Jump to content

Discussion on 3 rules


Centurius
 Share

Recommended Posts

After long arguments about the viability of the rules and the like and a confirmation from the moderation that said rules were in it is time to discuss the specific rules and have the community decide on what to do with them.

The first rule is a ban of lasers.

The second rule is a ban on space-based weapons

The third rule is a ban on mechs and the like.

We will be keeping this thread open for discussions for a while so you can all hear the required arguments to make a call, when the GMs feel enough time has passed a poll will be created on each of the rules.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Strictly speaking for myself and not as a GM:

Lasers simply are able to be made, they do it in real life and there are several theories that could be successfully done, now I am not saying we should fill entire armies with lasers however there simply are applications where they are possible. As such I propose implementing a common sense rule for lasers, if you have scientific evidence and do it on an appropriate scale you are allowed to use lasers within your military.

Now comes the second rule; I am strictly against space-based weapons like rods from god or really anything that is fired from a fixed installation in space, first of all it would be incredibly expensive to build and maintain, next to that it is simply to powerful and probably detrimental to rp.

And the final rule the ban on mechs. Well I am unsure about this one, technically I guess walkers in some form would be possible but they are so unlikely and in effective I'd personally advocate maintaining the ban of them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1. Lasers should be allowed but on a scaled-down role. Remember, military-grade lasers are prohibitively expensive and fragile: they have to be flown on giant jetliners and offer no defences for themselves in order to be mobile enough to be used. For non-mobile lasers, they are still extremely expensive and require large amounts of power, meaning building them in remote areas is essentially a no-no. As soon as someone starts doing some sort of mass production of military-grade lasers, either mobile or stationary, they are going beyond reason. While economies in general are not put down as a rule, we still have to go by the principle that our nations do not have the GDP of the entire world combined. We should also limit them to the highest tier of technology caps, simply because if they are not being used in the battlefield today beyond an extremely limited or test capability, then to have them in the battlefield used with efficiency will be years in the future. Also, we need to remember that we do tie in in-game improvements to war: if someone shoots cruise missiles, you can't just use lasers to shoot them all down. Lasers shouldn't be given any greater capabilities than standard missile defences to comply with the in-game improvements.

2. I fully agree. While players have circumvented this rule by launching a missile with rods in it that then fall down from space, which in my opinion is a cop-out and complete loophole being abused by certain players, having fixed installations means we will go back to the days of LVN launching rods from gods into the Indian Ocean to cause tsunamis and all of that. We've seen what happens with this, and there's a bloody well reason it was banned.

3. The problem is that when mechs were banned, it was the kind that you see that are Knightmares or Gundams and Mobile Suits and all that. Mechs in the sense of walkers and things that [b]actually follow the laws of physics[/b] should be allowed, because they follow the laws of physics. Yes, there should be limits because they are expensive, fragile, expensive, unwieldy, expensive, slow and unreliable, and expensive, they should be allowed to be builts. Things like the proper nouns shown before should stay banned simply because physics says no, [b]especially[/b] in regards to Mobile Suits and Gundams because they take place in a universe where it is specifically stated that physics are different and they're built out of magical materials.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1. I believe lasers should not be allowed except for missile defenses and an SDI. There is not a RL product to compare to smaller-scale laser weapon systems and base RP stats off of, and no one really knows how a laser might fare in combat.

2. I am against weapons designed for space (satellite-based weaponry, rods-from-god, orbital battleships, etc.) except for SDIs because SDIs are already regulated. I think there's potential for neat RP with small arms and other items brought up from the ground when used in space, so I believe this should be permitted.

3. I think Mechs should be allowed as unrefined prototypes only. A high-tech nation may deploy a small number of experimental mechs to a battlefield, taking into account they are not super-weapons and will have the usual assortment of bugs and features that come with any unfinished product.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='iKrolm' timestamp='1301533393' post='2681021']
1. I believe lasers should not be allowed except for missile defenses and an SDI. There is not a RL product to compare to smaller-scale laser weapon systems and base RP stats off of, and no one really knows how a laser might fare in combat.
[/quote]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tactical_High_Energy_Laser
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deuterium_fluoride_laser
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Airborne_laser
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Advanced_tactical_laser
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PHASR

You were saying?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1. I have to agree with Cent and Sargun on this.

