Requiem
08/07/18 06:42 AM
58.175.193.140
|
To name but a few ….
During the 4th Succession War and the later Capellan – St. Ives War we have the Thugee Cult using Nerve gas against opposing military units;
During the Clan Invasion we have the establishment of Clan Re-education camps as evidenced in the TV anime regarding the Somerset Strikers;
During the Jihad not only ….
• WOB forces but TC and Mercenary units were able to obtain Nuclear, Chemical and Biological weapons to be used against their opposing numbers;
• The use of asteroids as weapons of mass destruction;
• WOB camps were even discussed;
• Insertion of explosives into a person during an operation to turn him into a living explosive vest;
And now during the Alric’s assault upon Tharkad we have an Archon assassinated by an elemental;
My question is this then, is the undertone of the Battletech story starting to get ‘darker’ than it was in the original books such as the Warrior series?
To me the answer is yes, there is slow undercurrent of darker stories being introduced – I know this is a War game but at the same time are some of these stories that are being introduced taking it a little bit too far?
And is this a detriment towards future game development? Or will this be a positive as evidenced in other games such as Warhammer 40K etc.?
Get thee to Coventry … Now is the winter of our discontent, made glorious by this daughter of Tharkad … Our army shall march through. Well to New Avalon tonight.
|
Karagin
08/07/18 09:25 AM
72.176.187.91
|
Darker? No more like back to how it was before, the nation states are going to fight till something gives.and a balance is found.
Karagin
Given time and plenty of paper, a philosopher can prove anything.
|
Requiem
08/08/18 02:42 AM
58.175.193.140
|
And what will this fighting consist of …
• Nuclear
• Chemical
• Biological
• Mass Drivers – asteroids
• Assassination via elemental
• Surgery to allow people to become living bombs
How far is too far?
And what balance are you looking for – a new law upon the use of such weapons within a war?
Outlawed or allowed?
What are the consequences of your units actions within the game?
Get thee to Coventry … Now is the winter of our discontent, made glorious by this daughter of Tharkad … Our army shall march through. Well to New Avalon tonight.
Edited by Requiem (08/08/18 02:43 AM)
|
ghostrider
08/08/18 03:25 AM
66.74.61.223
|
To be honest, the only thing about the 'darker' issues is someone finally put it to print. The successor wars would have been doing this. Hell, they did nuke entire worlds. And assassinations happen alot more then they should.
And to be honest, I could see the CC doing this to the FS, then FC.
One of the books said that some agents had kidney bombs, that went off when the agent died. So it isn't like WOB is the only one to use them. I want to say it was the assassins going after Tormano and Justin Allard. Nukes and chemical weapons were used by Kali when the CC was taking back the St. Ives Compact.
How far is too far?
This question is only answerable by the group playing. For realistic purposes, it has to be covered. Some people like to play like that.
Evil in D&D comes to mind. Even robotech has their evil characters, people can play.
A little disturbing? Maybe.
Yet this very thing is something those desperate people would use to resist an enemy.
Any group that came make missiles and get ahold of nuclear materials, can build nukes. And mercs would be within their 'rights' to use them against a foe that will kill all, no prisoners taken. Torture comes to mind as well, as that is worse then just killing anyone that surrenders or is found alive. WOB was set up to be an evil like this. Force all to deal with them.
|
Requiem
08/09/18 09:06 AM
58.175.193.140
|
When considering how far is too far, should we consider the responses used in the final days of the Jihad … to end the life of the master …
With the Master on the run and being perused from world to world rather than actually attempting a legitimate assassination attempt whole worlds were put to the nuclear torch (with colbalt).
The Cannon Book Jihad: Final Reckoning pg. 21 described this as a ‘Sterilization on a Global Stage”, however there are more definitive words that should be used to describe a war crime upon this scale … yet, in the interests of brevity I will not use them here …
It was quoted as “Thousands of big damn nukes, multi-megatonners, lit up Paradise pole to pole within about five minutes of each other, zeroed in on every major city. For the towns and villages that didn’t get a direct hit, those Regulan bastards jacked the bombs with cobalt we could see the spectra in the flashes.”
And it is decided that this should be included in the game ….?
The logic is to strike a whole world kill one person …. Where is the logic in this?
Is this where any rational person wants the game to go?
Can we not say here, definitively, the game has lost the plot? (As evidenced by the decision not to have any novels written)
Is it any wonder then that it feels like the game is slowly being reduced to that of the computer game format only …. Reduced book runs …. Reduced availability …. due to the game losing plot.
Where is my game based within that of 3025? …. A more rational game?
