MOCpages : Share your LEGO® creations
LEGO models my own creation MOCpages toys shop Divide and Conquer 3Military
Welcome to the world's greatest LEGO fan community!
Explore cool creations, share your own, and have lots of fun together.  ~  It's all free!
Conversation »
Combat Thread 1
Join to comment
 Group admin 
This is a thread for discussion and results of wars between player nations. Keep things on topic, and remember, it's just a game. ;)
Permalink
| March 2, 2014, 9:08 pm
 Group admin 
OK, so war seems likely in North America between myself and Cliffe, so we will be needing a CM volunteer for D&C3's first war. Someone with prior experience either judging or seeing judging in action in previous games would be preferred.
Permalink
| March 2, 2014, 9:10 pm
It would be really funny if we couldn't find a CM since barely anyone seems to be paying much attention to this game...

Also, WolfBrigade01 and Awesome-o-saurus will be getting involved due to the Millenium Alliance.
Permalink
| March 2, 2014, 9:25 pm
 Group admin 
Quoting Kaiser Pharaoh Cliffe
It would be really funny if we couldn't find a CM since barely anyone seems to be paying much attention to this game...

Also, WolfBrigade01 and Awesome-o-saurus will be getting involved due to the Millenium Alliance.

I think we have a few potential candidates even with the somewhat low activity.

Anyway, considering how poor their and your force projection capabilities are, and considering there is this little thing called the Atlantic Ocean in between me and you guys... let's just say I'm not that worried about your allies intervening. Good luck trying to transport mass numbers of armor and men on a handful of destroyers. XD

"Amateurs study tactics; professionals study logistics."
Permalink
| March 2, 2014, 9:40 pm
Quoting Matthew McCall
I think we have a few potential candidates even with the somewhat low activity.

Anyway, considering how poor their and your force projection capabilities are, and considering there is this little thing called the Atlantic Ocean in between me and you guys... let's just say I'm not that worried about your allies intervening. Good luck trying to transport mass numbers of armor and men on a handful of destroyers. XD

"Amateurs study tactics; professionals study logistics."

We have transport ships on the way, and I'm mostly thinking in terms of aircraft. I think I'm good for ground forces.
Permalink
| March 2, 2014, 10:08 pm
 Group admin 
Quoting Kaiser Pharaoh Cliffe
We have transport ships on the way, and I'm mostly thinking in terms of aircraft. I think I'm good for ground forces.

Not really, you shouldn't really have any ground forces besides the few thousand soldiers that you could could have transported on your destroyers and battleships, and they won't be well supplied with armored vehicles. And given the fact that aircraft have limited ranges, you guys have pretty limited options for where you can base then. Like I said previosily, logistics are a real trouble for you guys currently.
Permalink
| March 2, 2014, 10:57 pm
Quoting Matthew McCall
Not really, you shouldn't really have any ground forces besides the few thousand soldiers that you could could have transported on your destroyers and battleships, and they won't be well supplied with armored vehicles. And given the fact that aircraft have limited ranges, you guys have pretty limited options for where you can base then. Like I said previosily, logistics are a real trouble for you guys currently.

And you think you could have power projection with just Duks?

This is ridiculous, man. Your group is dying anyway, and it's just ridiculous. It's more like Risk than anything. The Ottomans annexed Brazil for pete's sake.
Permalink
| March 3, 2014, 12:19 am
 Group admin 
I volunteer as tribute!
Permalink
| March 3, 2014, 12:29 am
Quoting Matthew Sylvan
I volunteer as tribute!

Well okay, but I'm not fighting anybody until I have a fair chance, and I can't just build transports out of the blue. I mean I could make a MOC, but due to production it would be impossible to get any decent amount of stuff over to the new world.

Really it's impossible for me to do much of anything because I'm so far behind, according to the way McCall has this all set up.
Permalink
| March 3, 2014, 12:33 am
 Group admin 
Quoting Kaiser Pharaoh Cliffe
And you think you could have power projection with just Duks?

This is ridiculous, man. Your group is dying anyway, and it's just ridiculous. It's more like Risk than anything. The Ottomans annexed Brazil for pete's sake.

