Kankou Posted April 21, 2011 Report Share Posted April 21, 2011 [quote name='HHAYD' timestamp='1303354431' post='2695184'] I recall in the past when RPers with small IG countries had nukes granted by RPers with nuke-armed IG countries. I don't know how well that turned out. [/quote] Not sure if I've ever seen such a case, but I would say nukes and ships are too big a gap to compare. Here is my particular thoughts: Giving ships should be allowed, but the ships should be downgraded to reflect the weakness. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lynneth Posted April 21, 2011 Report Share Posted April 21, 2011 When I was GM, there was a strict "You don't get anybody's ships but your own" policy on my part. I don't remember how the other GMs did it, but that's how I did it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
king of cochin Posted April 21, 2011 Report Share Posted April 21, 2011 [quote name='Lynneth' timestamp='1303373126' post='2695421'] When I was GM, there was a strict "You don't get anybody's ships but your own" policy on my part. I don't remember how the other GMs did it, but that's how I did it. [/quote] That is the policy as seen by me too. You RP ships only if you have ships of your own in game. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kankou Posted April 21, 2011 Report Share Posted April 21, 2011 [quote name='Kankou' timestamp='1303320355' post='2694717'] http://forums.cybernations.net/index.php?showtopic=101079&view=findpost&p=2694702 Basically, there seems to be some confusion with what the IFV/APC/SPA numbers are. Can we get a simple final ruling to be put in the books, or will it be common sense? I'm aiming for common sense, really. [/quote] Can we get a final decision on this? BTW, I root for common sense, as thin as it is. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Centurius Posted April 21, 2011 Report Share Posted April 21, 2011 [quote name='king of cochin' timestamp='1303350589' post='2695101'] Cent, AFAIK, you can RP a navy only if you have a ship IG. For the example you mentioned, sure you could RP selling a carrier to sarah, but all its operations would still have to be controlled to you. Having seven carriers IG means a total of seven carriers you control in CNRP. Now that could be as part of your own fleet or by proxy for another player, like how Maelstrom Vortex RPd his units as subservient to Triyun's forces during their merger. [/quote] Those have always been the terms on such a transfer. [quote name='Kankou' timestamp='1303374793' post='2695431'] Can we get a final decision on this? BTW, I root for common sense, as thin as it is. [/quote] We as GMs can not make that decision, however I am willing to start a community discussion and eventually vote on the subject. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King Timmy Posted April 21, 2011 Report Share Posted April 21, 2011 Didn't we already as a community reject the idea the last time it was brought up? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Captain Enema Posted April 21, 2011 Report Share Posted April 21, 2011 A discussion not started by a GM isn't considered binding or some buggery like that. I started a poll about spy rolls, most of the community voted in a certain way, the GMs started more or less the exact same poll and made everyone revote. Dunno why they find the need to piffle and wiffle at times, but I do find it hilarious. Silly boys. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Centurius Posted April 21, 2011 Report Share Posted April 21, 2011 [quote name='King Timmy' timestamp='1303396030' post='2695527'] Didn't we already as a community reject the idea the last time it was brought up? [/quote] Eh the latest discussion put forward several good proposals after which the discussion died out. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kankou Posted April 21, 2011 Report Share Posted April 21, 2011 [quote name='Centurius' timestamp='1303393647' post='2695520'] We as GMs can not make that decision, however I am willing to start a community discussion and eventually vote on the subject. [/quote] I believe that has been already enough discussions, never going anywhere because of the simle excuse "we need discussions". It is time for a vote. Would one of the mods please just make a voting thread between two choices? 1. IFV/APC/SPA numbers are common sense 2. IFV/APC/SPA numbers are max IG Tank numbers It's really simple at this point. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sargun II Posted April 21, 2011 Report Share Posted April 21, 2011 Given that prevailing wisdom says they're common sense, and the majority of the people in the thread responded to common sense, not only is there no need for a vote but we also know that the answer is common sense. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KaiserMelech Mikhail Posted April 21, 2011 Report Share Posted April 21, 2011 [quote name='Sargun' timestamp='1303402659' post='2695587'] Given that prevailing wisdom says they're common sense, and the majority of the people in the thread responded to common sense, not only is there no need for a vote but we also know that the answer is common sense. [/quote] The only problem is that common sense, like breasts, is a treasure held by only a few RPers. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lynneth Posted April 21, 2011 Report Share Posted April 21, 2011 Hey. http://forums.cybernations.net/index.php?showtopic=100500 Go rule on this already. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kankou Posted April 21, 2011 Report Share Posted April 21, 2011 [quote name='Sargun' timestamp='1303402659' post='2695587'] Given that prevailing wisdom says they're common sense, and the majority of the people in the thread responded to common sense, not only is there no need for a vote but we also know that the answer is common sense. [/quote] But weren't you the one who enforced the rule of max IG tank, causing all the discussion to happen in the first place? Just making sure because I'm sort of tired of hearing two different opinions being stated as if they're the sole rule. