LeVentNoir Posted February 25, 2009 Report Share Posted February 25, 2009 Chlorine gas can be made by oxidation of HCl via H2O2. Seriously, they are easy to make unless you are talking about viral agents, other wise, just get a sample of your bio agent, culture release. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Triyun Posted February 25, 2009 Report Share Posted February 25, 2009 I am more talking about viral and bacterological weapons which are specially designed to be resistant "super bugs" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LeVentNoir Posted February 25, 2009 Report Share Posted February 25, 2009 I am more talking about viral and bacterological weapons which are specially designed to be resistant "super bugs" Thats easy. Just evolve them First get your sample of what you want to evolve. Second, culture large numbers, split into groups. Third, try to kill them all with small doses of what you want them resistant to. Fourth, reculture those that survive, repeat until the cleansing agent has no effect. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shadowsage Posted February 26, 2009 Report Share Posted February 26, 2009 Thats easy. Just evolve themFirst get your sample of what you want to evolve. Second, culture large numbers, split into groups. Third, try to kill them all with small doses of what you want them resistant to. Fourth, reculture those that survive, repeat until the cleansing agent has no effect. Scary stuff. Reminds me that Penicillin is only like...50% effective? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Karl Peters Posted February 26, 2009 Report Share Posted February 26, 2009 I thought we were trying for realism here. We are. Most nations that have a lot of Biological Weapons don't have any Nuclear Weapons. So make sure you have to decided between Nuclear Weapons and Biological Weapons. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Karl Peters Posted February 26, 2009 Report Share Posted February 26, 2009 (edited) Sorry I thought I didn't post. Ignore this post it was an accident. Edited February 26, 2009 by Bismarck21 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Il Terra Di Agea Posted February 26, 2009 Report Share Posted February 26, 2009 We are. Most nations that have a lot of Biological Weapons don't have any Nuclear Weapons. So make sure you have to decided between Nuclear Weapons and Biological Weapons. I believe that he meant there should not be a limit on the numbers. My opinion is that you can have as many explosives and barrels of chemical/ biological weapons, but you can only have so many missiles to stick them on to, just like real life. If a real nation had none of the moral and ethical boundaries ones today do, then the chemicals would be nothing to get. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Karl Peters Posted February 26, 2009 Report Share Posted February 26, 2009 I believe that he meant there should not be a limit on the numbers. My opinion is that you can have as many explosives and barrels of chemical/ biological weapons, but you can only have so many missiles to stick them on to, just like real life. If a real nation had none of the moral and ethical boundaries ones today do, then the chemicals would be nothing to get. Ok. I see what you are getting at. In fact, I like that idea. Also we can make it, if a chemical plant or biological plant is hit then a massive explosion destroys a big number of your stockpiled barrels. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JerreyRough Posted February 27, 2009 Report Share Posted February 27, 2009 Think of game balence. E.x.: A cool unit for side A has lots of health & damage, and, although taking up more food/army size space, you can make lots of them. It makes sense that that side (if it were in RL) would make lots of them, because their so damn effective (even if their costly). But for the game to be balenced, the maximum for that unit is 1. Thus, even though it would make sence to have more than one, for the obvious reasons of balence there should be a max. (As a good actual example, take Starcraft 2's "Mothership". Its quite very powerful, but you can only have 1 at a time. You can afford to have many, but for game balence theres only 1 allowed at a time.) Of course, thats game balence. Not stat-based RP where there are no definite rules on weapons. I'm just throwing this out there. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brian Hill Posted March 2, 2009 Report Share Posted March 2, 2009 In RP all most everything has an IG penalties from Soldiers(low bills but still) to Nuclear Weapons with the exception of 2 being Cruise Missiles(have unlimited) and Biological/Chemical Missiles. Due to this every 0 infra nation could have thousands of the latter as such I would like to suggest the following. Biological/Chemical Weapons are directly tied to the in-game cruise missiles so you could have no more than 50 of these weapons. One of the most special reasons I have for this suggestion is the following. A good Biological or Chemical Attack can have the same or even worse effects than a Nuclear attack so it is bad for RP if people can have unlimited.With this suggestion you could have a maximum of 50 Biological/Chemical Weapons for a very low daily price. I suggested biological and chemical warfare options before (I think). I am too lazy to go back and check. But good luck with your suiggestion, I hope it gets selected. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vasili Markov Posted March 2, 2009 Report Share Posted March 2, 2009 A cruise missile FAB would have a large blast, but it would not have the radiological effects of a tac-nuke. Thus they are not an area denial weapon like a tac-nuke. So it could be reasonable to simulate them as an advanced warhead type for cruise missiles for nations that are not nuclear capable or nuke capable nations that would prefer not to use a tac-nuke cruise missile for whatever reason. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LeVentNoir Posted March 2, 2009 Report Share Posted March 2, 2009 Read the G-RP-G's, this has been ruled on. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HHAYD Posted March 2, 2009 Report Share Posted March 2, 2009 (edited) Scary stuff. Reminds me that Penicillin is only like...50% effective? No, it is only about 10% effective, and there are still some hospitals in the U.S. continuing to use Penicillin. Anyway, the amount of missiles a nation can hold should be based on their tech/infra level. It does not make sense for a nation with like 500 infra and 50 tech to have the same amount of CMs as a nation with 10,000 infra and 5,000 tech. Edited March 2, 2009 by HHAYD Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vasili Markov Posted March 3, 2009 Report Share Posted March 3, 2009 No, it is only about 10% effective, and there are still some hospitals in the U.S. continuing to use Penicillin.Anyway, the amount of missiles a nation can hold should be based on their tech/infra level. It does not make sense for a nation with like 500 infra and 50 tech to have the same amount of CMs as a nation with 10,000 infra and 5,000 tech. Yes but this is Cybernations RP, so we should endeavour to at least resemble our stats. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.