Umm... you are aware that with me annexing Ontario I have a direct land border with Quebec, right? I never said a thing about DUWKs and likely wasn't even going to use them until you reminded me about them. I don't need amphibious vehicles or a navy to reach you, my APCs, Tanks, and logistic fleet of trucks should be able I reach your new territory just fine. Of course, I can only get a fraction of my vehicles to you and certainly not until 1-3 weeks from now, but make no mistake: they will eventually be able to reach your territory.

As for the game dying, the number of participants is completely normal relative to this game's 4 predecessors.
Permalink
| March 3, 2014, 12:43 am
Quoting Matthew McCall
Umm... you are aware that with me annexing Ontario I have a direct land border with Quebec, right? I never said a thing about DUWKs and likely wasn't even going to use them until you reminded me about them. I don't need amphibious vehicles or a navy to reach you, my APCs, Tanks, and logistic fleet of trucks should be able I reach your new territory just fine. Of course, I can only get a fraction of my vehicles to you and certainly not until 1-3 weeks from now, but make no mistake: they will eventually be able to reach your territory.

As for the game dying, the number of participants is completely normal relative to this game's 4 predecessors.

I was just saying...

Well anyway, there's still no point in fighting you if I have no armor and only a handful of troops. In every other group I've been in, I haven't had to make a dedicated effort towards transports, so I was unprepared for this.
Permalink
| March 3, 2014, 12:48 am
 Group admin 
There were always these quiet parts, but after that players get active once again.
Permalink
| March 3, 2014, 12:49 am
 Group admin 
Quoting Kaiser Pharaoh Cliffe
Well okay, but I'm not fighting anybody until I have a fair chance, and I can't just build transports out of the blue. I mean I could make a MOC, but due to production it would be impossible to get any decent amount of stuff over to the new world.

Really it's impossible for me to do much of anything because I'm so far behind, according to the way McCall has this all set up.

Umm... nightmare created this game and set up the rules, if you have a problem with them you can talk to him, not me. I modified the production numbers but didn't come up with the system itself (and I think it works just fine). Before you say this situation is unfair, the same issues would apply to me if I tried to invade Europe without a single cargo ship.

Anyway, the rules make it clear that logistics matter, so if you are going to both annex land on a different continent and then declare war in a powerful neighbor you should make sure you have the logistics needed to pull it off. This shouldn't be some surprising news, just the fact that there are logistics ground vehicles, airplanes, and ships should have made this obvious that logistics are a thing.

Switching topics, with Matthew S volunteering as CM, we can either have one week to create and submit a battle plan, or we will have to negotaite a truce. Keep in mind that with you declaring war, if you want to back out I'm not going to let you get off without terms. ;)
Permalink
| March 3, 2014, 12:57 am
 Group admin 
Quoting Kaiser Pharaoh Cliffe
I was just saying...

Well anyway, there's still no point in fighting you if I have no armor and only a handful of troops. In every other group I've been in, I haven't had to make a dedicated effort towards transports, so I was unprepared for this.

Does this mean you wish to back down from the fight? We would need to negotaite terms that we can both agree on. One thing you should consider is that I currently don't have a single naval ship in the Atlantic so the situation isn't totally in my favor.
Permalink
| March 3, 2014, 1:01 am
Quoting Matthew McCall
Does this mean you wish to back down from the fight? We would need to negotaite terms that we can both agree on. One thing you should consider is that I currently don't have a single naval ship in the Atlantic so the situation isn't totally in my favor.

You what?...

This just keeps getting more and more absurd.

Well, most likely scenario is, I will hold off on invading any other part of America until WolfBrigade01 finishes his transport ships and we can get supplies over to the new world.

I mean, couldn't I just appropriate civilian vessels for my war time needs? I'm sure cargo ships could carry plenty of armor and stuff and unload in Quebec.
Permalink
| March 3, 2014, 1:29 am
 Group admin 
Quoting Kaiser Pharaoh Cliffe
You what?...

This just keeps getting more and more absurd.

Well, most likely scenario is, I will hold off on invading any other part of America until WolfBrigade01 finishes his transport ships and we can get supplies over to the new world.

I mean, couldn't I just appropriate civilian vessels for my war time needs? I'm sure cargo ships could carry plenty of armor and stuff and unload in Quebec.