For if this is allowed then, when will it be allowed in the game next time? … when hunting Clan Wolf and Alaric for the crime of assassinating the Archon every world within his empire is “sterilized” …. And any world he attempts to flee to undergo the same fate ….
Get thee to Coventry … Now is the winter of our discontent, made glorious by this daughter of Tharkad … Our army shall march through. Well to New Avalon tonight.
|
ghostrider
08/09/18 12:10 PM
66.74.61.223
|
There is logic, though not good logic.
As said in aliens, just nuke the place from orbit, just to be sure.
Then again, there are those that would see this as a good thing. A rebellious planet that constantly is a pain to the leaders in a region of space. To get the slipper leaders, the only way to do anything is remove those protecting him. And some would gleefully do so. Mainly to cover up their crimes. Blame the target for it.
I don't agree with it, but I do understand it.
Now the fact everyone in the IS missed the fact they had that many is a question.
Never said the game didn't have holes in logic. I said fix the rules first, then deal with the storyline.
Some of the reasons why the game is moving to computer format deals with lack of funds by those that love the game.
To it is easier to update rules when it is all in computer format. Printing a new version with the changes does not mean others will pay the 15 to 30 bucks for the new books. And this may be under estimating the costs anymore.
The computer games make it so those that can not imagine, see what is actually going on. Also, you can fight an entire campaign in a relatively short amount of time, verses the board game, where a simple lance on lance could well take an entire night to do. Then the convenience of being able to sit at home and play with others. No need to drive miles or even hours to get to the local spot to play at, or someone's house.
Reducing over head deals with not spending money on things that will sit, collecting dust, costing you to even keep them in storage. Business decision, but then there were a lot of hobby stores as well as comic book stores that refused to carry the line. And that helps kill a business.
Rational and good are not always one and the same. We played the game when they had ranges that didn't match those of the time, much less today's ranges. And this is supposed to be the future. Even the broken down version they implied.
As for Alaric, it is possible those chasing him would think it is the only way to take him out. They don't see any other way to do so. Well not without risking their butts.
|
Requiem
08/09/18 05:02 PM
58.175.193.140
|
Where is the logic in removing a planet from the game and how can anyone see his as a good thing - what were the writers and plot developers thinking?
In allowing them into the game’s story line you make them ‘Cannon’
There is no room for error with a nuclear weapon(s), there is no solution to this other than getting rid of them.
Or better yet how about a re-write of the story to remove them once and for all from “Cannon”
If people want this in their game let them play 40K.
As for the Battletech computer game – this will be the future of the game – with an ever shrinking market due to a lack of interest (or more accurately a lack of availability) in the game, I can see the paper format of the game ceasing to exist .
How long does it take to write the next book to expand the story line?
Get thee to Coventry … Now is the winter of our discontent, made glorious by this daughter of Tharkad … Our army shall march through. Well to New Avalon tonight.
|
ghostrider
08/09/18 11:03 PM
66.74.61.223
|
The only thing different about this over other worlds nuked til they glowed, as the time frame it was done. The Amaris war, as well as the succession wars did the same.
One possible reason for this is the legal issues that may be from the person that created the world. Just like the Eridini Light Horse, Wolf's Dragoons, Gray Death Legion and others were destroyed.
Another may well be the writers wanted the source of evil to be known, and why the IS could not allow them to survive.
What better way to make sure an enemy is hated, then to destroy worlds?
Again with rewriting things because of not liking them. They did it to sell books. If this bothers you so much, stop buying any. Complaining about it isn't going to change or fix it. I support bringing up issues, but there are more important things that need fixing before the writers running out of ideas. There is always another war in the never ending tale of Battletech.
As said numerous times, if you don't like that story, then don't use it.
|
Requiem
08/10/18 02:28 AM
58.175.193.140
|
Yes, I agree that the time frame is relevant. However, you need to consider the time from the last great nuclear war to that of the Jihad War – why return the bad old days?
If the writers wanted a more realistic war – perhaps removing genocidal actions may be a good place to start, as there are other ways of making an enemy force hated, and discussing such issues may just put off any new recruits who pick up a Jihad book as one of their first books?
However the ones that destroyed Paradise were believed to be Regulans – from the FWL so, the question comes down to being evil to destroy evil? (morality / ethics should have been considered rather than horror front and centre)
Does anyone know if the perpetrators were ever uncovered and brought before a war crimes tribunal?
If not then doesn’t this say something about the game and the games developers?
If they did this to sell books then why is it so difficult to purchase these books regarding the Jihad?
And as for not purchasing them – how many people would willingly create a gap in their books collection due to the subject matter?
