Technology Stats Help

[Subtleknifewielder]

[quote name='Drakedeath' timestamp='1282062892' post='2419772']
That's the definition, unless EM actually put a lighter on Triyun's arm.
[/quote]
lol

[quote name='HHAYD' timestamp='1282070389' post='2419991']
Guns do not require air to fire bullets, the bullets already have everything needed to ignite except for the hammer strike. Recoil would be a problem, but not if you shoot in the other direction to reposition yourself.

I meant laying mines on hardened space structures (not the flimsy ISS) to discourage enemy astronauts from marching in with drill and cutting tools. If the GMs allowed the usage of stationary weapons, then the mines would be useless.

Humans CAN survive reentry, you need the proper suit to accomplish such task though, and it will be a lot more expensive if a player combined a typical spacesuit with an space dive-suit, not to mention training would take years.
[/quote]
A mine is a weapon.

And a person falling from space into the atmosphere, even presuming the temperature didn't completely incinerate or even cook them, would be squashed flat on impact no matter what they landed on. No amount of armoring can shelter a single person from Newtonian physics...

[Generalissimo]

[quote name='HHAYD' timestamp='1282070389' post='2419991']I meant laying mines on hardened space structures (not the flimsy ISS) to discourage enemy astronauts from marching in with drill and cutting tools. If the GMs allowed the usage of stationary weapons, then the mines would be useless.[/quote] Mines might help defending a space station, [i]if the GMs allowed the usage of mines[/i], not a likely outcome as things stand.
In the meantime only one method is acceptable for defending hardened space structures from enemy astronauts – your own astronaut brawlers.

Edited August 17, 2010 by Generalissimo

[Zoot Zoot]

Would just be easier to use a missile to blow the damn thing out of the sky instead of boarding it and using weapons inside which can depressureise the entire thing killing everyone including the attackers.

[Subtleknifewielder]

[quote name='Zoot Zoot' timestamp='1282082642' post='2420392']
Would just be easier to use a missile to blow the damn thing out of the sky instead of boarding it and using weapons inside which can depressureise the entire thing killing everyone including the attackers.
[/quote]
Not if you want to capture it instead of destroy it. Duh.

[Lynneth]

[quote name='Subtleknifewielder' timestamp='1282089852' post='2420621']
Not if you want to capture it instead of destroy it. Duh.
[/quote]
Or if it's in geostationary orbit.

[Subtleknifewielder]

[quote name='Lynneth' timestamp='1282090382' post='2420636']
Or if it's in geostationary orbit.
[/quote]
Why would geostationary orbit make you want to assault it rather than missile it?

[iKrolm]

[quote name='KaiserMelech Mikhail' timestamp='1282064023' post='2419805']
What about a hammer or a screwdriver? Those would be on board as regular tools, and you can go out and try to crack your opponent's visor with it.
[/quote]
Might as well go with a drill. Or duct tape. You could always cover your opponent's visor in duct tape

"Weapon free" though, there's already a couple nations that have strength-enhancing powered armor for soldiers. It wouldn't take too much more work to convert it to a space suit, and then you could deal some serious damage to an opponent.

[HHAYD]

If we can use drills, duct tape, screw drivers, can't we use wrenches? I think those are also used in repairing structures in the other space.

Or, could an astronaut position himself where his opponent's face is facing up towards the astronaut's hydrogen-oxygen rocket booster pack, and turn on the engine? Nothing better than hearing the whoosh and immediately followed by the fracturing of the visor, roasting of the opponent's face, and then watching the head explode into droplets from the busted visor due to sudden depressurization.

Edited August 18, 2010 by HHAYD

[Generalissimo]

[quote name='iKrolm' timestamp='1282102100' post='2421061']Might as well go with a drill. Or duct tape. You could always cover your opponent's visor in duct tape

"Weapon free" though, there's already a couple nations that have strength-enhancing powered armor for soldiers. It wouldn't take too much more work to convert it to a space suit, and then you could deal some serious damage to an opponent.[/quote] But would a powered suit constitute a weapon? Melee suits might have to be man powered.
If rules would permit it duct tape should permitted as a space weapon, perhaps the sole space weapon. Imagine a thousand cosmonauts trying to cover each other’s visors in duct tape, unprecedented epic battles of legend.

[Generalissimo]

[quote name='HHAYD' timestamp='1282103536' post='2421100']If we can use drills, duct tape, screw drivers, can't we use wrenches? I think those are also used in repairing structures in the other space.

Or, could an astronaut position himself where his opponent's face is facing up towards the astronaut's hydrogen-oxygen rocket booster pack, and turn on the engine? Nothing better than hearing the whoosh and immediately followed by the fracturing of the visor, roasting of the opponent's face, and then watching the head explode into droplets from the busted visor due to sudden depressurization.
[/quote]By playing [i]Opposing Force[/i] and [i]Team Fortress 2[/i] I can vouch wrenches are weapons.
Even if an astronaut is already carrying a maintenance tool, however illogical, would have to drop it and fight hand-to-hand.

Booster packs might be useable for maneuvering so long as it isn't used as a weapon, this might include include propelling an impact at increased speed.
To be within current rules an astronaut would have to use their booster to decrease speed before entering battle.

Edited August 18, 2010 by Generalissimo

[HHAYD]

[quote name='Generalissimo' timestamp='1282103690' post='2421104']
But would a powered suit constitute a weapon? Melee suits might have to be man powered.
If rules would permit it duct tape should permitted as a space weapon, perhaps the sole space weapon. [b]Imagine a thousand cosmonauts trying to cover each other’s visors in duct tape[/b], unprecedented epic battles of legend.
[/quote]
And then kicking each other into Planet Bob's atmosphere, satellites, space shuttles' ion engines' exhaust ducts, and other fun stuff.