How is it absurd for me not to have naval ships in the region when I have yet to really establish myself on the east coast? The starting name of West Coast Federation should have made this clear. I would have to check the rules about using civilian ships, but I think at the very least it is discouraged as it would ruin the point of making military cargo ships. I'll let other Admins make a call on this, I'm not the only person in charge of rules here and obviously have a vested interest in the answer being "not allowed".

Anyway, sorry, but since you declared war I'm not going to sit around and twiddle my thumbs to let you guys build up, you can either concede on favorable terms to me or get ready for the first week of combat. Don't expect me to be able to bring much of any ground forces to the region for the first week.
Permalink
| March 3, 2014, 1:48 am
Quoting Matthew McCall
How is it absurd for me not to have naval ships in the region when I have yet to really establish myself on the east coast? The starting name of West Coast Federation should have made this clear. I would have to check the rules about using civilian ships, but I think at the very least it is discouraged as it would ruin the point of making military cargo ships. I'll let other Admins make a call on this, I'm not the only person in charge of rules here and obviously have a vested interest in the answer being "not allowed".

Anyway, sorry, but since you declared war I'm not going to sit around and twiddle my thumbs to let you guys build up, you can either concede on favorable terms to me or get ready for the first week of combat. Don't expect me to be able to bring much of any ground forces to the region for the first week.

I didn't actually officially declare war...

So you're telling me that /neither/ of us will have much of anything in the way of ground forces in the first week?

I really don't have any idea how any of this works, obviously. I would need to get inside your head. This is all... very new to me.

So I didn't know I would have to have cargo ships to send ground forces over, and so even if I made a MOC of one I could only build one per week, so by the time combat started I would only have one shipload of vehicles ashore in North America. This war is impossible unless I am allowed to appropriate civilian vessels, which most nations DID during the world wars. Mind you, that won't discourage me or my allies from building transports. I'll still build them, but for now I must force the merchant ships to cooperate with me.
Permalink
| March 3, 2014, 2:28 am
 Group admin 
Quoting Kaiser Pharaoh Cliffe
I didn't actually officially declare war...

So you're telling me that /neither/ of us will have much of anything in the way of ground forces in the first week?

I really don't have any idea how any of this works, obviously. I would need to get inside your head. This is all... very new to me.

So I didn't know I would have to have cargo ships to send ground forces over, and so even if I made a MOC of one I could only build one per week, so by the time combat started I would only have one shipload of vehicles ashore in North America. This war is impossible unless I am allowed to appropriate civilian vessels, which most nations DID during the world wars. Mind you, that won't discourage me or my allies from building transports. I'll still build them, but for now I must force the merchant ships to cooperate with me.

Well, even if you haven't officially declared war it's obvious that you will eventually. XD

Anyway, yeah, maybe we should include a merchant marine or something similar to that. It shouldn't be a substitute for military cargo ships but it would make a decent supplement.
Permalink
| March 3, 2014, 3:28 am
Quoting Matthew McCall
Well, even if you haven't officially declared war it's obvious that you will eventually. XD

Anyway, yeah, maybe we should include a merchant marine or something similar to that. It shouldn't be a substitute for military cargo ships but it would make a decent supplement.

If this can be facilitated, I will have a fighting chance.
Permalink
| March 3, 2014, 1:23 pm
 Group admin 
Quoting Kaiser Pharaoh Cliffe
If this can be facilitated, I will have a fighting chance.

Yes, that's the main reason I'm deciding to propose this, because currently getting forces overseas is hard. I'm thinking a system based off of how many ocean touching territories one owns, say 5-10x merhant marine ships per territory. Said theoretical ships shouldn't be allowed to carry all that much to make it so that there is still a reason to produce logistics ships.
Permalink
| March 3, 2014, 1:49 pm
Quoting Matthew McCall
Yes, that's the main reason I'm deciding to propose this, because currently getting forces overseas is hard. I'm thinking a system based off of how many ocean touching territories one owns, say 5-10x merhant marine ships per territory. Said theoretical ships shouldn't be allowed to carry all that much to make it so that there is still a reason to produce logistics ships.

Ten ships times eleven territories...

I'd say 110 ships for me, 50 for Germany and 40 for South Africa sounds sufficient. Shall I add them to my stats?
Permalink
| March 3, 2014, 2:50 pm
 Group admin 
Quoting Kaiser Pharaoh Cliffe
Ten ships times eleven territories...

