SD.net's World OOC/Discussion thread MK III

[Beowulf]

Tian Xia exports (minerals):
Major:
Chrome
Lithium

Minor:
zinc
aluminum
nickle
magnesium

[Mr Bean]

OAN, Saddamstain, Terra Libertia, and Adrianpolis are going to get fucked and fucked hard by this Tsunami. None more than Adrianpolis. Some of those islands are going to get SWEPT.

OAN:Question, what happens to sea-mines when a Tsunami hits? I know that the further out mines(10+ miles) will be unaffected unless the water is shallow, but what about the closer in mines?

[K. A. Pital]

Did we really need a tsunami? I guess it's pointless to ask.

[K. A. Pital]

Actually I realized that’s probably a pretty low estimate

Bullshit.

No its peak yield was fair bit higher then that

Yes, a bit.

The peak yield never went over 28 gigatons. Again, bullshit.

If the US and USSR had concentrated on building high yield gravity bombs they could have produced THOUSANDS OF GIGATONS worth of nuclear firepower.

The US nuclear programme costs, even prior to designing low-yield missileborne devices, were shown. Either show them to be false or decline:

What cost $715,398 in 1996 would cost $964,708.89 in 2007, per the inflation calculator.

This means Shep needed to spend 322 billion yearly on nukes alone.

Look carefully on the years. It terminates in 1954. The cumulative costs are this.

Your absurdly over simplistic comparisons are irrelevant

Here's the table. It's right up there. It says nothing about the economy. And it covers the period when the US constructed huge bombs; allowing it's arsenal to shoot up in 3 years - what we need.

Space travel and giant multi stage booster rockets able to throw 20 ton masses into orbit are far more technologically demanding

Yes, but there are more or less set production terms for the components and investment figures. The OMSK invested a good hundred billion into the space programme collectively.

So either show that the US program 1944-1954 was in a large part formed by the cost of missiles and SSBN (bullshit). Or scale down the fucking arsenal.

[K. A. Pital]

Anyway, if you're willing to say you did construct so many bombs still, regardless of cost, and regardless of necessity, all anti-UAR measures enacted by my nation are now considered permanent. As soon as people get a grip on how large your arsenals are IU, I'll write it into the main thread.

[MKSheppard]

It would have cost $452,000 per W-74 warhead for the 155mm AFAP in about 1974; if we assume that back then, a strategic TN bomb cost about $2 million; remember the AFAP is a very complicated linear implosion design which is tricky to develop, while a big TN bomb can be much simpler.

So that means that adjusted for inflation, a big TN bomb would cost about $10 million per copy; and at 300 of them, that's about $3 billion; which is easily sunk, considering everyone loves space programs which are proportinately more expensive.

EDIT: Also; keep in mind that that costs given in Atomic Audit are for the ENTIRE PROGRAM; from bombs to the factories and enrichment plants, etc.

We got perhaps about 75% of the facilities needed magicked into existence by Q; because how else will we enrich Uranium to the high % needed to support naval reactors?

[K. A. Pital]

EDIT: Also; keep in mind that that costs given in Atomic Audit are for the ENTIRE PROGRAM; from bombs to the factories and enrichment plants, etc.

We got perhaps about 75% of the facilities needed magicked into existence by Q; because how else will we enrich Uranium to the high % needed to support naval reactors?

No, wait. I thought the subs were provided with a complement of uranium, but no enrichment facilities were created - which led to the "conservation" of the sub fleet until such are built.

I presumed that you only had the R&D costs "done", but not the capital construction costs. For example, Atomic Audit gives a breakdown on the costs of the very first nuclear explosion. R&D costs are $795 million (1996 dollars) versus a total cost of $21,6 billion (1996 dollars). Of those, uranium enrichment was $13,6 billion - which still leaves us with $9 billion (factored for inflation, like $12 billion) for a simple nuclear device - minus R&D, minus uranium.

Engineering and materials costs alone are $5 billion.

Nuclear reactors existing, allright.