2. Same as above.

3. While obvious physics-breaking walkers/mechs should be banned, I feel that one present in Star Wars (ala AT-AT) should be allowed, simply because it's one of the more realistic walkers I've seen. Other than that, I feel that not much should change.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1- Sure, we can have lasers, but to be honest they're in most cases simply worse than conventional weaponry. As long as people don't use lasers as the new loltech while not understanding how they work, it's fine. Either way my people will probably think that nations which field many lasers are just derp.

2- It's bad enough with nukes as is, we don't need space warfare and more WMDs up there.

3- Why not allow mechs? Realistic mechs, that is. In any case, almost always a mech is far worse than a wheeled vehicle, so if people want to throw away their money, let them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1. Lasers yes but only for SDI and plausible (within 2020) means. So no like laser pistols or laser rifles a la Unreal Tournament.

2. No rods of God/Space weapons. but how about moon/other planet colonization?

3. Instead of mechs which always look silly imho, why not a nonclunky non time consuming like suit of power armor, all thin and sleek like an second skin?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Lasers are alright, but not man portable ones. They should require a dedicated powerplant and be prone to breaking down on a regular basis. All laser shots should require a roll to determine if the damn things even work. A 50/50 roll would be fair imo.

You might wonder why I suggest this. I suggest it because it would strike me as amusing to watch people having to rp the repair of their expensive behind laser defenses in the middle of an air raid.

Rods from God.. No.

But space based weaponry in the form of defensive measures for space platforms and such should be ok. But if yall are going to allow defensive measures for space platforms or satellites or even any kind of weaponry in space.. we should also allow the ability to knock out satellites from the ground. The technology isn't all that difficult to come up with. I remember the missiles mounted on the F-15 back in the 80s that was supposed to accomplish a satellite kill.


Mechs.. No.

But if you are going to insist on them.. they should require a roll to see if they fall over and/or crap out. 50/50 roll for epic win and hilarity.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1) sargun and cent have my vote. So long as they are regulated lasers have my green flag.

2)No. SDI's being the exception. Also guns don't work in space anyway. Simply firing one will send your into space and you die. If fired IN space that is. On a planet I have no idea.

3)
No.no.no.no
I am Surprised the mech topic was brought up again. The only thing that comes close to real are the US armies pack mule supply walkers, which are still highly experimental at best. I can't get a link at the moment due to being on the phone.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I basically agree with everything Sargun said. The only amendement I would make would be to allow higher-tech nations to develop some basic anti-ASAT weapon technology to protect their sats. Nothing more than 50% of course (base it off IG missile defenses), but something so sats aren't completely vulnerable.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1. We're all agreeing with cent, but would those lazers that blind soldiers be against the rules? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Personnel_Halting_and_Stimulation_Response_rifle. It's hand held and expiremental, and we could limit them to very small-minimal use, not entire armies of blinding laser soldiers. It's non-lethal, so I would assume it's allowed or no?

2. No rods from god. No no no.


3. I'm going to say that a person should be allowed to create LOGICAL walkers, things that follow the rules of physics. And if you really want them, then they should be made as noisy, slow and unsteady, since they haven't even gotten a decent working one in RL yet.


Just my two cents.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Will write my argument for lasers as last part.

[b]2.[/b]
No rods from god. Sat-defense, to potentially protect satellites from sat-killer missiles, sure. Makes satkillers less effective.
Some limited weapons on the moon, maaaaybe. Might liven one or two things up a little.

[b]3.[/b]
I am for limited, realistic, mechs. I argued for them a while ago when I was the GDR, and got the approval from the community.
I do not see why others should not be able to use similar walkers.
No goddamn gundams. Nothing from Anime. $%&@ that !@#$.