I'd say 110 ships for me, 50 for Germany and 40 for South Africa sounds sufficient. Shall I add them to my stats?

We'll go with 4 cargo ships and 3 transport ships per teritory. We need to decide the cargo capacity of the ships. Anyway, no, don't add ships to your stats until we get this finalized.
Permalink
| March 3, 2014, 3:18 pm
Quoting Matthew McCall
We'll go with 4 cargo ships and 3 transport ships per teritory. We need to decide the cargo capacity of the ships. Anyway, no, don't add ships to your stats until we get this finalized.
Land territories supply sea territories with goods to trade and thusly they make more ships.

Permalink
| March 3, 2014, 5:10 pm
Anyways, how about productions capacity is one ship per week per ocean touching territory and 1 ships per 500,000 square kilometers of land you have or 2 per million(as land would provide goods for you to ship)This also provides a stipulation for expansion.
Permalink
| March 3, 2014, 5:13 pm
 Group admin 
Quoting Daniel Bozarth
Anyways, how about productions capacity is one ship per week per ocean touching territory and 1 ships per 500,000 square kilometers of land you have or 2 per million(as land would provide goods for you to ship)This also provides a stipulation for expansion.

I'm iffy about making it by land mass, but yeah, I could totally see a desperate production rate for merchant marine based off of how much teritory one controls.
Permalink
| March 3, 2014, 6:29 pm
Quoting Matthew McCall

I propose we temporarily put all this aside and stop Korea from taking over Panama and the canal zone.
Permalink
| March 3, 2014, 7:14 pm
Quoting Kaiser Pharaoh Cliffe
I propose we temporarily put all this aside and stop Korea from taking over Panama and the canal zone.
New Judah will stand with korea to stop any European bullying of the rest of the world

Permalink
| March 3, 2014, 7:27 pm
Quoting Matthew McCall
I'm iffy about making it by land mass, but yeah, I could totally see a desperate production rate for merchant marine based off of how much teritory one controls.
the thing is, we can really do it on territories, because the united states if 50 territories, but china is just two, it doesnt make logical sense.

Permalink
| March 3, 2014, 7:28 pm
 Group admin 
Quoting Daniel Bozarth
Quoting Matthew McCall
I'm iffy about making it by land mass, but yeah, I could totally see a desperate production rate for merchant marine based off of how much teritory one controls.
the thing is, we can really do it on territories, because the united states if 50 territories, but china is just two, it doesnt make logical sense.

You do have a point, doing it by size instead of number of teritories makes more sense, but at the same time is more difficult to compute.
Permalink
| March 3, 2014, 8:10 pm
Quoting Daniel Bozarth
Quoting Kaiser Pharaoh Cliffe
I propose we temporarily put all this aside and stop Korea from taking over Panama and the canal zone.
New Judah will stand with korea to stop any European bullying of the rest of the world

As if you could do anything about it! You have "N/A" written under your naval stats.
Permalink
| March 3, 2014, 8:11 pm
 Group admin 
Quoting Kaiser Pharaoh Cliffe
I propose we temporarily put all this aside and stop Korea from taking over Panama and the canal zone.

Hmm... on one hand that would mean letting you establish a foothold, but on the other hand I would be in a much stronger position to attack/defend as well...

I'm not sure if I can really do much about preventing Best Korea from taking panama (which I obviously want for myself XD ), I'll have to check the range of my naval ships.
Permalink
| March 3, 2014, 8:24 pm
 Group admin 
Quoting Kaiser Pharaoh Cliffe
As if you could do anything about it! You have "N/A" written under your naval stats.

And I have a bunch of naval aircraft without any carriers. :D
Permalink
| March 3, 2014, 8:25 pm
Quoting Matthew McCall
Hmm... on one hand that would mean letting you establish a foothold, but on the other hand I would be in a much stronger position to attack/defend as well...

I'm not sure if I can really do much about preventing Best Korea from taking panama (which I obviously want for myself XD ), I'll have to check the range of my naval ships.

The situation in Canada won't be changed much by this, and I don't care much if you take Panama. I would just like to keep Korea out of the equation... it seems beneficial to both of us.
Permalink
| March 3, 2014, 10:59 pm
 Group admin 
Quoting Kaiser Pharaoh Cliffe
The situation in Canada won't be changed much by this, and I don't care much if you take Panama. I would just like to keep Korea out of the equation... it seems beneficial to both of us.