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Centurius Posted April 21, 2011 Report Share Posted April 21, 2011 (edited) Very well, my ruling based on community discussions: 1. Lasers in limited capacity are allowed within rp, no handheld rifles zapping people or stuff but you can have the weapon systems in rl use. 2. No space-based weapons unless they are used for a missile defense system with ig backing. 3. Walkers are allowed, no Gundam mech's or anything like that. 4. Artillery and non-tank armored vehicles will be defined by common sense however should be based around your ig capacity. Edited April 21, 2011 by Centurius Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kankou Posted April 21, 2011 Report Share Posted April 21, 2011 *Claps* Decisive action indeed. Thank you. I have a question: How would you define Gundam mechs? They're not that much different from walkers. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Centurius Posted April 21, 2011 Report Share Posted April 21, 2011 [quote name='Kankou' timestamp='1303404590' post='2695620'] *Claps* Decisive action indeed. Thank you. I have a question: How would you define Gundam mechs? They're not that much different from walkers. [/quote] Eh they fly, walk smoothly, etc. Walkers in real life will be clumsy and quite ineffective. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kankou Posted April 21, 2011 Report Share Posted April 21, 2011 [quote name='Centurius' timestamp='1303404649' post='2695623'] Eh they fly, walk smoothly, etc. Walkers in real life will be clumsy and quite ineffective. [/quote] Thank you. *Starts working on making walkers smoother with the other mecho otaku of CNRP* Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Voodoo Nova Posted April 21, 2011 Report Share Posted April 21, 2011 [quote name='Kankou' timestamp='1303404863' post='2695627'] Thank you. *Starts working on making walkers smoother with the other mecho otaku of CNRP* [/quote] The Land Walker is a working walker* in the real world. That's about as far as we've come with walkers working. *Note: It doesn't actually walk, but scoots on wheels. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
king of cochin Posted April 21, 2011 Report Share Posted April 21, 2011 [quote name='Centurius' timestamp='1303404192' post='2695613'] Very well, my ruling based on community discussions: 1. Lasers in limited capacity are allowed within rp, no handheld rifles zapping people or stuff but you can have the weapon systems in rl use. 2. No space-based weapons unless they are used for a missile defense system with ig backing. 3. Walkers are allowed, no Gundam mech's or anything like that. 4. Artillery and non-tank armored vehicles will be defined by common sense however should be based around your ig capacity. [/quote] I concur with rules 1,3,4 but need some clarification on rule 2. What missiles are we talking about? Just SDI related missiles or every kind of missiles including and not limited to ASAT missiles and conventional ballistic missiles? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Centurius Posted April 21, 2011 Report Share Posted April 21, 2011 [quote name='king of cochin' timestamp='1303407070' post='2695656'] I concur with rules 1,3,4 but need some clarification on rule 2. What missiles are we talking about? Just SDI related missiles or every kind of missiles including and not limited to ASAT missiles and conventional ballistic missiles? [/quote] Well basically the rule as it has been before, you can have space-based systems if they are backed by an ig wonder or improvement. So yes including ballistic missiles and defenses against ASAT systems. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
king of cochin Posted April 21, 2011 Report Share Posted April 21, 2011 [quote name='Centurius' timestamp='1303407627' post='2695669'] Well basically the rule as it has been before, you can have space-based systems if they are backed by an ig wonder or improvement. So yes including ballistic missiles and defenses against ASAT systems. [/quote] AFAIK while SDI has been permitted, defenses against ASAT weaponry had been prohibited in the blanket ban on space weaponry. Are we scrapping that rule? The RP corollary of IG missile defenses had always been earth based defenses, as far as I know. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Centurius Posted April 21, 2011 Report Share Posted April 21, 2011 [quote name='king of cochin' timestamp='1303407848' post='2695670'] AFAIK while SDI has been permitted, defenses against ASAT weaponry had been prohibited in the blanket ban on space weaponry. Are we scrapping that rule? The RP corollary of IG missile defenses had always been earth based defenses, as far as I know. [/quote] The ASAT case would be an addition to the rule but it would fall under the basis that missile defenses protect against non-nuclear weapons. I also believe the original blanket ban on space based weapons was intended for offensive weapons, if a player can feasibly defend its satellites I see no reason to not allow it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mogar Posted April 21, 2011 Report Share Posted April 21, 2011 (edited) [quote name='Voodoo Nova' timestamp='1303405243' post='2695633'] The Land Walker is a working walker* in the real world. That's about as far as we've come with walkers working. *Note: It doesn't actually walk, but scoots on wheels. [/quote] ...i can have a Tachikoma? edit: the video reminds me of hammer from the beginning of iron man 2, though i suppose 10 years of focusing on it could give you something useful. Edited April 21, 2011 by Mogar Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KaiserMelech Mikhail Posted April 21, 2011 Report Share Posted April 21, 2011 [quote name='Voodoo Nova' timestamp='1303405243' post='2695633'] The Land Walker is a working walker* in the real world. That's about as far as we've come with walkers working. *Note: It doesn't actually walk, but scoots on wheels. [/quote] What about that lumberjack thing? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zoot Zoot Posted April 21, 2011 Report Share Posted April 21, 2011 What about satellite based anti missile weaponry? Like, t can't hit anything on the ground but has the abilityto hit ICBM's, conventional and nuclear? 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.