Since none has responded to my letters (yet), I am going to get a post started.

I'm in that boat with ya!

@MihndarWe are set 20 whole years after WW3. The war ended in 2030.Our current date is 2050.
Just like the example with the recent war declaration on the Caliphate I see that people have problems gasping the distance of time.
I repeat it has been 20 whole years since WW3 ended. That's relatively a ton of time.
For example I used this to form a large kingdom with the development level comparable to the leading nations in the setting.

The Soviet Union developed their own nuclear weapons under 3 years, even if we include the start of their nuclear researches till the first test (1942-1949) it'd only count for 7 years.
And that was a whole century ago.
By our age nuclear physics are pretty much part of our everyday technology and then imagine 2050.
Yup, it wouldn't be surprising even if a nation just pops up with nuclear weapons under a year or two.
Nuclear prohibition would be nearly useless because of the pure fusion alternatives.

Anyways, the only current missile which is in the excess of the 30Mt combined yield is the R-36 which is steadily decommissioned and limited in overall count to less than a hundred such missiles. Yes, 10 bombs with combined 30+ Mt yield can level most metropolises in the world but such event was already discussed before.
You can call such all out nuclear bombing the apocalypse but the fact is a major part of humanity and our civilization will survive. At worst the radiation will cause some deaths even centuries after the war and it'll remind us of such terrible and ancient folly.
But destroying ourselves? Hah, even if you split the current nuclear firepower into hundred times more warheads as MIRVs (which is impossible for technical reasons) I doubt it would be anywhere enough to destroy life on our planet.
It'd do about 10 times more damage, though. Both direct and indirect.
It's the same with the cold war era arsenal.
the idea of 1 bomb per city works only on paper. Sure, a multi-megaton nuke exploding over a city would destroy quite a large portion but not all. Indirect effects are the same.
Some theorize the so-called "nuclear winter" but the biggest problem with that nuclear explosions are pure energy compared to volcanos or meteor impacts. Meaning it can't move so much dust as these and then you have to consider that airburst detonations only raise fraction as much dust as ground contact detonations.
So yeah, chances are high it won't change our weather the slightest bit.
Long story short there are swarms of natural disasters that could destroy humanity far worse than an all out nuclear war does.
Again, nuclear wars are terrible. But don't be so drunk on our powers.
We would currently struggle to deal with any incoming asteroid, for example.
We may find solutions in the future but even if our ICBMs could be easily used to target asteroids our oh-so-terrible nuclear arsenal would at best only help us to redirect the asteroid a bit so it would miss us.

Also back on acquiring nukes. We are in 2050 and use orders of magnitudes more energy than we do right now. To put in perspective, we have kW range consumers and with railguns and alike we would need to switch to the MW range. You can bet that nuclear power would be far more widespread, preferably with large plants gradually replaced with the new and clean fusion reactors. Containing the heat is somewhat plausible albeit we would need high temperature superconductors and of course something to "catalyze" the reaction (like antimatter) to make it worth the effort to begin with. Still, by 2030-2050 it should be plasuble by any but the most pessimistic estimate.
And with widespread nuclear power comes the even more through application of it in the military.
I already told you how "easy" (relatively speaking) for a country to become a nuclear power in this setting. Nukes would be be a in use by any developed nation, to say at least.
While I'm not sure on strategic warheads but many countries should pile up massive amount of tactical warheads which pales the Cold War in comparison.
In such a world a flexible nuclear warfare policy is a must.
Like I said there's a huge difference between using sub-kiloton tactical warheads, kiloton-yield cruise missiles or SRBMs, and large strategic ICBMs (MIRVS or otherwise).
And these are just their measure of power. We also have the method of application. Using nukes to knock off satellites in space, using nukes to destroy armies or large military, using high altitude nukes to knock off civilian electronics, and outright dropping nukes on cities. The difference between them are huge.
All of these have different levels of severity, and just like how Kennedy realized this you should be aware that a policy which doesn't allow for different measures for different situations is no deterrent. It's actually an alibi for a terrible all out nuclear war.
So if you don't wish to have actual nuke-spammy wars, I suggest adopting a flexible doctrine with them.