Well, the thing is that you took Maine. My current goal is by the end of the game to control all 50 states. This means that one way or another, be it by war or negotiation I'll try and get it.

The only reason I really care about panama is because it would allow me to move ships through it, but I agree that denying Korea panama would be in our favor. It just seems like you are using Korea as a convenient distraction if you know what I mean...
Permalink
| March 4, 2014, 12:56 am
 Group admin 
Quoting Matthew McCall
I'm iffy about making it by land mass, but yeah, I could totally see a desperate production rate for merchant marine based off of how much teritory one controls.

I only control 5 territories yet I have the longest shore.
Permalink
| March 4, 2014, 9:08 am
 Group admin 
Quoting Matthew Sylvan
I only control 5 territories yet I have the longest shore.

Then again, much of that shore is in the artic ocean. XD
Permalink
| March 4, 2014, 11:06 am
 Group admin 
Quoting Brickviller -

I'm sorry to correct one of the many nations Korea has great respect for, but we are not there to stay. Korea WILL leave the area after we've cleared the famine. And your country CAN conquer Panama afterwarths. Going to war with Korea would only weaken our position, as this would mean the Asian Pacific Alliance and the Northern Alliance would be dragged into an all out war. This would weaken the Tongorian Union, and thus would need to move forces to it's eastern borders (where Korea and the Tongorian Union meet), thus leaving Eastern Europe somewhat vulnerable to attack. Attacks from most likely the Millenium Alliance, the one Cliffe is in. The Millenium Alliance is the one which would gain the most of a war between Korea and the West Coast Federation. So far Korea has conquered parts of Asia peacefully, while anMillenium Alliance member has showed us the cruelties of war (bombing of Polish towns). If we want to avoid a war that would destroy both our nations, you could reconsider your current policy.

Yes, we realize that a war between our alliances would be in the Millennium Alliance's favor, but given your alliance's current naval state, you are currently no threat and have virtually no way to stop the WCF from utterly crushing any attempt on your part at taking Panama (battleships > small transport ships). On the other hand, the Millennium Alliance is a major competitor for our navy.

We agree that Tongaria is not exactly the strongest country at the moment, they have been primarily building designs that will not be finished for decades and have chosen not to produce our designs to supplement their current weakness. It would also put the WCF in a weakened position to try and fight two wars at once, and we fear our allies in Europe are not properly equipped for a real war.

We would like to propose that we allow Great and Best Korea to take Panama and instead we will occupy neighboring Nicaragua. We will hold you to your word that the occupation of Panama is short-term only. Does your alliance agree to this?
Permalink
| March 4, 2014, 3:47 pm
Quoting Matthew McCall
Well, the thing is that you took Maine. My current goal is by the end of the game to control all 50 states. This means that one way or another, be it by war or negotiation I'll try and get it.

The only reason I really care about panama is because it would allow me to move ships through it, but I agree that denying Korea panama would be in our favor. It just seems like you are using Korea as a convenient distraction if you know what I mean...

I don't actually care too much about Maine. Tell you what, you can have Maine if I can have Ontario and eventually the rest of Canada minus Alaska. Sound fair? I'll invade New Caledonia for you and get rid of them, and then you can have Alaska for free.
Permalink
| March 4, 2014, 4:43 pm
Quoting Kaiser Pharaoh Cliffe
As if you could do anything about it! You have "N/A" written under your naval stats.

this is because they had to replace the ssd card on my laptop, i will have the designs re-made soon
Permalink
| March 4, 2014, 4:47 pm
Quoting TheWolfBrigade 01 The Millennium Alliance will see to it that our efforts are to be realized. But the option of war is not yet on table...For now.

By the way, I emailed you and it's urgent. The 60's are coming... BRACE YOURSELVES


Permalink
| March 4, 2014, 4:59 pm
 Group admin 
Quoting Kaiser Pharaoh Cliffe
By the way, I emailed you and it's urgent. The 60's are coming... BRACE YOURSELVES


Ah yes, I'm quite excited for the 1960's, I've got a few creations I'm wanting to show off. :)
Permalink
| March 4, 2014, 5:35 pm
 Group admin 
Quoting Kaiser Pharaoh Cliffe
I don't actually care too much about Maine. Tell you what, you can have Maine if I can have Ontario and eventually the rest of Canada minus Alaska. Sound fair? I'll invade New Caledonia for you and get rid of them, and then you can have Alaska for free.

