JuleTron

North Korea recently sent one of its submarines within torpedo range of an American aircraft carrier. The submarine went undetected and surfaced close to the carrier despite the fact that the US was conducting anti-submarine warfare exercises in that very area. This has served as an enormous wake-up call to the US Navy. Russia has developed the VA-111 shkval supercavitating rocket torpedo and no nation has any kind defense against this weapon due to its tremendous speed. It is rumored

[quote]the SU-47 also rivals the F-22, it's all about whether or not you can manufacture enough for it to be relevan[/quote] Su-47 is just a technology demonstator. The PAK-FA has technology on par with the Raptor and is significantly cheaper. The Raptor just cannot compete with the PAK-FA on a cost basis. Being roughly equal yet one third of the price is a major advantage. Xer07, sorry if my quip was a bit harsh, but just because the US has technological superiority to most n

[quote]Which will become Oil-Free first? The USA or PRC?[/quote] PRC is more likely because it is a developing nation. The US has to tear up existing infrastructure and replace it, but China being a developing country does not need to do this on such an extent. [quote]China's military technology sucks.[/quote] You obviously know nothing about Chinese military technology. To those interested in Chinese naval capability <a href="http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar

[quote]Yes, and by your definition all lands are products of imperialism[/quote] To say otherwise would be to say that the Europeans who subjugated much of Africa, Asia and South America and Australia were not imperialistic and they certainly were. However, not all nations have been effected by imperialism. Examples include Iceland, Sweden, Bhutan, Saudi Arabia, Ethiopia, Liberia and a few others. Interestingly, Liberia got started by freed black slaves with the help of the Am

[quote]You are probably living in the imperialistic area of England, where the native Picts and Celts were conquered by Anglos, Saxons and Normans. If you go back far enough, I am sure you can claim that we are all imperialists as we conquered Dinosaurs. However, there comes a time to be realistic in that America is not occupying America. And the natives of this land are living here as part of the country. That the dominant culture comes from elsewhere is nothing new. Look at La

[quote]You apparently do not understand the word Imperialism. Again, I would ask you where are the imperialistic territories of the US? I want to visit them (and if still in doubt about the definition of Imperialism, I would suggest dictionary.com, or perhaps a hard back copy of Websters).[/quote] You probably are living in the imperialistic territories of the US. The native Americans were conquered and subjugated by the dominant anglo-saxon culture. That is, by definition

True, all empires have stretched militaries but America tries to be in more places at once than any previous empire but with fewer personell proportionally. My point was that every one believed that counter-insurgency was the future of warfare and that no major wars would ever occur again and this was before BOTH world wars. The major powers were wrong about counter-insurgency and major wars several times before. They will likely be wrong again eventually.

America's military is dangerously overstretched. There is a saying that the entire US military is either in Afghanistan or its going/leaving. This is exageration but it does highlight a problem. The US military has an unusually low number of personell yet it is almost everywhere at once. America now is like France and Britain in the 1930s. Huge and expensive armed forces with the best technology in the world with a firm belief that no major wars would ever occur again and that the fut

[quote]only reason i didnt think Napoleon was worth buying after Empire is that i heard that like Empire the game worked in other areas at the sacrifice of the actual battles themselves.[/quote] This is not true at all. The only things someone could complain about in Napoleon is that there is no mod support (this makes no difference since fantastic mods like Napoleon Order of War are being made anyway), a few balance problems still exist and the unit editor is still not released! I wo

Japan tried to invade Korea in the 1590s and this isn't too far outside the scope of the game for it to be included as an expansion. Also, China tried to help Korea militarily in the invasion so Chinese and Japanese troops did fight during this time. Empire tried to do too many things and so it over-extended itself. Shogun and Medieval were great at the time because they worked well. Napoleon succeeds in both areas because gameplay, dipomacy and AI were focused on at the expense of sc