For example with clean and sub-kiloton yield nukes I can easily see them being occasionally used for mining and excavation purposes. Teller at the time was a bit crazy to suggest this but without any fissible material and the explosion being sufficiently low yield that it won't spew too much dust into the atmosphere, it's doable. (Teller's original idea involved dozens of buried multi-megaton nukes, so go figure)
You have to realize that nukes are basically nothing but very weight-efficient explosives.

EDIT: Regarding antimatter.
Well, there are multiple proposed ideas to its generation but without space development I say the most plausible is to use various colliders.
Technically the conversion achieved nowadays is ridiculously inefficient but if made by engineers it was suggested to go up to 0.01%. I think by understanding the mechanism better which is inevitable this can be raised to at least 1%. Laser induced mechanisms are another way.
As for storage, currently the antimatter trap is roughly this size:
Some obvious issues aside you can actually carry this around. Artistic presentation of what would be a soon to be portable antimatter storage unit:

Also I suppose when storage time doesn't need to last for months and hold back miligrams of particles then perhaps more compact measures are possible. Although it's of course just extrapolation on my part.
BTW, another possibility for holding antimatter? Yup, carbon-nanotubes. If done right you can actually squish quite an amount of antimatter into these.
I guess, as always, CNT is the answer to such issues. Nanotechnology rules!

I think that we shouldn't be allowed to use nuclear bombs in this roleplay.

I think that we shouldn't be allowed to use nuclear bombs in this roleplay.

That's practically like banning firearms in a 16-17th century setting.
We are knee deep in the age of nuclear power. That's the world we have here.

Well, maybe it is time to start a conference about nuclear disarmament again :P

<Snipped quote by The Grey Warden>That's practically like banning firearms in a 16-17th century setting.
We are knee deep in the age of nuclear power. That's the world we have here.

Somebody would just sent a nuclear bomb to another person's nation, because they had a fight in the ooc. With firearms, they wouldn't kill the roleplay.

A person getting payback by doing it in the IC rather than the OOC happens a lot. And having a nuclear bomb to get payback, that shit would kill this roleplay.

<Snipped quote by Willy Vereb>

Somebody would just sent a nuclear bomb to another person's nation, because they had a fight in the ooc. With firearms, they wouldn't kill the roleplay.

A person getting payback by doing it in the IC rather than the OOC happens a lot. And having a nuclear bomb to get payback, that shit would kill this roleplay.

How?
Nukes aren't some autohitting weapons that cause gameover.
There are countless ways to intercept them, especially in this age where we have better computers, faster targeting systems, better sensors, railguns and even DEWs.
Even right now we have methods to track and shoot down targets less than 10cm in diameter over much smaller ranges.
Yet you think we can't do the same with a 10+ meters long ICBM coming from tens of thousands of kilometers away (given its parabolic route)?

I may suggest you to read up on this subject because your fear is entirely unfounded.

<Snipped quote by The Grey Warden>How?
Nukes aren't some autohitting weapons that cause gameover.
There are countless ways to intercept them, especially in this age where we have better computers, faster targeting systems, better sensors, railguns and even DEWs.
Even right now we have methods to track and shoot down targets less than 10cm in diameter over much smaller ranges.
Yet you think we can't do the same with a 10+ meters long ICBM coming from tens of thousands of kilometers away (given its parabolic route)?

I may suggest you to read up on this subject because your fear is entirely unfounded.

I know how much hate can drive a person to do some unthinkable things. I saw one person declaring war on another just because of an argument. It happens often. I take it that you haven't roleplay that long to see that or you have just been lucky enough.