You will notice I said "current goal". My long term goal is a bit more ambitious... and it involves not letting other countries gain a major foothold north of me. I'm willing to let you keep Quebec, but don't really want to have to deal with guarding a massive northern border.
Permalink
| March 4, 2014, 5:38 pm
Quoting Matthew McCall
You will notice I said "current goal". My long term goal is a bit more ambitious... and it involves not letting other countries gain a major foothold north of me. I'm willing to let you keep Quebec, but don't really want to have to deal with guarding a massive northern border.

You can be assured that you won't have to worry about guarding the border at all. In fact once I gain all of Kanada, I plan on making it an semi-autonomous colonial territory within the Imperial Nordic Federation of Prussia. They will have their own government, laws, everything. It is my anticipation that they will want to have closer ties to you and may well buy much of your military inventory. After I conquer all of the north, except the territories you might want like Alaska, I seek no further conquest. I do not seek world domination, the notion is very silly and unrealistic to me.
Permalink
| March 4, 2014, 5:49 pm
 Group admin 
Quoting Matthew McCall
Ah yes, I'm quite excited for the 1960's, I've got a few creations I'm wanting to show off. :)

I have more than a few:D
Permalink
| March 5, 2014, 9:48 am
So... did we ever make a final decision about merchant navies? I still wanna kill you, McCall.
Permalink
| March 9, 2014, 11:15 pm
 Group admin 
Quoting Kaiser Pharaoh Cliffe
So... did we ever make a final decision about merchant navies? I still wanna kill you, McCall.

Well, there's the problem of the fact that we can either do it by territories owned, which is unfair to large countires, or by the total amount of landmass each country has, which may be hard to calculate.
Permalink
| March 10, 2014, 11:41 am
Quoting Matthew McCall
Well, there's the problem of the fact that we can either do it by territories owned, which is unfair to large countires, or by the total amount of landmass each country has, which may be hard to calculate.

Why does it have to be so complicated? You said this isn't a realistic game, it's like Risk with legos. Why try to make it realistic when it's not supposed to be? We can just say x amount of ships transported x amount of troops to this place and it won't be unbalanced because of the natural obligation of countries to keep a certain amount of troops at home to defend their borders. It's like how in Civ V and Rome II you can ship troops without having to build troop transports. I like it.

And don't argue that this makes things "too easy" because this game's annexing mechanics are laughable.

Besides, it's not like anyone is going to complain... because... there's barely anyone left. It's pretty much just you and me going back and forth, and sometimes Awe or Wolf will pop up. The others are just focused on grabbing blank spaces on the map on other continents far away.
Permalink
| March 10, 2014, 3:43 pm
 Group admin 
There hasn't ever been a single one of these games where players got free logistics, the entire poit of this type of game is to build every single design that your nation uses for war. This applies to logistics, notice that cargo aircraftabnd supply trucks are not assumed to automatically exist. Why should ships be any different? I'm fine with merchant marine existing and even havig a way to calculate a way to produce th, but just giving sufficient amounts of them to players without production or even a model of the ships existing clashes with the model used for production of all other military assets. Anyway, I disagree that we are the only two players, multiple people besides us are participating and people such as Kenyon or Sylvan are building up forces for the 1960's.
Permalink
| March 10, 2014, 4:34 pm
Quoting Kaiser Pharaoh Cliffe
It's like how in Civ V and Rome II you can ship troops without having to build troop transports. I like it.


Daily reminder Civ V is a casualized shadow of Civ IV.

On the issue of transports, I think you should be required to have landing vehicles. But actual cargo ships and troop transports? I mean, do you want us to build passenger jets too for ferrying troops around by air? It seems a bit overboard.

I read nothing buy those post, so I have no idea what you're actually talking about.
Permalink
| March 10, 2014, 7:14 pm
 Group admin 
Quoting Awesome-o-saurus The Not-So-Great

Daily reminder Civ V is a casualized shadow of Civ IV.