Yes there is always another war – but is this not taking it a little bit too far towards a dystopian nightmare – and if we say we ‘understand and approve’ of such tactics what does that say about ourselves?
Back when the game fist came about could you see this being discussed – yes there was violence but never on such a nightmarish scale when using WMDs.
By using them it sets a dangerous tone for the game that should never have been crossed – when the game is reviewed and that review is placed on the net how does this create interest in the game? How does this create new gamers who want to play the game?
At this stage you can only wonder whom the game developers thought were their target market (People) and their underlining intentions for wanting to play the game?
Get thee to Coventry … Now is the winter of our discontent, made glorious by this daughter of Tharkad … Our army shall march through. Well to New Avalon tonight.
|
csadn
08/10/18 03:00 AM
50.53.22.4
|
I have been gaming since I was seven. At no point in my 35+ *years* at the table have I *ever* seen any sign that allowing players access to NBC weaponry, or indeed any means to destroy anything larger than a vehicle, was a Good Idea....
CF
Oregon: The "Outworlds Alliance" of the United States of America
|
ghostrider
08/10/18 02:34 PM
66.74.61.223
|
So the movie Star Wars was morally horrible and you didn't watch it after the first time. The original that turned into a new hope.
They destroyed the planet. Much worse then nukes. Well in most ways. The worse thing about nukes is the linger pain of creatures that didn't die initially.
Realistic war is point of view. WMDs are used in games alot. The sabotage of a nuke reactor is one that shouldn't be done, but are run in scenarios. Those that plan it, normally don't perform it.
I do agree players using it is disturbing, but then there are some scenarios I can see it being needed. Mainly some thing like an invasion by the movie Aliens. You will never find them all, and to prevent them from spreading, destroying the planet and making sure no one sets down would be viable. Even if there are billions on the world.
But that should not be in the players hands.
Without the full destruction, even an orbital bombardment is getting on the darker side of things.
But without it, the game is not realistic in those weapons being out there.
Do you play any computer games? Ones like Halo or Wing Commander?
You know, where earth will be destroyed if you fail?
Those are very common in games. Something even other humans are out do destroy the world. That crosses the line you are suggesting, but most don't think twice about it. They enjoy the game.
Grand Theft Auto is another game based on dark thoughts. Still popular.
So does this mean society is having issues? Possibly.
As this is a game, and the WMD's could well be someone in a mech, most of the rest are out of players hands.
And I agree with csadn. Players should never get or be in charge of things like this.
|
Requiem
08/10/18 05:11 PM
58.175.193.140
|
SW – A military space station is the same as a world that has a bio habitat (an environment – how many species of animals / vegetation etc.) and people – civilians (mothers, fathers, sisters, brothers, children, infants etc.)
It is like saying a Warship is the same as a civilian research/colony Jump-ship that has bio-domes attached (look at the 1972 Film Silent Running)
So, good luck in convincing anyone the two are even remotely the same thing.
Why …. why does the game need to that realistic now …. When I started playing it was never included, so why bring them in in-force now? …. The gamers should never have used them in the 4SW in the CC and they should never have brought them into any other scenario …. How many have left the game because they were used?
There are no aliens in the game, just other people …. Paradise- Population 144,000,000 + animals + vegetation all reduced to 0 just because they lived there!
Even during the Clan’s Invasion they were never used … not even after Turtle Bay …. when Clan Smoke Jaguar used an orbital bombardment … so why now, why during the “Jihad”
Is it because of the title itself? …. Why bring into the game such a dystopian nightmare? …
The game is a military based science fiction, we can all agree on this point, so why the attempt to make it more realistic now … if you want realism then why are they so many plot holes with regards to armaments
• Anti-Elemental armour piercing rifle;
• Space Based Dropships that are equipped with Naval Lasers etc – ie. my PT Craft.
• HE Drones; etc
All of these are easily created but where never included in the game because they upset the games dynamics too far – and yet nuclear, chemical, biological don’t?
If you want realism then this is it - using orbital bombardment within the game every time – if you enemy concentrates any forces on the planet you just sterilize the entire area … that is how the game then should become … no more mechs required at all, as they are now obsolete, just navies - as all other forms of warfare are now obsolete as they are just a target on the ground for your space based artillery….
During the Jihad did not some mercenaries fighting the TC get there hands on them and used them? So how long before they become a common item in any-ones TO&E?
So, if we all agree that WMDs should never be in the hands of players, they why should they be in the hands of game masters, writers and plot developers then?
Boundaries that we set ourselves are a good thing, once crossed can you ever go back to the game that it once was?