Why should we also "assume" the costs of a thermonuclear device? Here's a table which shows just the bare production costs alone (I deducted R&D costs which generally are small and stay around $1-$2 billion).

So if Zor's "no nuclear facilities" rule applies, you can't handwave that many nukes without bearing the cost. If all nuclear infrastructure exists already and it's only a matter of weapons production, in that case of course you're right.

BUt if that is the case, I'd presume far more nations would've mass-produced nuclear weapons on such a scale.

[CmdrWilkens]

Simly put Shep can certainly afford to get 8+ GT of nukes since he drastically cut naval spending (though he did take on a rather large cost of fielding the Blackbeards up until recently) and was running basically an occupation economy in Neverhood for the last few years until the revolts started. I'm honestly wondering how Saddamistan is affording all of this.

He made billions off of Blackbird because he manged to sell over 7,000 missiles plus launchers plus radar's eight countries, yes he had massive start-up costs. But now even New Patria has enough anti-ship missiles to make a Naval assault sucide.

Had Saddamstain been switched for a Beard equipped country during the Terra Libertia incident, your talking about being able to fire twenty missiles per ship before having to reload.

As Pezook noted, he has enough missles on hand to sink the entire grand Combined Mess Naval Force himself.

As noted the Blackbeard program has turned nearly all conventional warfare against most of the FUN into a losing game, minus strategic craft if you try a Naval assault it's going to get fucking MACROSS'd with six or eight missiles per ship to ensure 100% annihilation.

All of which is missing the two points I was making which were:

1) Shep stated and was, until he recently rescinded it, paying the majority of other nation's aquisition costs. For the number of missiles produced he was shouldering a HUGE capital outlay in taking on somewhere around 75% of the cost IIRC. (based on the most recent numbers I saw he was absorbing roughly 100mil per battalion).

2) None of this addresses how the fuck Saddamistan while being an isolationist amongst nations (unless the RPing you did had your characters lying to Rogue's) managed to afford upgrading its SSKs/SSNs to SSGNs/SSGs and developing the missiles to use in them along with aquiring several thousand MT of nukes.

So yes right now being detectable and targetable by an opponents SSMs basically means death but it is still going to be a running cost especially for any L3 nation that decided to go with a 1st world population (and therefore lower birthrates and growth). It also does nothing to address airborne threats AND is suceptible to being over-riden by the next-gen SAM plus Shep won't have the money to sell everybody a brand new system at that time.

[Sea Skimmer]

OAN, Saddamstain, Terra Libertia, and Adrianpolis are going to get fucked and fucked hard by this Tsunami. None more than Adrianpolis. Some of those islands are going to get SWEPT.

We need a precise location for the event, because any angle it hits from the south east will leave most of the Saddamistan coast shielded by major land masses and big islands. Whatever area is directly hit however, will possibly be hit by a wave with its height increased by the funneling effect of the surrounding islands.

OAN:Question, what happens to sea-mines when a Tsunami hits? I know that the further out mines(10+ miles) will be unaffected unless the water is shallow, but what about the closer in mines?

Moored mines will be broken loose and some thrown onshore to detonate, some will explode inside the wave, and some will be pulled back out to sea. In terms of damage though, a mine isn’t going to go anywhere that isn’t already deveasted, and the explosive charges in moored mines are nothing huge.

Low tech pressure and acoustical bottom mines may explode, high tech ones will not, magnetic wont, but all of them may be dragged along the sea bed. Many of the anti handling devices Saddamistan has strewn around will explode or be moved, but Saddamistan already clears mines with aircraft dropped depth charges for safety whenever possible.

[Sea Skimmer]

Engineering and materials costs alone are $5 billion.

Why should we also "assume" the costs of a thermonuclear device? Here's a table which shows just the bare production costs alone (I deducted R&D costs which generally are small and stay around $1-$2 billion).

3 years have elapsed in the game more or less, time enough to spend several hundred billion on nuclear facilities and weapons without particularly horrific strain on the economy. Other then nukes and research into fission reactors for power production (mobile and static) Saddamistan has not really built much other then offensive missiles and diesel/RTG subs, certainly no other grand projects. It does not yet produce its own super high yield bombs either.