On the issue of transports, I think you should be required to have landing vehicles. But actual cargo ships and troop transports? I mean, do you want us to build passenger jets too for ferrying troops around by air? It seems a bit overboard.

I read nothing buy those post, so I have no idea what you're actually talking about.

Yes, cargo airplanes are needed to lift stuff by air. I don't know why you guys suddenly think this is a problem, this is the 5th game I've been a leader in and the first to have members who thought having to build logistics was an issue. A major concept of this game that nightmare decided on was that logistics actually mattered, so we went ahead and made sure that there was a way to make sure that people had the ability to make sufficent numbers of them. Building a micro scale cargo ship really isn't all that difficult (1-2 hours max), and it's avaolutely fine to build large aircraft in micro scale as well. You don't have to build a massive B-52 like I did, feel free to build at a more convenient scale.
Permalink
| March 10, 2014, 9:19 pm
Quoting Matthew McCall


I feel it's a problem, and probably Cliffe does too, because the groups we spent the last 5 years in didn't do this. It was just assumed you had basic transport capabilities. Also, the performance of your gear depended on the quality of the build, so no one wanted to waste time on building cargo boats when they already existed IRL. We'd rather spend our effort on planes, tonks, etc.
Permalink
| March 11, 2014, 12:08 am
 Group admin 
Quoting Awesome-o-saurus The Not-So-Great
Quoting Matthew McCall


I feel it's a problem, and probably Cliffe does too, because the groups we spent the last 5 years in didn't do this. It was just assumed you had basic transport capabilities. Also, the performance of your gear depended on the quality of the build, so no one wanted to waste time on building cargo boats when they already existed IRL. We'd rather spend our effort on planes, tonks, etc.

This series of games has never seen building cargo and other logics vehicles as a waste of time, instead being a way to add more variety to our building. From our point of view, Logistics shouldn't be shunned as something unworthy of being built simply because they don't see combat. Building a wide variety of designs is fun and pushes us to try building something else other than tank # 63. And as I told you previously, building micro logistics vehicles is quick and easy so they can not be described as large users of time.

Logistics are equally if not more important than armored vehicles and fighter aircraft, and because of this our group's leader oppinion was that they should be considered an important part of gameplay.
Permalink
| March 11, 2014, 2:47 am
 Group admin 
Quoting Awesome-o-saurus The Not-So-Great
I feel it's a problem, and probably Cliffe does too, because the groups we spent the last 5 years in didn't do this. It was just assumed you had basic transport capabilities. We'd rather spend our effort on planes, tonks, etc.

The thing is that cargo planes, boats, and trucks can all be destroyed.
We don't want nations to have unlimited numbers of them because that in its self is unrealistic. How are we supposed to have our subs stalking the ocean for convoys, or recon vehicles destroying fuel trucks to slow the enemy war effort? Logistics is pretty much the gears that make the modern army work.
The game is a simplified version of C&C, its not as realistic but fun for a lot of us because we don't have to take as much time out of day researching, and can spend that time doing other things like work. Annexations, and statistics are more simplified to give everyone an equal chance "something C&C didn't have"
But I also believe that once something is set up its not right to change it midway through. A lot of your points are valid however, and if we want to vote on it I'm all up for that. D&C4 may include most of them
The game as it stands works however, and if we want to nitpick every little thing we can but its just a waste of time.

At least we're not doing the whole DA thing.
Permalink
| March 11, 2014, 2:44 pm
 Group admin 
Nightmare, I won't quote you but I agree with your points. Yes, this is the first time we've tried this decade production model. I'm sure it could be inproved if we were to use it again, and I'm open to making some minor changes to it as of right now.
Permalink
| March 11, 2014, 2:55 pm
 Group admin 
Quoting TheWolfBrigade 01
Any theme plans for D&C 4???

It seems a bit early to be discussing D&C4's theme in my oppinion, but I believe near future, modern, WW1, and WW2 were all proposed.
Permalink
| March 11, 2014, 5:22 pm
 Group admin 
Quoting TheWolfBrigade 01

Another D&C 2 setting? It is early but I can only wonder.

D&C 2 isn't near future, I'm talking more like 20 years from now level of technology.
Permalink
| March 11, 2014, 10:12 pm
 Group admin 
Quoting Matthew McCall
D&C 2 isn't near future, I'm talking more like 20 years from now level of technology.