Get thee to Coventry … Now is the winter of our discontent, made glorious by this daughter of Tharkad … Our army shall march through. Well to New Avalon tonight.
|
ghostrider
08/10/18 08:47 PM
66.74.61.223
|
So far, I have yet to hear of even one person leaving the game because of WMDs.
They leave because of bad gaming groups or other things, like rule issues, but not because there are WMDs in the game.
SW – A military space station is the same as a world that has a bio habitat (an environment – how many species of animals / vegetation etc.) and people – civilians (mothers, fathers, sisters, brothers, children, infants etc.)
It is like saying a Warship is the same as a civilian research/colony Jump-ship that has bio-domes attached.
Do people die in all of it? Is it tragic someone who survives had radiation poisoning and suffers the same in both situations?
And yet there are alot of research stations that have less people on it that most warships do.
I can see people in the military not liking the thought they were there to die. And WMDs are not selective on who they kill most of the time. They kill all, and alot of the time, make the area uninhabitable without special gear.
Did you even consider the Jihad had people that thought winning by any means was the only choice? Why bother wasting troops taking, then holding a world? Now you do it once, and others will not resist you, as they fear you will do that same to them. The line of thinking, They are only (insert name here). What do we care?
That is real history there.
All of these are easily created but where never included in the game because they upset the games dynamics too far – and yet nuclear, chemical, biological don’t?
Game balance is why they use poor logic for alot of things. The big 3 WMDs aren't used by those on the ground. The cowards that would use them do it from orbit in sci fi games. I don't know of any that would have it strapped to their butts and run into the starport with one on.
The main focus of the players it tactics. Strategy is supposed to be outside of their hands.
So, if we all agree that WMDs should never be in the hands of players, they why should they be in the hands of game masters, writers and plot developers then?
If you need an answer for this one, I would suggest you stop playing at all. Things like this may be ugly for most, but it is how the game revolves at times. It is their game to do as they like.
I think this ends this part of the conversation. If you don't like the story, DON'T READ IT!
And the thought of this not being in the thread about the Wolverines is interesting. No rants about that being used there.
|
Requiem
08/11/18 03:21 AM
58.175.193.140
|
As for people leaving due to WMDs, unfortunately that has not been the case for others - some of us get very annoyed when their units no longer exist due to the utilization of these weapon systems, and yes, even to the point of giving the game up completely - that is until apologies are made and house rules banning them completely from the game are implemented.
Winning by any means necessary is not the way to play the game … it is like cheating … and so where is the fun in that? … The fun lies in the skill of moving your pieces / character around and the roll of the dice, if WMDs are required in the game then the people playing the game suffer accordingly.
For a fun and enjoyable game you do not need them at all.
This is a game and all games should be fun and enjoyable and not a dystopian nightmare from 1984 / Brazil / Clockwork Orange etc.
And it is not ‘their’ game it is ‘our’ game – can anyone really give up on something they have invested so much time and energy into? - I think not!- I think this is why some people only play within certain periods or they are waiting for something new that no longer includes those parts that are not wanted or even create house rules to make the use of these WMDs illegal – we then just rewrite the game for our own personal rules to exclude the use of WMDs and keep moving forward.
I just find it distressing that some people believe it is necessary game tool – that it adds to the game in some way.
And yes I also believe that even in the story regarding the Wolverines the use of a Nuclear weapon was a despicable plot inclusion - it could have been rewritten in that a commando group gained access to the site – sent all the technicians running for their lives – and then set off a type of ‘napalm’ charge that caused a firestorm within the building – thus turning everything to ash – How hard would it have been to change this from Nuclear to Napalm …. Same result?
In the writers / plot developers minds you just don’t get the same sense of horror though -however this is, in my opinion this is just a cheap way of eliciting a feeling of horror from those writing the story – you can do it using other implements at hand – just look at Hitchcock’s ability do you think he would need such a pitiful plot device unless it was just used for window dressing?
Get thee to Coventry … Now is the winter of our discontent, made glorious by this daughter of Tharkad … Our army shall march through. Well to New Avalon tonight.
|
ghostrider
08/11/18 12:03 PM
66.74.61.223
|
I suggest talking to the developers before accusing them of not understanding things. They may well know what this does, and are using it to villainify those that use it. Not much more incites anger then using a nuke.
But there are other things in the game that are there to inflict maximum pain. The neural whip is a torture device.
Then flamers and infernos are another pain infliction weapon. As a side effect, they are meant to burn down anything, while includes woods and building. The smoke, as well as other chemicals things put off when burning, could well cause alot of medical issues. And most don't think about it, as the rules don't go that far. And for a game, probably shouldn't. They don't destroy worlds like nukes do, but they are very common to inflict pain on those that oppose the invaders.
