised troops reserves and youre done.

Instead we could jsut make MP more expensive in terms of PP. Seems more organic.

In any case, if we go for manpower we need to redo population growth entirely, so you might as well add that to your proposed changes
The Cobbler
The Cobbler

Posts : 512
Join date : 2014-05-23
Age : 21
Location : Netherlands

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Deployment/Mobilizing/Upkeep changes

Post by MysticPing on Mon Dec 15, 2014 11:28 am

We won ONE offensive war. Against a nation with no military. The war i lost was when i was outnumbered 2:1 and with the normal GM units. They simply made their own and was able to convince you they'd win. 

For growth i added to the bottom already (unless i forgot) that growth should be changed.
And i'm still for removing the MP cap, it serves no use in this system other then being used for some calculations.

1000 kerbals per MP was just an example. 

The difference between reserves and normal troops are that those names sounds nicer.
I would write more in-depth but i'm in school

_________________
ListerRimmer [18|Mar 06:01 PM]: what to post in VotDS | Caesar15 [18|Mar 06:02 PM]: Something sexy

Soccer [21|May 08:06 AM]: I'll be back >.>

Top8 [02|Mar 04:29 PM]: sounds like a naughty fellow, this professor Fux

[2014-07-13 20:10:06] MysticPing (Victor): Caesars extensive boob research? [2014-07-13 20:10:12] Stephen: Yes
[11:24:57 PM] Ryan Jones: I got nothing better to do than question peoples sex lives
Nah my dick was so confused nothing turned it on

[23:48] Yuriski (Ryan Jones): Then all of a sudden bam, it wants to fuck anything in sight
Tables, lampshades, food blenders
If it exists ill fuck it

[22:46:05] DeltaV: i sure am learning a lot about dino penises today

[21:27:10] DeltaV: you finally found my fetish
[21:27:13] DeltaV: yuri’s fully clothed dad

[23:36:40] Jay Dee: i joined the hitlerjugend
MysticPing
MysticPing

Posts : 767
Join date : 2014-05-23
Age : 19
Location : Sweden

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Deployment/Mobilizing/Upkeep changes

Post by Crichton on Mon Dec 15, 2014 1:43 pm

Appe96 wrote:The problem with 1 MP = 1 000 kerbals is that 25 tanks at best holds 100 kerbals
Then it just includes the supply chain. The people at home making shells and doing repairs aren't free to contribute to the rest of the economy.
Crichton
Crichton

Posts : 468
Join date : 2014-05-24

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Deployment/Mobilizing/Upkeep changes

Post by borisperrons on Mon Dec 15, 2014 1:57 pm

MysticPing wrote:We won ONE offensive war. Against a nation with no military. The war i lost was when i was outnumbered 2:1 and with the normal GM units. They simply made their own and was able to convince you they'd win.

Actually, we were fewer than you, but we had the technological advantage.
borisperrons
borisperrons

Posts : 912
Join date : 2014-05-23
Location : In a teather near you

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Deployment/Mobilizing/Upkeep changes

Post by Hellorp on Tue Dec 16, 2014 7:11 am

Agreed. Also, I suggest that the whole idea that troops can be instantly deployed in your territory for no cost is stupid. You still have to pay the soldiers, you still have to buy ammunition and other supplies. This will therefore encourage people to have actual standing armies rather than either nothing in peacetime and everything during war and make the military scene more interesting. A crisis might start if, for example, two neighboring nations keep increasing their readiness, or if a large fleet is deployed right off somebody's coast.
Hellorp
Hellorp

Posts : 91
Join date : 2014-06-28

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Deployment/Mobilizing/Upkeep changes

Post by The Cobbler on Tue Dec 16, 2014 10:48 am

Hellorp wrote:Agreed. Also, I suggest that the whole idea that troops can be instantly deployed in your territory for no cost is stupid. You still have to pay the soldiers, you still have to buy ammunition and other supplies. This will therefore encourage people to have actual standing armies rather than either nothing in peacetime and everything during war and make the military scene more interesting. A crisis might start if, for example, two neighboring nations keep increasing their readiness, or if a large fleet is deployed right off somebody's coast.

Exactly. Removing it means standing army and reserves are simulated by who's deployed and who isnt... and even reserve units would need to have a base cost.
The Cobbler
The Cobbler

Posts : 512
Join date : 2014-05-23
Age : 21
Location : Netherlands

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Deployment/Mobilizing/Upkeep changes

Post by MysticPing on Tue Dec 16, 2014 1:05 pm

Reserve units could have a much lower cost, yes. However i'm confused to what you mean with the rest. Reserves can't be instantly deployed, the only thing instantly deployed is the already deployed standing army. Or where you not criticizing? Sorry sometimes i just get confused.

_________________
ListerRimmer [18|Mar 06:01 PM]: what to post in VotDS | Caesar15 [18|Mar 06:02 PM]: Something sexy

Soccer [21|May 08:06 AM]: I'll be back >.>

Top8 [02|Mar 04:29 PM]: sounds like a naughty fellow, this professor Fux

[2014-07-13 20:10:06] MysticPing (Victor): Caesars extensive boob research? [2014-07-13 20:10:12] Stephen: Yes
[11:24:57 PM] Ryan Jones: I got nothing better to do than question peoples sex lives
Nah my dick was so confused nothing turned it on

[23:48] Yuriski (Ryan Jones): Then all of a sudden bam, it wants to fuck anything in sight
Tables, lampshades, food blenders
If it exists ill fuck it

[22:46:05] DeltaV: i sure am learning a lot about dino penises today

[21:27:10] DeltaV: you finally found my fetish
[21:27:13] DeltaV: yuri’s fully clothed dad

[23:36:40] Jay Dee: i joined the hitlerjugend
MysticPing
MysticPing

Posts : 767
Join date : 2014-05-23
Age : 19
Location : Sweden

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Deployment/Mobilizing/Upkeep changes

Post by Appe96 on Tue Dec 16, 2014 1:15 pm

Again, I think these reserves should have less fighting capability than their standard army counterparts. Simply due to lack of training and probably of older age considering that in most nations you are a reservist untill you are like what? 50 years? Atleast in sweden and some other nations I have heard about.
Appe96
Appe96

Posts : 144
Join date : 2014-12-14
Age : 22
Location : The dark side of ze Moon

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Deployment/Mobilizing/Upkeep changes

Post by The Cobbler on Tue Dec 16, 2014 1:23 pm

I am saying we dont need a reserve system. Reserves can be normal units that simply need to be deployed before they can be used, whereas standing army units are just units you perma-deploy
The Cobbler
The Cobbler

Posts : 512
Join date : 2014-05-23
Age : 21
Location : Netherlands

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Deployment/Mobilizing/Upkeep changes

Post by Sponsored content


Sponsored content


Back to top Go down

Page 1 of 3 1, 2, 3  Next

Back to top


 
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum