Subtleknifewielder Posted January 15, 2010 Report Share Posted January 15, 2010 Godmodding isn't preparing for war over an OOC threat. That's metagaming. And I say if someone bully's another OOC-ly over OOC issues, then they deserve to be metagamed on. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
loannes Posted January 15, 2010 Report Share Posted January 15, 2010 Godmodding isn't preparing for war over an OOC threat. That's metagaming. My mistake. And I say if someone bully's another OOC-ly over OOC issues, then they deserve to be metagamed on. I don't see the logic...argument over the latest Packers game, and then it applies to RP? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Subtleknifewielder Posted January 15, 2010 Report Share Posted January 15, 2010 I don't see the logic...argument over the latest Packers game, and then it applies to RP? You know I mean OOC issues that are somehow actually related to CNRP. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
loannes Posted January 15, 2010 Report Share Posted January 15, 2010 You know I mean OOC issues that are somehow actually related to CNRP. Then they'd be IC issues. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Uberstein Posted January 15, 2010 Report Share Posted January 15, 2010 Then they'd be IC issues. Somebody threatening you OOC is not an IC issue, cause there is then no IC action being taken. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
loannes Posted January 15, 2010 Report Share Posted January 15, 2010 Somebody threatening you OOC is not an IC issue, cause there is then no IC action being taken. I mean the issue they'd be threatening them over would be an IC issue. Not the OOC threats. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Uberstein Posted January 15, 2010 Report Share Posted January 15, 2010 I mean the issue they'd be threatening them over would be an IC issue. Not the OOC threats. Ah, thanks for clarifying. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lynneth Posted January 15, 2010 Report Share Posted January 15, 2010 (edited) http://forums.cybernations.net/index.php?s...t&p=2106665 >>Arbiter MBT >>Propulsion: Front-Mounted Isomer Reactor Turbine No. Just NO. Nuclear reactor in a TANK? VERY NO. Requesting a GM to kill that thing. Edited January 15, 2010 by Lynneth Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SpacingOutMan Posted January 15, 2010 Report Share Posted January 15, 2010 http://forums.cybernations.net/index.php?s...t&p=2106665>>Arbiter MBT >>Propulsion: Front-Mounted Isomer Reactor Turbine No. Just NO. Nuclear reactor in a TANK? VERY NO. Requesting a GM to kill that thing. It's actually not that implausible Lynn. http://englishrussia.com/?p=2355 The Russians built "mobile nuclear reactors" as far back as the 1970's. Now, the viability of a fully armored tank with a nuclear reactor would be interesting to see, but I'm not 100% sure if it is at all possible due to size restrictions and the sorts (you could, instead, use hydrogen fuel cells). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lynneth Posted January 15, 2010 Report Share Posted January 15, 2010 It's actually not that implausible Lynn.http://englishrussia.com/?p=2355 The Russians built "mobile nuclear reactors" as far back as the 1970's. Now, the viability of a fully armored tank with a nuclear reactor would be interesting to see, but I'm not 100% sure if it is at all possible due to size restrictions and the sorts (you could, instead, use hydrogen fuel cells). One would be interesting. A thousand of them would be devastating. But they changed it, so blah. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SpacingOutMan Posted January 15, 2010 Report Share Posted January 15, 2010 One would be interesting. A thousand of them would be devastating. But they changed it, so blah. Touche, true, though I do not agree in your inference as to how it would be devastating. It would be devastating economically for any nation to produce thousands of nuclear-fueled tanks. That and should they have their inner-chambers breached, they would take out the entire column with them, meaning a chain reaction of nuclear tanks exploding. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
king of cochin Posted January 15, 2010 Report Share Posted January 15, 2010 Only very recently has Toshiba and i think Hyperion has produced miniature reactors commercially for use in trucks. How much more modification would be needed for it to the compacted for a tank engine and to make it combat capable? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lynneth Posted January 15, 2010 Report Share Posted January 15, 2010 (edited) Touche, true, though I do not agree in your inference as to how it would be devastating. It would be devastating economically for any nation to produce thousands of nuclear-fueled tanks. That and should they have their inner-chambers breached, they would take out the entire column with them, meaning a chain reaction of nuclear tanks exploding. Devastating as in "the environment will die". And, yeah. Breach in a reactor = bad. Only very recently has Toshiba and i think Hyperion has produced miniature reactors commercially for use in trucks. How much more modification would be needed for it to the compacted for a tank engine and to make it combat capable? Theoretically, you'd just have to build a superheavy tank into which you can fit that 2*2*1 meter reactor to use it. How big is the one by Toshiba? The Hyperion reactor has the aformentioned size. Edit: Combat-capability? Never. Nuclear reactors are too "fragile" to be used in tanks. Well, they're not really fragile. But it's too easy to kill a tank, really. Edited January 15, 2010 by Lynneth Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SpacingOutMan Posted January 15, 2010 Report Share Posted January 15, 2010 But it's too easy to kill a tank, really. I believe that's the main reason behind its unavailability. