So what do you consider an acceptable percentage for YZ-5a? Also I would point out the situation at 5a is not new, the previous turn we had been dealing with escalating NOD attacks (for that matter we have known the situation since we built the hub).
Yes, and the attacks are
continuing to escalate.
Read the updates; we've gone from "Nod is harassing the base" to "Nod is being kept out of artillery range of the base only by constant aggressive patrols and the garrison is feeling outclassed."
The subtext is extremely clear, in fact,
it's the text. Nod is reinforcing and acting more aggressively around that base, and if they continue to escalate, they are very likely to launch a major assault next turn if they sense vulnerability. I want that attack to run into a fleet of operational MARVs trundling at it, not into an unfinished base surrounded by God knows how many thousands of refugees in shantytowns.
Also looking on NOD attack patterns and the situation with 5a (and what they are doing with our prospecting and the general mil reports) I see the same issues occuring at Hub 7N if we slow roll it out...
The 5a hub is located in an isolated area with no other GDI bases within hundreds of miles.
The 7N hub is located within convenient artillery range of one of the largest GDI fortresses on the North American continent.
One of these things is not like the other.
If Nod attacks the Chicago MARV hub in anything less than utterly overwhelming strength, the Chicago garrison will kick their balls up between their ears. You've argued that the 7N hub helps protect Chicago,
and you're right, but that relationship works both ways.
A force much weaker than what is required to destroy the Chicago MARV hub (while fighting the Chicago garrison) would easily overrun the Colombian MARV hub (which has no extra reinforcing garrison nearby).
As it is these past few turns voting has been against major MARV investment and instead trying to get by with the minimum, as such trying to fit a plan with actual MARV investment in is likely going to require 1 on YZ-5a because I have seen limited people speak in favor of MARVs and far more speak that we are spending too much on MARVs. This despite the situation at 5a, or how we have been told that 7N will help secure the Northern flank of our operations in NA.
We
are spending too much on MARVs
in the long term given the limits of our budget.
That doesn't mean we can't or shouldn't surge completion of the MARV fleets we're already committed to building anyway. Since the Colombian MARV fleet
urgently needs a surge (because we risk losing everything at that site if Nod attacks before the MARVs are operational), and since we probably can't afford to surge
two MARV fleets while covering things like Scrin research into reactionless drives and fusion research and Johannesburg and finishing the vaccine program if possible and God knows what else...
By process of elimination, we should concentrate on starting up the fleet that is likely to be immediately destroyed if it
doesn't start,
then concentrate on getting the Chicago MARVs stood up and running as soon as possible. Whether we continue to invest in MARVs after that time will be an open question.
NOD has been poking at 5a for more than just this turn, this did not stop people from being fine with a 1 dice investment this past turn at a much lower chance of success (2 dice would have been a 72%). If you can convince people to vote for MARV funding in a way to actually finish 5a and also not leave 7N to hang (because based on the past they are going to start poking 7N and the area it protects this turn, and keep on escalating until we have that fleet in place)...
Again, Nod poking a site isolated and far from other GDI territory has much worse consequences than Nod poking a site co-located with one of our biggest fortified forward bases.
I will make a plan for it, until than I will continue to try to get what MARV funding I can get pushed through. Also I would point out that not getting 7N up sooner than later is going to keep glacier mining and chicago as more tempting targets...
Huh?
If anything, finishing a MARV hub makes it
LESS attractive and motivates Nod to divert and attack other targets like glacier mines instead. Because a glacier mine is guarded only by conventional forces, but if you attack an operational MARV hub you end up fighting one or more MARVs.
So many people voting for Seo to "combat the Tiberium spread" when that is one of if not the primary reasons why Doctor Granger was picked at the beginning, and nothing we've done has really slowed it down, even now that we're at 50 mitigation in the Red Zones and 70 in the yellow. Like, just saying, it might be worth starting to invest more heavily in space instead of monofocusing on tiberium so much, because doing so has done nothing for us thus far.
You're getting it backwards.
Without mitigation, the Red Zones would be significantly larger than they are now, and the Yellow Zones would have virtually overrun the Blue Zones by now. All the mitigation we've done IS the thing that's slowed the spread of tiberium, it's not as if tiberium has literally ignored us.
Right now, every time the Yellow Zones roll an 85, we grumble and watch 0.1% of the planetary surface turn to Yellow Zone, then roll them back next turn when the Yellow Zones roll a 65 instead.
Without all our mitigation, every time the Yellow Zones roll an 85, we'd lose roughly five or six percent of
the entire Blue Zone region of the planet.
Wait a sec, what happened to the scrin tech we research we got? To help with abatement and maybe liquid tib storage?
The abatement tech hasn't yet been readied for deployment; they're still working on it and we're told it will show up as a Tiberium project when they're ready. The storage project
did show up as an option to construct some kind of long-term tiberium silos to help us if we bump into our refinery cap, but we haven't taken it just yet because we don't really need it urgently.
So that means that this statement isn't based on anything (or at least correctly so) the QM has said because QM hasn't said that Julian gets no bonuses at all.
Look, Oshha, it's basic logic. Character bonuses are based on what the characters are good at.
What is Granger good at? Tiberium research and civilian operations. What did he get bonuses at? Tiberium and Services. What was Granger bad at? Clueless about the military. What did he get a penalty at? Military dice.
What does Julian know well? Politics and the military. What will he get bonuses at? Politics and the military.
What does Julian
NOT know well? Civilian life, since he hasn't been a civilian since he was a teenager, and bureaucratic administration of large agencies, because he's been a military officer, not a bureaucrat. What will Julian
NOT get bonuses for? Civilian affairs outside of political maneuver, and handling bureaucracy.
Why would you expect him to have bonuses in areas he has no experience in? Why cling to the "the QM hasn't explicitly said in so many words that he won't have bonuses" argument?