<Snipped quote by The Grey Warden>How?
Nukes aren't some autohitting weapons that cause gameover.
There are countless ways to intercept them, especially in this age where we have better computers, faster targeting systems, better sensors, railguns and even DEWs.
Even right now we have methods to track and shoot down targets less than 10cm in diameter over much smaller ranges.
Yet you think we can't do the same with a 10+ meters long ICBM coming from tens of thousands of kilometers away (given its parabolic route)?

I may suggest you to read up on this subject because your fear is entirely unfounded.

Thats truth , with only railguns you can shoot out a ICBM (Because of the very high velocities of the shell) , but imagine nuclear shells in railguns or beaming earth from the space with largue lasers cannons , etc.

<Snipped quote by Willy Vereb>

I know how much hate can drive a person to do some unthinkable things. I saw one person declaring war on another just because of an argument. It happens often. I take it that you haven't roleplay that long to see that or you have just been lucky enough.

Yes?
And how is this connected to nukes?
They are a weapon of war, and something which depending on its use may have heavy political recursions.
Besides, if somebody attempts to wage war because of a petty argument in OOC then they just end up like it happened with the Mexican Empire and ASAE.
If not, then the situation is already so fucked up so it doesn't matter.

Again, you are just being paranoid.

<Snipped quote by Willy Vereb>

Thats truth , with only railguns you can shoot out a ICBM (Because of the very high velocities of the shell) , but imagine nuclear shells in railguns or beaming earth from the space with largue lasers cannons , etc.

Well, nukes are banned to be brought into space.
And the only way you can make a very powerful killsat like that is by using nuke-pumped x-ray lasers.
Not to mention the fact we only talked about nuclear weapons. The GM explicitly banned superpowered energy weapons, IIRC.

Also railgun accelerations are so great it'd likely destroy any nuclear device before it even leaves the barrel.
And if not, then it won't be any better than the already existing concept of nuclear artillery.
Anyways, like I said, we already have technology to identify and intercept mortar shells on flight.
Just imagine the situation in 2050.
Also keep in mind that nuclear artillery shells are relatively small so their explosive yield is negligible compared to other nuclear weapons.
That being said, I do plan a nuclear variation of the Toldi IV tanks which uses 160mm nuclear shells.
Basically they are used for anti-fortification purposes.
Or at worst to take out larger military targets like bases, camps or airfields. Although these are more likely to happen with nuclear artillery than the tank-launched variant.

<Snipped quote by The Grey Warden>Yes?
And how is this connected to nukes?
They are a weapon of war, and something which depending on its use may have heavy political recursions.
Besides, if somebody attempts to wage war because of a petty argument in OOC then they just end up like it happened with the Mexican Empire and ASAE.
If not, then the situation is already so fucked up so it doesn't matter.

Again, you are just being paranoid.

I am just being paranoid? I take it that you haven't roleplay enough to know about this. No, it wouldn't end like that all the time. Trust me, people would just get tried of doing the same thing over and over.

I really hate to do this, but I have to drop out of this RP. It's honestly just too much to handle. It really is an excellent RP, and I don't want to leave, I simply don't have enough time. I didn't realize that it would take so much time. In addition, I'm going camping for a week pretty soon and I'm sure I'll miss a lot of posts.

Keep up the good work guys, this RP really has been fun and well done! I'm sorry I couldn't stay.

Is there any particular state that Neural Interface Computers/Machinery is at? Particularly implants, artificial organs or prosthetics directly attached to nerves and/or the brain and usable via thought as a normal organ or limb would? Also just computers or electronics that can be attached to ones nerves and used by thought as well?

I swear if this Nuke talk kills this RP.

Hey guys I will be going away for a week, and won't be able to post at all. Just wanted to give a heads up, so if you do blitzkrieg my country at least wait long enough for me to get back. Thanks.

So what have I missed?

So what have I missed?

A bunch of talk about nukes.

<Snipped quote by LordZell>

A bunch of talk about nukes.

Sounds fun. So how about my invasion of UTA?

So what have I missed?

Mexico is undergoing a civil war, also the OOC has been nothing but nuke debates