The nations I listed have first pick of military surplus and access to more advanced military technology because they are either NATO members or formally listed as Major Non-NATO Allies. Countries not on that list that purchase weapons from the US military do not get the same access to advanced military technology as those ones do.
@Jonathan S. Fox: So the US is handing over or selling to other governments technology that is in every way equal to what the current US army uses? Even 'under the hood' technology?
Yea... hard to convince me of that... as a dominant power, you want to stay that way. Which means keeping certain things out of the hands of others. Knowledge is power.
It depends on the technology. But no, the US will generally keep some aspects of some technologies secret, or more advanced versions private while earlier versions are sold. This has little to do with xenophobia or efforts at hegemony. Limiting access to the details of in-house technologies helps to prevent leaks which would give unfriendly nations copies of or ways to defeat advanced military technology, and ensures that in the extremely unlikely event that the US finds itself at war with a former major ally, it will still have a slight technological advantage.
This isn't a "maintain dominance by limiting the military strength of our allies" mentality however; that isn't present to any substantial degree in the US populace, government, or military. It's just being pragmatic. Americans tend to like being on top, but that's so that they can bully countries they don't like, not so they can bully their friends.
(Though, it seems that more worldly/political/whatever debating gets done on this forum then anything else.)
A question for the general debating populace: You/we/whatever are trying to make LCS realistic or something? (Just so I am sorta clear on what sort of ideas/suggestions/whatever would fit, if any.)
Yes, this forum is often full of off-topic political debates. I have found that what happens is that when there's no releases or development updates for awhile, threads begin to derail into political discussions, while if there's active development and new releases, most threads stay on topic. The way I see it, if discussing politics in between discussing LCS keeps people interested, that beats trying to chase everyone off. Besides -- this subforum isn't active enough to necessitate a hard line on shutting down off-topic threads, although it's certainly a lot more hopping than it was a year or two ago!
All other things being equal, most people feel realistic is slightly better than unrealistic. But personally, my goal is not to make LCS more realistic, just more fun. I don't mind breaks in realism at all where they make the game more fun -- that's a good trade -- but if they become large distractions from the political theme of the game, or will leave players thinking "what the heck?" when they come across the breaks in believability, that's where realism becomes important. Discussions of what is realistic with regard to LCS are fine, but they won't be a major factor in swaying what I think is best for the game.
Author
Topic: New Weapons, and a few other suggestions... (Read 5436 times)