Free Forum
To access all the features provided by this forum, please log in or register an account.

derpderpdunderp

Page 2 of 3 Previous  1, 2, 3  Next

View previous topic View next topic Go down

Re: derpderpdunderp

Post by Guest on Mon 10 Dec 2012, 8:52 pm

In my first medieval post I mentioned that Darkona bordered Edessa to the East. Both were separated by mountains with only a few mountain passes. The passes were walled off at both sides.

Southern Edessa is on the sea. The western edessian territories are also mountaneous, albeit not as much as the east.

There are some other NPC factions to the North and West of Edessa. Which I will get to conquering btw. I'll leave the North ones alone. Think of them as bulwarks for Edessa incase the Vanskerry get ideas.

Some of this is outdated information by the modern version of DtHaBa. Those western NPC's I mentioned will be Edessian. At-least some of them.

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: derpderpdunderp

Post by Vero on Mon 10 Dec 2012, 10:05 pm

The plan was that everyone was separated.

And the fact that I never acknowledged that meant that it is probably untrue, unless you want the country below or above Darkona....
avatar
Vero
Board Founder
Board Founder

Location : United States of America

http://freesource.forumotion.com

Back to top Go down

Re: derpderpdunderp

Post by Guest on Mon 10 Dec 2012, 11:30 pm

Oh. Well. I didn't know. :/

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: derpderpdunderp

Post by Vero on Tue 11 Dec 2012, 7:50 pm

And this idea dies without further notice.
avatar
Vero
Board Founder
Board Founder

Location : United States of America

http://freesource.forumotion.com

Back to top Go down

Re: derpderpdunderp

Post by Guest on Tue 11 Dec 2012, 8:14 pm

Is good idea.

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: derpderpdunderp

Post by Vero on Sat 15 Dec 2012, 2:18 am

Seriously, come on. I'm pitching ideas and no one is even trying to pick them up.

I'll be absent for the next 5-6 days. I'm expecting progress here when I get back.
avatar
Vero
Board Founder
Board Founder

Location : United States of America

http://freesource.forumotion.com

Back to top Go down

Re: derpderpdunderp

Post by Bloodtrailkiller on Thu 20 Dec 2012, 7:55 pm

I'd love to pitch in but modern is one of those eras I'm absolutely shit in.
So I wouldn't only be getting constantly curb stomped, I'd lack any interest in it..
avatar
Bloodtrailkiller
Board Moderator
Board Moderator

Location : Donderost, Norstros

Back to top Go down

Re: derpderpdunderp

Post by Vero on Sun 23 Dec 2012, 6:00 pm

Was thinking about a Role-Play, not a whole section to add to the library.
avatar
Vero
Board Founder
Board Founder

Location : United States of America

http://freesource.forumotion.com

Back to top Go down

Re: derpderpdunderp

Post by Vero on Sun 23 Dec 2012, 11:22 pm

Anyhow, here is what I drew up.

Darkona becomes a militaristic state due to a military dictatorship taking over. Several Coalition countries are brutally attacked, with these countries calling out for international assistance. So you get whatever country you want to throw at Darkona come there.
avatar
Vero
Board Founder
Board Founder

Location : United States of America

http://freesource.forumotion.com

Back to top Go down

Re: derpderpdunderp

Post by Guest on Sun 23 Dec 2012, 11:37 pm

Knight Dog wrote:A snowny place where a super EMP weapon hit and the sun never shines because something happened to the sky. That's all I got.

Aftermath of a nuclear war, maybe? I believe it would fit the above description since there'd be nuclear winter blocking large amounts of sunlight, and electronics would have been knocked out from missiles detonated in space.

⊂-Santa House-⊃ wrote:Actually we can just use the medieval and victorian nations we made from DtHaBA and put it in modern times, minus nuclear bombs and all that stuff that makes people not go to war over MAD.

After such a nuclear war, wouldn't systems have been put in place to intercept missiles immediately after launch, like the SDI was intended to do? Or, the system was already in place, but it couldn't blunt the initial mass missile strike well enough to avoid significant damages. Except now that all the thousands of ICBMs have been launched and with the damage to industry, it would take a significant amount of time (Or more likely never, if a ground war is going on) to rebuild a nuclear arsenal sufficient to bypass the automated defense systems still out in space?

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: derpderpdunderp

Post by Vero on Sun 23 Dec 2012, 11:43 pm

MAD is what keeps the world from exploding into another massive war seen in the previous century.

Mutually Assured Destruction

Therefore if you take nuclear weapons out of the equation, it is actually possible.