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Subtleknifewielder Posted January 16, 2010 Report Share Posted January 16, 2010 Then they'd be IC issues. Somebody threatening you OOC is not an IC issue, cause there is then no IC action being taken. I mean the issue they'd be threatening them over would be an IC issue. Not the OOC threats. *facepalm* A miswording on my part. I meant an OOC threat concerning IC actions. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Uberstein Posted January 17, 2010 Report Share Posted January 17, 2010 http://forums.cybernations.net/index.php?s...t&p=2112066 We have sat's watching his territory from most PEPTO nations, with shared intelligence, yet he refuses to give concrete troop numbers on what he initially deployed in the area. He claims these numbers will change when he finds out someone else's response, which should not be allowed because it is retconning his initial deployment. I am simply requesting that he gives concrete numbers on his initial deployment. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kevin Kingswell Posted January 17, 2010 Report Share Posted January 17, 2010 http://forums.cybernations.net/index.php?s...t&p=2112066We have sat's watching his territory from most PEPTO nations, with shared intelligence, yet he refuses to give concrete troop numbers on what he initially deployed in the area. He claims these numbers will change when he finds out someone else's response, which should not be allowed because it is retconning his initial deployment. I am simply requesting that he gives concrete numbers on his initial deployment. Here is a solution seeing as both sides want to other to post first then have both sides post their numbers to a GM in a PM and then you can both post and the GM will be able to step in if either side changes them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sargun II Posted January 17, 2010 Report Share Posted January 17, 2010 BaronUberstein, none of the sats were watching before Proxia attacked. When KP attacked, he had errors and needed to revise them. If KP knows the specific troop numbers, he will be influenced and make his decisions differently even though in IC he shouldn't. Once KP edits, then Yawoo is obligated to do so. However, he, and you, are waiting on Penchuk. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Uberstein Posted January 17, 2010 Report Share Posted January 17, 2010 BaronUberstein, none of the sats were watching before Proxia attacked. When KP attacked, he had errors and needed to revise them. If KP knows the specific troop numbers, he will be influenced and make his decisions differently even though in IC he shouldn't.Once KP edits, then Yawoo is obligated to do so. However, he, and you, are waiting on Penchuk. KP can't change his initial attack either, Retcon's arn't allowed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sargun II Posted January 17, 2010 Report Share Posted January 17, 2010 KP can't change his initial attack either, Retcon's arn't allowed. If KP did something wrong or based off information he never had, then he has to revise his attack. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Uberstein Posted January 17, 2010 Report Share Posted January 17, 2010 If KP did something wrong or based off information he never had, then he has to revise his attack. To revise his attack we'd need concrete numbers of what Louisiana brought in the first place, otherwise what did he shoot the planes down with? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kevin Kingswell Posted January 17, 2010 Report Share Posted January 17, 2010 To revise his attack we'd need concrete numbers of what Louisiana brought in the first place, otherwise what did he shoot the planes down with? Then go with my idea its simple and it works. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sarah Tintagyl Posted January 17, 2010 Report Share Posted January 17, 2010 Because god forbid if people post numbers we can't be respectful enough to use the numbers we were going to use in the first place. I personally like Kevz ideas, since influence and metagaming would play too big a roll in this, if it wouldn't be too much trouble, I would like concrete PM's sent to either me or Ty and from there we can gauge how many soldiers have been placed in action, their movements and so forth. This is just an idea, but at least its a starting point, so bear with me here and we'll try to get everything settled as soon as possible. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sargun II Posted January 17, 2010 Report Share Posted January 17, 2010 To revise his attack we'd need concrete numbers of what Louisiana brought in the first place, otherwise what did he shoot the planes down with? Who is we? And he wouldn't know the concrete numbers in the first place. You're trying to give KP information he didn't have in order to revise his attack, which is not the actual issue. Yawoo will give information once KPs attack is revised. What's the issue? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Uberstein Posted January 17, 2010 Report Share Posted January 17, 2010 Because god forbid if people post numbers we can't be respectful enough to use the numbers we were going to use in the first place. I personally like Kevz ideas, since influence and metagaming would play too big a roll in this, if it wouldn't be too much trouble, I would like concrete PM's sent to either me or Ty and from there we can gauge how many soldiers have been placed in action, their movements and so forth. This is just an idea, but at least its a starting point, so bear with me here and we'll try to get everything settled as soon as possible. Okay, I'll pass it on to KP to send you his numbers. 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.