[quote]The idea of all factions being Japanese clans sounds ... AMAZING!!!!! I just hope its done well.[/quote] So do I, however I fear that this limited variety may effect gamepay in a bad way. I would love to be able to invade Korea and fight the Chinese and Mongols as this happened historically and round about the same time as this game. Some features such as the seiges, night battles etc. sound incredibly exciting. [quote]do I have to get original Empire TW to get

Alot of people seem to be missing out on Napoleon: Total War. [quote]Napeleon for now after the no confidence vote from the majority of players at the TW fan forums.[/quote] Thats interesting because I have heard of alot of people on TWC forum who think that NTW is better than Rome. Admittedly, NTW is better in respects to AI (AI loves sniping my elite units, trying to break my centre, melee charging only when outgunned, using flanking fire, distractions etc.) and campaign dip

[quote]Loss of... hell, loss of anything, HA. Nonsense. Arbitrary bullshit.[/quote] It is important to remember that just because the potential effects of something are unknown, that doesn't mean that there is no risk involved. If statistics are as meaningless as you claim, then we should be MORE worried about the effects on our health precisely because we don't know. If we don't know that chemicals may interfere with male development, then we should be determined to find ou

Today's society values fame over virtue, wealth over good qualities, hedonism over self-sacrifice and style over substance.

I think that the specialisations will remain the same, but the names, appearances and abilities of some ships will be completely new. Some pre-existing designs will be updated because fans would be dissapointred if their favourite ships do not return.

A quick comment on Napoleon: Total War. It might seem shallow at first, but it has alot of depth. It is also more complex then previous total wars so it hasnt been noobified in any way. Free DLC was released recently which is good. You might not find the campaign very replayable, but you will love the battles. Not arcade-style at all and the AI is great as long as it is on hard or expert. If you hhave played Empire: Total War, you might think, "hey this game doesn't change much at all

If someone rings your mobile phone when you are on a bus or other form of public transport, always talk as loud as you possibly can about very personal matters. If the subject is sexual or involves your mental health issues, even better.

I don't know of any other Sins machinima, but the second video you made was quite good. More people don't make Sins machinima probably because you can't have visible characters.

Using Sova carriers is a very good idea, but don't use a Kol battleship. It doesn't really do much. Use the Akkan for its great economy boosting colonise ability and the Marza for its great firepower. Dunov is meh. [quote]What's better- tons of light frigates, or a few high end heavy cruisers? (or what?)[/quote] Don't tech rush to heavy cruisers, you will lose. Build light frigates and long range frigates in the early game. Mix in flak and carriers when you are able to. Build

[quote]After Space Seige and then Demigod, I - and I'm sure Chris Taylor - was thinking it was time for GPG it have a hit and release something special.[/quote] Actually Demigod was the third best selling PC game of 2009 so GPG is not in such dire need of a hit. Demigod has actually sold better then GPG ever expected, Frogboy confirmed this. This was indicated in the thread titled 'so much fo piracy" or something, I cant fully remember. The Square Enix forums are full of peopl

Then catgirl's warriors,

Nice ideas so far. My idea for a new capital ship class. Unnecassary but cool. TEC Kun-class Battlecruiser Abilities Saturation fire: Fires a huge number of rounds at many enemy ships within range. Duration and maximum number of targets increased at higher levels. Electronic Countermeasures: Jamming signals reduce the accuracy of all enemy targets within range including capital ships, starbases and strike-craft. Flechette bomb: Fi

I thought that he meant that a player shouldn't lose many units. Yeah that does sounds rediculous though. However, he was referring to an ideal situation.

Laughing at someone is no substitute for a logical argument. This issue is not so much about assualt cruiser survivability, but more about counter systems. Its not about whether assualt cuisers are tough or not, the issue is that assualt cruisers are not really an alternative at all to bombers when viewed from the perspective of the game's counter system.

[quote]If Very Heavy, then it WOULD force defenders to choose between bombers and fighters.[/quote] Tough choices are what strategy games are all about. I agree that very heavy armour may be a better solution then heavy armour. Using bombers defensively would be a novelty. [quote]add "Change assault cruiser armour type to be less vunerable to fighters?" up there[/quote] Agreed.