And when I mean no nuclear bombs or nuclear weapons, I mean none. Because this is our alternate universe where we can shove our thumbs where it don't shine and prance around like silly antelopes.

So DTHaBA has not had it's 'Manhattan Project', so to speak.
avatar
Vero
Board Founder
Board Founder

Location : United States of America

http://freesource.forumotion.com

Back to top Go down

Re: derpderpdunderp

Post by Keval on Mon 24 Dec 2012, 1:12 pm

I'm a bit confused.
avatar
Keval
Lurker
Lurker

Location : Nowhere

Back to top Go down

Re: derpderpdunderp

Post by Vero on Mon 24 Dec 2012, 1:33 pm

DTHaBA in modern times.

Except no nuclear weapons. Nuclear technology has not been invented.
avatar
Vero
Board Founder
Board Founder

Location : United States of America

http://freesource.forumotion.com

Back to top Go down

Re: derpderpdunderp

Post by Keval on Mon 24 Dec 2012, 2:12 pm

Oh, okay. Sounds good to me.
avatar
Keval
Lurker
Lurker

Location : Nowhere

Back to top Go down

Re: derpderpdunderp

Post by Guest on Mon 24 Dec 2012, 4:28 pm

We need trench warfare.

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: derpderpdunderp

Post by Keval on Mon 24 Dec 2012, 5:21 pm

That's not very modern.
avatar
Keval
Lurker
Lurker

Location : Nowhere

Back to top Go down

Re: derpderpdunderp

Post by Guest on Mon 24 Dec 2012, 5:29 pm

Exactly.

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: derpderpdunderp

Post by Keval on Mon 24 Dec 2012, 5:37 pm

You're failing to see the point behind this collaboration. It's supposed to be Modern without nuclear technology.
avatar
Keval
Lurker
Lurker

Location : Nowhere

Back to top Go down

Re: derpderpdunderp

Post by Vero on Mon 24 Dec 2012, 5:40 pm

Tanks pretty much neutralized trench warfare.
avatar
Vero
Board Founder
Board Founder

Location : United States of America

http://freesource.forumotion.com

Back to top Go down

Re: derpderpdunderp

Post by Guest on Mon 24 Dec 2012, 7:18 pm

Modern sounds kind of boring. Not to the point where I won't participate or consistently get my ass kicked though.

Also, trenches still work if you have enough AT weapons :/. It's just that people don't have enough time to make a huge complex trench line with multiple layers of defenses usually and you need something to combat flanking maneuvers.

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: derpderpdunderp

Post by Vero on Mon 24 Dec 2012, 7:29 pm

There is really no need for trench warfare when you have JDAMs, B-52s, Stealth Bombers, and all the like.

Tanks and Aerial vehicles changed history. Trench Warfare was only seen in Vietnam, which was mainly the Americans using trenches to defend against Vietnamese guerillas and NVA surprise attacks.

The Vietnamese lacked enough tanks to make a difference, and the Americans controlled the skies.

Modern isn't that boring, it depends on how you view it. I wanted to kick the Role-Play off with an amphibious landing.
avatar
Vero
Board Founder
Board Founder

Location : United States of America

http://freesource.forumotion.com

Back to top Go down

Re: derpderpdunderp

Post by Guest on Mon 24 Dec 2012, 7:34 pm

Eh. A B-52 is easy to shoot down when you get fighters on it. We've never had to fight anyone that can be a threat in 40 years.


Last edited by Knight Dog on Mon 24 Dec 2012, 7:35 pm; edited 1 time in total

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: derpderpdunderp

Post by Vero on Mon 24 Dec 2012, 7:35 pm

The point being you'd need aerial superiority, and with both sides contesting, trench warfare would be obsolete. You also have fighter bombers to consider.
avatar
Vero
Board Founder
Board Founder

Location : United States of America

http://freesource.forumotion.com

Back to top Go down

Re: derpderpdunderp

Post by Guest on Mon 24 Dec 2012, 7:41 pm

Anti aircraft weapons near the trenches. SAMs, Flak guns, 20mm cannons. Whatever.

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: derpderpdunderp

Post by Vero on Mon 24 Dec 2012, 7:41 pm

Halo, trenches are obsolete whether you want to believe it or not.
avatar
Vero
Board Founder
Board Founder

Location : United States of America

http://freesource.forumotion.com

Back to top Go down

Re: derpderpdunderp

Post by Sponsored content


Sponsored content


Back to top Go down

Page 2 of 3 Previous  1, 2, 3  Next

View previous topic View next topic Back to top


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