Joint Area Missile Shield Network

This game isn't set millenia from now. The technology displayed in this game thus far has been explainable, if not yet achievable. What you are proposing is not even explainable. The means by which to somehow test the contents of a gas in a small container without getting a sample, let alone from space with the container surrounded by lead and other metal and moving at high speeds, is simply preposterous. If you have an explanation for how it might be possible, please, give it now. But stop falling back on "we can do whatever we want in this game", because its becoming annoying.

I'm not a physicist, Rot. You can't expect us to explain how everything that we're doing works. If that were the case, we wouldn't have to worry about WMDs in the first place.

And the verdict is...

900 PP.


At 5 PP a day from each World Union member, we can have the entire system up in less than a week!

Post all your donations here. I'll start us off by donating 25 PP.

I won't be donating anything.

I fail to see why you wouldn't, but I guess I didn't expect support from you or Rot anyway.

Superior will not be donating anything

....could you guys explain why? Por favor?

Well even just going into PP expenditure, it would be take 30 PP for each nation to create an anti-ICBM defence network, whereas it would be 35 each for the space lasers. When yo uconsider that I have direct control of what I do with my defence network, whereas I wouldn't have complete control over what the lasers do, why wouldn't I want the ICBM defence network? Also I've stated before that I don't think it would be in keeping with the WU charter to shoot down all missiles indiscriminately.

"yes but wouldnt keeping the peace include not shooting at one another?"

"I thought it was basicly the world union of peace"

"and if this system is up, can we not help the campaign against manchuria?"

"and a ground system could be targeted and destroyed by an invasion, but in space is a missle is launched at it, it can be shot down, of if it is a different wepon then we would have justifiable cause to invade said contry"


(also how do ya know it is 30PP for a system like that? did ya talk to BB or is it a hypothetical price?)

I talked to BB

laxspartan007 wrote:"yes but wouldnt keeping the peace include not shooting at one another?"

"I thought it was basicly the world union of peace"

"and if this system is up, can we not help the campaign against manchuria?"

"and a ground system could be targeted and destroyed by an invasion, but in space is a missle is launched at it, it can be shot down, of if it is a different wepon then we would have justifiable cause to invade said contry"


(also how do ya know it is 30PP for a system like that? did ya talk to BB or is it a hypothetical price?)

(30)Strategic Missile Defense - Fires missiles to counter ICBM attacks.

It's in the infrastructure list. And as I said before, if you amend the charter to accept the destruction of all missiles, I would support it. And as for the space system being safer, the satellites can easily be shot down by something as simple as a battleship from anywhere in the world. That would also be hard to determine who fired it. It would be far safer, I think, in a nation. And Certainly in several nations, since, for example, If mine is destroyed, I could still be protected by several of my allies in Europe.

"other systems around you would probably not be able to shoot it down, just the ones inbetween you and where the missle was fired, and the same is possable with the satilites, and if a missle is fired into spaces and comes down on you from 90 degrees straight up, is your system able to look straight up? mostlikely not, but with some modifications and some money shure, bu the satilites can shoot down any missle ANYWHERE"

"and the fact that you were saying that the satilites can be taken out easily and you wont know the culprit, atleast one satilite will be able to see where the other was shot from, they are within somewhat close proximity"

"Actually, since the missile defense program I am talking about fires missiles to counter the ICBM, it could hit one going straight down for my nation. And when you consider the range of modern missiles, my allies certainly would be able to hit an ICBM headed directly for me. Really I don't think your system holds any advantages over me building my own personal system.

"and if said attacking missle has chaff and other defences?"

"the proposed system i am talking about has lazers ones that can take out a missle instantly, as fast as light..."

OOC: Who the hell puts chaff on a missile?

(someone that doesnt want it shot down)

((And if they cover their missile in shiny mirrors?))

(powerful lazor rips through said mirror)

CivBase wrote:....could you guys explain why? Por favor?

Because I need all of my funds for the war effort.

what war?

CivBase wrote:I fail to see why you wouldn't, but I guess I didn't expect support from you or Rot anyway.

I've spent a good portion of this thread explaining why I wasn't going to support this. And while I'm surprised at how cheap you got BB to go, I still don't like it for all the other reasons I listed, including the moral implications of indiscriminately shooting down missiles and having basically one or two countries in almost complete control of the system. If the German Empire wanted to build a program called SkyNet and asked everyone to fund it, would you not all be suspicious? Even if we said we wouldn't do anything terribly evil? Even though we've done nothing terribly evil this entire game?

laxspartan007 wrote:"yes but wouldnt keeping the peace include not shooting at one another?"