What would be the difference?
Permalink
| March 18, 2014, 4:28 am
 Group admin 
Quoting Matthew Sylvan
What would be the difference?

No mechs, limited rail, and laser weapons, no hoover tanks, and no 6th, or 7th generation fighters.
Permalink
| March 18, 2014, 5:57 am
 Group admin 
Quoting Matthew Sylvan
What would be the difference?

I agree with everything nightmare said for what near-future means except for the hoover tanks, which we've had for decades in the real world. Now hover tanks on the other hand... XD
Permalink
| March 18, 2014, 12:52 pm
 Group admin 
Quoting Nightmaresquid
No mechs, limited rail, and laser weapons, no hoover tanks, and no 6th, or 7th generation fighters.

My precious mechs :'(
Permalink
| March 18, 2014, 6:21 pm
 Group admin 
I guess I'll ask again, is anyone willing to CM the fight against brickviller's occupation of South and Central America? This should be an easier fight to judge than most.
Permalink
| April 10, 2014, 11:14 am
 Group admin 
Quoting Matthew McCall
I guess I'll ask again, is anyone willing to CM the fight against brickviller's occupation of South and Central America? This should be an easier fight to judge than most.

I can of course.
Permalink
| April 10, 2014, 12:15 pm
 Group admin 
Wolf, can I have jack's email? What I had written down for it seems to be incorrect. :(
Permalink
| June 30, 2014, 2:32 am
Quoting Matthew McCall
Wolf, can I have jack's email? What I had written down for it seems to be incorrect. :(

If I recall you sent me a confirmation email. I forgot to reply, but you had my email right. I am on holiday now but will moderate when I return.
Permalink
| June 30, 2014, 2:37 pm
 Group admin 
Quoting jack kenyon
If I recall you sent me a confirmation email. I forgot to reply, but you had my email right. I am on holiday now but will moderate when I return.

Ah, from your lack of reply I assumed it was wrong, I'll send it shortly then. XD

Permalink
| June 30, 2014, 8:42 pm
 Group admin 
This is President (for life) McCall to NAU forces located in Canada, please come in. I repeat, please come in. A status update on your performance is due. We are aware that you should be rapidly be overrunning enemy positions on all fronts, and that critical infrastructure should be destroyed, but we need better intel on exactly what has occurred. We request that General Kenyon inform us ASAP.
Permalink
| July 17, 2014, 5:42 pm
 Group admin 
Quoting TheLoneWolf 01

Don't bother. Canada is all yours.

I'm not really interested in gaming anymore at this point. Hopefully one day I will return. I'm still posting on Flickr but I'm not doing well.

I put over 6 hours into that plan :/ It was brilliant. I had routes all planned out, cities of interest to conquer, and the only three ports capable of taking in military cargo ships for your forces to resupply from Europe were going to leveled. I already had Canada cut in half as it was on top of this.

Anyway, I'm sorry to hear how you are feeling.
Permalink
| July 17, 2014, 8:38 pm
 Group admin 
Quoting TheLoneWolf 01
I would have had alternative ports and additional protection but I've had my fun on here.

With no more players and potential rivals...How will D&C III continue? XD
Unless you switch to realism and fight a traditional Cold War against Soviet/Tongorian Union XD

Actually, there are no additional ports, I did my research, and as of the 1970's there are only 3 major ports capable of accepting large cargo ship in all of the Canadian East Coast. They were going to be hit by B-52s, cruise missiles, naval bombardment, and strike aircraft, and then I was sending in armored divisions to take the two right next to our border and a mechanized infantry division to take the farther away one. :D

... Anyway, that remains unknown.

Permalink
| July 18, 2014, 2:37 pm
Other topics
« Combat Thread 1



LEGO models my own creation MOCpages toys shop Divide and Conquer 3Military


You Your home page | LEGO creations | Favorite builders
Activity Activity | Comments | Creations
Explore Explore | Recent | Groups
MOCpages is an unofficial, fan-created website. LEGO® and the brick configuration are property of The LEGO Group, which does not sponsor, own, or endorse this site.
©2002-2019 Sean Kenney Design Inc | Privacy policy | Terms of use