[KaiserMelech Mikhail]

[quote name='HHAYD' timestamp='1282104837' post='2421135']
And then kicking each other into Planet Bob's atmosphere, satellites, space shuttles' ion engines' exhaust ducts, and other fun stuff.
[/quote]
We live on Earth. You can stop it will all the Bob crap.

[HHAYD]

[quote name='KaiserMelech Mikhail' timestamp='1282149836' post='2421692']
We live on Earth. You can stop it will all the Bob crap.
[/quote]
CNRP and CN takes place on Planet Bob.

[Lynneth]

[quote name='HHAYD' timestamp='1282153152' post='2421761']
CNRP and CN takes place on Planet Bob.
[/quote]
For me, CNRP takes place on Earth.

[Generalissimo]

[quote name='HHAYD' timestamp='1282153152' post='2421761']CNRP and CN takes place on Planet Bob.[/quote]That’s an ongoing and unresolved debate beginning in 2006, remember that CNRP takes place in a setting nominally based on [b]CyberNations[/b].
The designation [i]Planet Bob[/i] won out in popular usage over [i]Digiterra[/i] or [i]Cyberverse[/i] when referring to the realm of [b]CyberNations[/b].
Most role-players designate CNRP’s ‘world’ [i]Earth[/i], but [i]Planet Bob[/i] is still an acceptable nomenclature.

Edited August 18, 2010 by Generalissimo

[Generalissimo]

[quote name='Lynneth' timestamp='1282154284' post='2421781']For me, CNRP takes place on Earth.[/quote]For you, but simply announcing your opinion does not immediately end a four-year-old unfinished flamewar.
Can we leave leave this topic alone?
I, for one, don’t want to open old wounds.

Edited August 18, 2010 by Generalissimo

[JerreyRough]

IMO I like the movie reference more than the plain Earth name.

But that's just me.

[Executive Minister]

[quote name='Drakedeath' timestamp='1281944503' post='2417716']
In response to EM's carrier...that thing looks like a toy.
[/quote]

Goddamn... its a freaking 50 to 1 scale replica model i painstakingly handcrafted with left over bits of styrofoam and a pen knife... gimme some credit! [sub]And some specs[/sub]

[Generalissimo]

[quote name='Executive Minister' timestamp='1281909378' post='2417017'][img]http://i710.photobucket.com/albums/ww106/mofailla/Stealth_5.jpg?t=1281908832[/img][/quote][quote name='Executive Minister' timestamp='1282240666' post='2423273']Goddamn... its a freaking 50 to 1 scale replica model i painstakingly handcrafted with left over bits of styrofoam and a pen knife... gimme some credit! [sub]And some specs[/sub][/quote]What's the source of the image? Just for clarification concerning the design.

[Executive Minister]

[quote name='Generalissimo' timestamp='1282271617' post='2423844']
What's the source of the image? Just for clarification concerning the design.
[/quote]

Its a CVX stealth carrier concept of the US Navy.

[Generalissimo]

[quote name='Executive Minister' timestamp='1282273498' post='2423888']Its a CVX stealth carrier concept of the US Navy.[/quote]What's the CNRP technology level required to deploy a CVX concept stealth carrier?

[Executive Minister]

[quote name='Generalissimo' timestamp='1282275285' post='2423921']
What's the CNRP technology level required to deploy a CVX concept stealth carrier?
[/quote]

First world, which I am... to be frank, I am willing to eschew the total stealth concept if its too problematic... was planning on making it rely upon a heavily fortified and armored superstructure due to its unconventional design... hence, WWII carriers... but i dunno much about Navies, to be honest.

[Generalissimo]

[quote name='Executive Minister' timestamp='1282275632' post='2423932']First world, which I am... to be frank, I am willing to eschew the total stealth concept if its too problematic... was planning on making it rely upon a heavily fortified and armored superstructure due to its unconventional design... hence, WWII carriers... but i dunno much about Navies, to be honest.[/quote]
[quote name='Executive Minister' timestamp='1282275632' post='2423932']. . .but i dunno much about Navies, to be honest. . .[/quote] and I co-developed cybernations naval role-play, despite my current inability to deploy naval forces. It is possible to deploy an armored aircraft carrier, it might possible to develop a stealth aircraft carrier, but a carrier that’s both stealth and armored is (by modern standards) completely unheard of. Correct me if I’m wrong, but wouldn’t heavy armor neglect what makes naval stealth work?

Edited August 20, 2010 by Generalissimo

[Executive Minister]

[quote name='Generalissimo' timestamp='1282276442' post='2423946']
and I co-developed cybernations naval role-play, despite my current inability to deploy naval forces. It is possible to deploy an armored aircraft carrier, it might possible to develop a stealth aircraft carrier, but a carrier that’s both stealth and armored is (by modern standards) completely unheard of. Correct me if I’m wrong, but wouldn’t heavy armor neglect what makes naval stealth work?
[/quote]

As far as i'm concerned, Naval stealth is all about reducing your radar profile... something I suspect has more to do with the shape of your frame rather than its weight or density.

[Generalissimo]

[quote name='Executive Minister' timestamp='1282276653' post='2423951']As far as i'm concerned, Naval stealth is all about reducing your radar profile... something I suspect has more to do with the shape of your frame rather than its weight or density.[/quote]Carriers need space to be effective aircraft carriers, additional armor wouldn't help.
More importantly stealth materials, like those featured in the Visby Class Corvette, don't make for great armor.

Edited August 20, 2010 by Generalissimo