[K. A. Pital]

3 years have elapsed in the game more or less, time enough to spend several hundred billion on nuclear facilities and weapons without particularly horrific strain on the economy.

What the hell are you SAYING? The biggest nations of SDN have 1,5 trillion GDP. How could they "spend several hundred billion" without a colossal strain on their economies, praytell? Yeah, right - let's just pretend.

That's exactly the problem. People don't understand that to spend 800-900 billion in 3 years you'd need to spend 300 billion on nuclear weapons production, transportation and deployment alone yearly. Which is 20% of your GDP. I'm not counting the military spending which is not related to nuclear weapons: Navy ship maintenance and Army AFV maintenance.

Other then nukes and research into fission reactors for power production (mobile and static) Saddamistan has not really built much other then offensive missiles and diesel/RTG subs, certainly no other grand projects. It does not yet produce its own super high yield bombs either.

Get a better grip on economy then. You're not a $13 trillion economy like the United States. Not even an $5 trillion one. You're a $1,5 trillion economy. Realistically, war spending should not exceed 10 percent of GDP, or you're going into war footing.

And I'm not saying your small stockpile is a problem. Shep's stockpile is.

[Shroom Man 777]

My god. You people are insane! INSANE!!!! INSANE!!!!

Goddamn. Prime Minister Shroom is now curling in a foetal position, sobbing for his mom.

I never wanted it this way! All I wanted was peace! Why?! WHY?! WHY?!

The horrer... the horrer...




Now I can't get cheap-as-nails discount missiles. Now my beautiful friendship with Shep is ruined! You had to bring out his bad side! His BAD SIDE!!

Goddamn Groinstars!

GODDAMN YOU ALL!!!!


Okay. Time to read the Game Thread and figure out a way to salvage this goddamn situation.

This is horribel.

[Sea Skimmer]

That's exactly the problem. People don't understand that to spend 800-900 billion in 3 years you'd need to spend 300 billion on nuclear weapons production, transportation and deployment alone yearly.

Who the fuck said 800 billion? I said several hundred, as in 200-300 and more like 5-7% of the GDP. I don't need to spend anything like 800 billion to have a real nuclear capability, do you think Iran or NOrth Korea or South Africa or Pakistan or Isreal or India spent anything like that much money to get nuclear weapons? I am not replicating the entire US nuclear program, which BTW reached my current level of nuclear firepower by about 1950. The data from the late 50s and 60s does not JUST include huge nukes, it also includes hoards of other things like thousands of tactical nuclear artillery shells that we aren't bothering with yet.

Get a better grip on economy then. You're not a $13 trillion economy like the United States. Not even an $5 trillion one. You're a $1,5 trillion economy. Realistically, war spending should not exceed 10 percent of GDP, or you're going into war footing.

Great, I can spend half that and still have plenty of money for a conventional military and my cheap cruise missile swarm on the side. Just look at Iran, they have built a complete nuclear program, which multiple forms of fissile material production and a complete mine to waste recycling fuel cycle without any strain on there economy at all, which has a GDP of just 600 billion, half of Saddamistans, and about 5 million more people to deal with under that GDP too.

And I'm not saying your small stockpile is a problem. Shep's stockpile is.

He got the material for it fair and square by giving up a huge chunk of conventional firepower. Its too bad no one took advantage of his weakness at the time.

[Shroom Man 777]

Right now, I severely regret that whole NINJA thing. I couldn't help but have guys shouting "Allahu Ackbar Assholes!" and "Mazel Tov Motherfuckers!"

Well, damn.

[The Yosemite Bear]

I'm just upset that noone picked up my plotlines.

[Shroom Man 777]

They're kind of... hard to understand. Sorry.

