WesWorld

I've considered bringing this topic up before as it's a topic of some interest to me. Do we want to accept nuclear programs generating real A-bombs, and if so, what kind of timeline is necessary?

Without a WWII to get the R&D funds going, I'd think nuclear weapons wouldn't be developed as quickly, if at all, in the game time we have. In that case, might I propose a no-nukes-in-gametime agreement?

That would be the best way of preserving the spirit of the game as intended; Ship design.

The alternative is pretty widespread nuclear proliferation, since numerous countries have some manner of ability and scientists to pursue the concept, and no economic or research rules to restrict or regulate the endevour.

Quoted

Originally posted by ShinRa_Inc
...and no economic or research rules to restrict or regulate the endevour.

I think someone in the last year or so calculated the cost of the Manhattan Project in comparison to our infrastructure system... I don't remember the exact numbers, but it was ludicrously expensive, on the order of seventy-plus IP.

But as with all technology development, and the procurement of anything beyond direct warship materials....we have no rules to mandate that kind of investment.

We don't have either the grouping of the scientists or a real need for the bomb to justify a massive and costly development program for something which isn't proven to work.

I prefer the concept that we are all more likely to have men who think a lot like Barnes-Wallis.

Though I wonder is Walter is planning this

I think a none-nuke-in-game-time-agreement is the best way to handle this problem !!

We are all playing WW and have fun with the sim, but if nukes will be developed i think the fun will be gone !!! How will the concept look like, to handle the developement and the use ? On the other side, if we allow nukes, only three or four nations will have them, because of their industrial power. The other nations would be exposed ! I fear a big power imbalance ! Why do we want this risk ?

[SIZE=3]In my eyes Wesworld definitely needs no nuclear weapons ![/SIZE]

I agree, there's (so far, anyway) no reason for the various world powers to be spending the money on it. So I'm perfectly fine with a nuke ban.

I wholeheartedly agree.
There is no need for it.

It would just be something for the uncontrolled(-able!) nations to start screwing around with!

That's all I got to say about this Nuke threat thread.

Quoted

We don't have either the grouping of the scientists or a real need for the bomb to justify a massive and costly development program for something which isn't proven to work.

True. Italy already has Ulivi's "F" ray weapon so there is no need for them to waste money and resources and scientists to build some untested weapon system that is clearly inferior.

Quoted

Though I wonder is Walter is planning this.

Hell, I even blew up and edited a B-29 picture somewhat to make it look a little bit like the G10N Spaghetti Bomber.
http://i249.photobucket.com/albums/gg240…/IJN/G10N_B.png

... thinking of it now, my idea of the Spaghetti Bomber is linked to India due to the Italian threat of the India Bombers. Since India is pulling out of the SATSUMA treaty, I'm having doubts whether there is still a need for such a bomber. There is no longer any need to strike back at Italy should they attack India with their India Bombers.

Quoted

We are all playing WW and have fun with the sim, but if nukes will be developed i think the fun will be gone !!!

Oh, you'd be surprised if you knew what I have in mind with them...
... and yes, it includes Manzo...
... and that is all I want to say about it. Don't want to give away too many details. ^_^

Quoted

I fear a big power imbalance !

Actually, as a SATSUMA member, you know that there already is a big power imbalance. (Seriously, as players, we really should have vetoed the creation of SAER; even if it was a logical thing to do, for me it pretty much ruined a lot of the fun and possible tensions and interesting situations that could have appeared... but we're not talking about that now)

With that what I have planned (which is something I have thought about a longtime ago, this should not be an issue...
... unless SAER tries to be funny and attempts to take out SATSUMA. Originally I had thought OOC that it was indeed a defense treaty against SATSUMA but now that they have with trickery and deception managed to take India out of the equation, I have serious doubts about their intentions... so as long as they behave (and naturally us SATSUMA-ites as well), there really should not be any problems and nothing will change...

Quoted

... unless SAER tries to be funny and attempts to take out SATSUMA.

Heck, I didn't even take out Poland!

Looking forward to what Walter has in mind with Manzo and Nukes!

Heaven forbid an alliance is created so that a unified Asia doesn't try to force Europe out of its Asian colony's!

I agree, ban the nukes!

With to constant statements about how SEAR is going to stomp SATSUMA its only logical that Japan should look for an equalizer

Quoted

Heck, I didn't even take out Poland!

Heck! That worries me even more!!! o_O

Quoted

Looking forward to what Walter has in mind with Manzo and Nukes!

Manzo + Nuke can mean only one thing: the end of the world.

Quoted

With to constant statements about how SEAR is going to stomp SATSUMA its only logical that Japan should look for an equalizer

Exactly, and with India out of the picture, the chance of that happening is a lot bigger (the stomping that is).

Quoted

Originally posted by Vukovlad
With to constant statements about how SEAR is going to stomp SATSUMA its only logical that Japan should look for an equalizer

Ironically enough those statements have come from those outside of SAER or SATSUMA so I think your just a little paranoid.

Seriously, did you expect to run roughshod over the Pacific unopposed? Sheeesh...

Quoted

Originally posted by thesmilingassassin

Quoted

Originally posted by Vukovlad
With to constant statements about how SEAR is going to stomp SATSUMA its only logical that Japan should look for an equalizer

Ironically enough those statements have come from those outside of SAER or SATSUMA so I think your just a little paranoid.

Seriously, did you expect to run roughshod over the Pacific unopposed? Sheeesh...

As they say its not paranoia if they are out to get you

Quoted

Originally posted by Vukovlad
With to constant statements about how SEAR is going to stomp SATSUMA its only logical that Japan should look for an equalizer

That goes for half of the countries in the sim. With China talking about how they're going to retake San Hainando, "it's only logical that Iberia should look for an equalizer" against the world's most populous country. With Azerbaijan and Armenia constantly under threat of Persia, "it's only logical that Armenia should look for an equalizer". With Ireland right next door to the largest naval power in the world, "it's only logical that Ireland should look for an equalizer". With Canada right north of that US giant, "it's only logical that Canada should look for an equalizer" in the event their neighbors go crazy. Seriously, everyone with a score to settle can use that justification to get themselves a shiny bomb.

I repeat that it took the entire course of WWII, and the R&D resources of most of the Western Allies, to create a half-dozen bombs by 1945 - and even then, they spent no small amount of effort picking occupied Europe clean of scientists like Niels Bohr. It further took until the mid-1950s for those same powers to develop a power-generating nuclear reactor. We might have an East-West Cold War, but that's not going to get those R&D funds flowing to nuclear weapons or propulsion projects.

In any case, a no-nuke rule is even more to Japan's benefit than the big European powers: if Japan develops nukes, its a sure bet the SAER powers will too - and more of them.

If we DO decide to permit the development of nukes, then we should have some sort of in-game cost attached to their acquisition - say, make the cost 40IP or some such.

Iberia, Axerbaijan and Armenia are poor examples as they are all stronger military than the "threat", and MAD is an effective defence strategy

Armenia and Azerbaijan stronger than Persia? Iberia stronger than a million man army capable China?!! Your joking right?

Eh, have you compared the Azeri and Armenian Armies with with the massive 3 Cav brigades that Persia soon but not yet can field... and the Iberian army is far more modern than the Chinese with a lot of armored and special units (and can be backed by the Italians that are far ahead of anything China can field technologigly)