[b]1.[/b]
Lasers.
The US and Israeli militaries using [url="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tactical_High_Energy_Laser"]chemical lasers[/url] to shoot rockets and artillery shells down, Boeing is researching an [url="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_Laser_Avenger"]AA-laser[/url] (and basically ready to build it with funding), an Italian company proposed a [url="http://www.defensereview.com/352003/TIS1.pdf"]gas-dynamic laser weapon[/url] (An infantry weapon, no less!) in [b]1999[/b], and there's plenty of [url="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dazzler_%28weapon%29"]'dazzler' weapons[/url] designed to blind or disorient humans.
In addition, there's a homemade [url="http://nerdapproved.com/misc-gadgets/homemade-pulse-laser-gun-qualifies-as-an-actual-weapon/"]pulse laser[/url] that could qualify as actual weapon with more range and power. And that thing was made with commercially available parts. Dedicated research could result in assault lasers comparable to modern infantry rifles.
While there is of course the issue of people going "LOLlasers" and thinking of weapons seen in Star Wars, Star Trek and other sci fi, I feel the need to state that realistic laser weaponry would no act as it does in movies.
I have posted a rather [url="http://forums.cybernations.net/index.php?showtopic=90657&view=findpost&p=2667657"]long post[/url] (by now several, actually) about a potential laser developed by a corporation in my nation, using material (little of which is my own at the time, unfortunately) from [url="http://www.projectrho.com/rocket/sidearmenergy.php"]Atomic Rockets[/url] (a very hard SF website) and the website of a [url="http://panoptesv.com/SciFi/LaserDeathRay/DeathRay.html"]Luke Campbell[/url], whose knowledge of the matter strikes me as vast enough that he might actually be working as researcher on such a 'DEW'.

I do believe that laser weaponry should be allowed, but only if people go about it realistically - IE no 'blasters' or 'phasers' or 'turbolasers' - and sanely, using common sense and asking people who know about this sort of stuff before doing it.
Lasers don't go "pew pew". Lasers are not visible unless you use visible-light frequencies in it. Lasers do not have infinite range. Lasers do not usually instakill armoured troops (unless a powerful enough pulse laser is used).
Recent advances in capacitors and other technologies have come far enough that I am convinced that, given some ten million in funding, laser weaponry could feasibly be made, both for use by infantry and for very mobile AA and A-mortar/missile platforms.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Centurius' timestamp='1301533597' post='2681026']
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tactical_High_Energy_Laser
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deuterium_fluoride_laser
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Airborne_laser
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Advanced_tactical_laser
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PHASR

You were saying?
[/quote]

I meant smaller: vehicle or man-portable. (PHASR is man-portable, but isn't lethal and hasn't been deployed in an armed force.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='GeoLauzier' timestamp='1301544965' post='2681182']
Would mechs include transforming humans into an animal of our choice ?
[/quote]

That is a whole other ballgame of gene splicing that was laughed out of CNRP years ago when someone tried turning a human in to a dragon.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Voodoo Nova' timestamp='1301546057' post='2681194']
That is a whole other ballgame of gene splicing that was laughed out of CNRP years ago when someone tried turning a human in to a dragon.
[/quote]
'Twas quite the magnificent failure. He was confined to a wheelchair and died soon after.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Issue 1:

I favor the allowing of defensive and cyber/ electronic warfare uses of directed energy weapons. I do not think that one should be able to speed of light kill a tank or bomber. I think one should be able to blind a satellite, shoot down a missile, do some active defenses etc. Laser systems btw are no super missile shield. If a navy destroyer is facing only 30 second to react to a hypersonic anti ship missile, even if the crew can react to hit one in time, a barrage easily could get through due to sheer time of human and computer reaction rather than the speed of the defensive energy beam.

Issue 2:

I do not believe orbital based weapons should be allowed to be used. If people want to use a kinetic energy weapon dropped from space (that includes non-nuclear ICBMs btw), it should be allowed.

Issue 3:

Absolutely no super robot, probably not much real robot either, but I think it'd be bad ass to allow like battletech/ mechwarrior mechs at a cost of 1 mech for 10 MBTs. Full Metal Panic Arm Slaves (not including the lambda driver ones) would be pretty cool also.

Edited by Triyun
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Voodoo Nova' timestamp='1301546057' post='2681194']
That is a whole other ballgame of gene splicing that was laughed out of CNRP years ago when someone tried turning a human in to a dragon.
[/quote]

I think we should reexamine this. Gene splicing should be allowed on the condition that the character in question forfeits rights as a human being, namely the right not to be hunted like an animal by others.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Triyun' timestamp='1301548663' post='2681234']
I think we should reexamine this. Gene splicing should be allowed on the condition that the character in question forfeits rights as a human being, namely the right not to be hunted like an animal by others.
[/quote]
Hunting the deadliest prey of all. Cape Buffalo-man :ph34r:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...