[K. A. Pital]

Just look at Iran, they have built a complete nuclear program, which multiple forms of fissile material production and a complete mine to waste recycling fuel cycle without any strain on there economy at all, which has a GDP of just 600 billion

And has Iran or DPRK produced 10 gigatons worth of fissile material in three years? Really. If you claim you have several hundre megatons in your arsenal, fine.

But Shep claims to have 8 gigaton.

Pakistan took a DOZEN YEARS to scale up their nuclear industry, and you claim that... it just arrived? Poof?!

He got the material for it fair and square by giving up a huge chunk of conventional firepower

Really? Did he decomission anything but his submarines? Carriers perhaps, each of which costs billions in operating costs? No? Maybe his strategic airforce, which also costs billions to maintain, should be ignored as a cost factor?

[The Yosemite Bear]

Sending food and meds to those effected.

[Sea Skimmer]

And has Iran or DPRK produced 10 gigatons worth of fissile material in three years? Really. If you claim you have several hundre megatons in your arsenal, fine.

No but no one handed Iran dozens of tons of the highest possible grade fissile material, the game handed that to Shep even if we didn’t get enrichment facilities to go with it. If you gave Iran that fissile material then it does already have all the facilities it needs to fabricate it into nuclear devices. US naval reactors run on fuel enriched to about 90% purity, it’s the best stuff you could ask for to build a nuke with. You could end blend it down by a factor of three and it would still work, just with a lesser yield to weight ratio.

Pakistan took a DOZEN YEARS to scale up their nuclear industry, and you claim that... it just arrived? Poof?!

Pakistan had to build up a technological base, and it had very little money to spare, its one of the worlds poorest nations by per capita GDP. This game CLEARLY gives first rate powers a first class industrial and technological base, proven by the numerous space programs (notice, in the real world more nations can afford nukes then space flight) and railgun/coilgun projects people have embarked on, and a first world per capita GDP of around 24,000 bucks a head. Building mere nuclear bombs is not some fucking breathtaking accomplishment in this environment. Furthermore this huge nuclear arsenal IS NOT NEW. Sheppard exploded a 100 megaton bomb long ago in the game, why the hell didn’t you raise hell then?

People fucking put GPS up in less the TWO years and no one batted an eye. That’s technology it took the United States billions of dollars and 30 years of R&D, including two generations of previous satellites, to develop and deploy, including a nearly ten year period to orbit all the satellites! I'm not wasting any more time with this bullshit.

[K. A. Pital]

I never said anything about the R&D terms or costs, Skimmer.

I proposed that for the sake of the game, R&D terms and costs are zero (all calculations and research on XX century technology is already done) and Uranium mining costs are likewise zero.

Anyway, I'm not going to press this issue further either. If Shep did build so many nukes out of his scrapped nuclear submarine fleet, so be it.

[PeZook]

Okay...ISCA budget time!

Calling all ISCA members for their contributions, and all other countries for their ship orders!

Come here, come all! FCS, FCS-L in all variants! Automated bulkers! Coast Guard cutters and hydrofoils! Nuclear passenger and cargo ships!

[The Yosemite Bear]

oh and our big but slow folks will be watching over you from the skies too. Or some people prefer to ship via air.

[The Yosemite Bear]

Also how long before nova terra gets it's own Steve Irwin?

[RogueIce]

Okay...ISCA budget time!

Calling all ISCA members for their contributions, and all other countries for their ship orders!

Come here, come all! FCS, FCS-L in all variants! Automated bulkers! Coast Guard cutters and hydrofoils! Nuclear passenger and cargo ships!

I'll build the 1 SHS and 2 LHS I have planned.

[PeZook]

Order accepted! Shinra gets 1 shs and 2 lhs ships! Excellent hospital vessels for all your disaster relief needs!

P.S.

This year, PeZookia and the Shadow Empire receive floating drydocks capable of servicing up to 30 thousand DWT of shippage yearly. They are not nuclear-rated, but can service LHDs and smaller conventional carriers.

In FY2011, the ISCA will invest in N'Ton and Baerne, delivering nuclear-rated drydocks and support facilities.

Please refer to the ISCA budget document for all your pricing and tonnage information!