"I thought it was basicly the world union of peace"

"There is such a thing as justified war. It is not the place of the World Union to make nations ask permission to use a legal weapon in a legal war. Especially when this likely will not prevent the illegal weapons all that well."

laxspartan007 wrote:"and if this system is up, can we not help the campaign against manchuria?"

"The German Empire was forced to pull out of Sibaristan due to lack of World Union support. We will not send our men to die when it will achieve nothing. We are ready to redeploy them, but only if we see an actual movement by the rest of the World Union, whom we might point out, are obligated to do so."

laxspartan007 wrote:"and a ground system could be targeted and destroyed by an invasion, but in space is a missle is launched at it, it can be shot down, of if it is a different wepon then we would have justifiable cause to invade said contry"

"Not really. A system on the ground is protected by that nation's entire military. A system in space is very vulnerable indeed. Especially if it has to frequently orient itself directly over "enemy" territory."

laxspartan007 wrote:(also how do ya know it is 30PP for a system like that? did ya talk to BB or is it a hypothetical price?)

(Because it's in the infrastructure list. Civ's price was given by BB.)

laxspartan007 wrote:"other systems around you would probably not be able to shoot it down, just the ones inbetween you and where the missle was fired"

"You seem to greatly underestimate the missile. A missile that can only travel a few dozen miles in any direction would not be sufficient to take down an ICBM regardless, since such an ICBM would need to be eliminated higher up to minimize the debris landing in a concentrated area."

[quote="laxspartan007]"and the same is possable with the satilites, and if a missle is fired into spaces and comes down on you from 90 degrees straight up, is your system able to look straight up? mostlikely not, but with some modifications and some money shure, bu the satilites can shoot down any missle ANYWHERE"[/quote]

"First of all, I don't know what you use in your military, but where we are from, guns can shoot straight up. More importantly, so can missiles. In fact, almost every weapons system, at its base concept, can be altered very very easily to shoot straight up.

Second of all, the biggest flaw is not whether or not the satellites can shoot down a missile anywhere, but whether they can do it in time. How many satellites would be included under the current estimated budget? A score, maybe? And could a score of satellites possibly provide complete coverage of the entire Earth at all times? Of course not. Satellites are not particularly fast. They take time to position and to aim. Lasers may be precise, but orienting a gun in space without friction to aid you is not an easy thing. And given the great distance, even half a degree off target could result in a miss of miles from the missile."

laxspartan007 wrote:"and the fact that you were saying that the satilites can be taken out easily and you wont know the culprit, atleast one satilite will be able to see where the other was shot from, they are within somewhat close proximity"

"Do you even realize how many satellites it would require for them to all have line of sight of one another!? Obviously not."

laxspartan007 wrote:"and if said attacking missle has chaff and other defences?"

"I hope you realize that chaff isn't an amazing missile all-in-one countermeasure. It defeats radar-guided missiles. That is all."

laxspartan007 wrote:"the proposed system i am talking about has lazers ones that can take out a missle instantly, as fast as light..."

"You mean as fast as it takes a satellite system to detect a tiny, low-flying object, move into position to be able to fire upon it, and then fire upon it."

tiny tim wrote:(30)Strategic Missile Defense - Fires missiles to counter ICBM attacks.

It's in the infrastructure list. And as I said before, if you amend the charter to accept the destruction of all missiles, I would support it. And as for the space system being safer, the satellites can easily be shot down by something as simple as a battleship from anywhere in the world. That would also be hard to determine who fired it. It would be far safer, I think, in a nation. And Certainly in several nations, since, for example, If mine is destroyed, I could still be protected by several of my allies in Europe.

A giant lazer shooting up in to space that destroys a kill sat would not be hard to track. The many remaining kill sats would simply annihilate the battleship.

And Rot, I'm not asking you to build the network for my nation. I proposed this network as a World Union controlled system. All I did was bring the idea to light.

The World Union is already in control of the entire game, for better or for worse. It is an automated defense tool under direction of a large body of nations, so I fail to see what your concern is.

So you admit that this system would also be capable of striking land targets? In this case I am VERY concerned about what would happen should any nation or any person manages to hack into the system. They could do an IMMENSE amount of damage before anyone figured it out.

tiny tim wrote:So you admit that this system would also be capable of striking land targets? In this case I am VERY concerned about what would happen should any nation or any person manages to hack into the system. They could do an IMMENSE amount of damage before anyone figured it out.

That is the case with any weapon, including the many WMDs that have already been made and will most certainly be made in the future. It is an unavoidable risk with all weapons, but I assure you that the system will be created carefully, efficiently, and collaboratively.

Sibaristan nuclear missiles....


This is EXACTLY what JAMSNET was designed to prevent. Don't BS me about nobody using nuclear missiles; it's already started! Come one guys, just 5 PP a day. That's pocket change to most of you!