The enjoyable part comes with the group you are playing with. I really don't think any player should be able to use WMDs. But that is up to the group. Even playing a fighter pilot with a nuke ready to drop is not a good thing. We have not had an issue with being tempted to use a nuke, though blowing up a reactor in enemy territory has come up. It was a scenario for our infantry characters. Didn't really think much about the suffering, as the game doesn't deal with that. I would say it is only a game, but people tend to show their true desires in them at times.
The reason I am against the nukes, even in space, is they are dirty devices. The radioactive materials left behind are horrible. Even a space craft flying thru a cloud of it, such as a fighter dropping the next round, or even normal dropships flying thru it, will pick up some debris and bring it back with them. Landing a fighter that has some on it would contaminate the landing bays. Dropships should probably have covers to protect the weapons during re-entry, so may well get some caught up in there as well. A commercial starport where the dropship is going to get some work done comes to mind.
|
ghostrider
08/11/18 12:14 PM
66.74.61.223
|
The our game thing isn't quite true. They have thousand of people playing the game. Having even 10 quit isn't going to bother them much.
As I said, talk to the developers themselves. It is very possible, they know what the effect are, and use it to remind people of the evil humans do to each other. Then again, they may not have thought about some people having issues with it.
Other games use chemical weapons in their infantry. I think it is just a part of the game that needs to be there, but doesn't need to be used by, for, or against the characters/players.
As for people losing their units, I have not seen weapons being the reason for it, but losing the race to shut down a reactor did. It didn't help, no one in the group didn't have computer skills. And a bad die roll caused us to have to find another way into the area, as the door remained locked.
Now if you had based a campaign from the world, then I could see that happening. Even garrison duty, but then that would be up to the game master or players to change things a little and have the unit offworld at the time. It is always possible to lose the unit in other no win situations, like having your dropship blown apart by naval weapons trying to flee/assault a world. Clan or IS, it doesn't matter. There is no way to avoid it. Just a lucky shot can kill units as well. A fighter gets a shot into the engine/fuel cell of the dropship and destroys it.
Now having someone purposefully setting off a device to kill the party has happened, and the games master we had told the person to leave and not come back. He ignored the person saying their character did such a thing.
|
Requiem
08/11/18 06:00 PM
58.175.193.140
|
Critiquing a person’s work doesn’t require a one on one, just logic and a good understanding of what makes a good story otherwise how would I have ever completed all those reports regarding long dead authors?
I fail to see how a comparison can be made between a WMD and Neural whip.
QUOTE: Didn't really think much about the suffering, as the game doesn't deal with that.
Yes you can learn about yourself when playing the game, you can also learn about morality and what constitutes an illegal military order. Rather than destroying a reactor (and causing a Three Mile Island Incident) did your team ever consider disabling the reactor for a time without causing a major incident and endangering the local population. Remember if you capture the planet you will need to Govern them in the future (future insurgents against your rule) – Plus if you cause a nuclear incident your enemy will use this to vilify your unit / whomever you work for as war criminals (ie the press will destroy you – your employer will disavow your actions – and in all likelihood you will be put up on war crimes charges). Was this even considered? Remember all of your actions have consequences and those consequences should be pursued to their logical conclusion.
There are protocols in place with regards WMDs decontaminating vehicles etc.
Using rational thought of only losing a small amount is not the issue – even losing one person is one person too many.
And I disagree WMDs do not have to be a part of the game – as it says that even after 1000 years of warfare we as a people have learnt nothing and we are more than willing to use them – cannot we hold our game to higher standard, why do we need to include them in the game?
It is horror on an unimaginable scale plain and simple – and in my opinion has no place within the game.
Can anyone say having it there makes the game better even from a historical point of view it is just too horrific to contemplate?
If everyone agrees not to include them in their game then they should be excluded completely from all records.
Get thee to Coventry … Now is the winter of our discontent, made glorious by this daughter of Tharkad … Our army shall march through. Well to New Avalon tonight.
|
ghostrider
08/11/18 11:10 PM
66.74.61.223
|
So condemning someone for using a tactic to save worlds, by destroying the enemies staging point, yet suggesting you do all you can to stop the enemy sounds hypocritical.
So which is it? Do all you can to stop the enemy from ravaging your area? Or use what is already there and take the out?
As the characters failed to stop the reactor melt down, it wasn't like we had a choice. It was supposed to clear out the base so we could take or destroy the supplies. But a single bad die roll change all of that, and didn't shut down in time.
Again, saying all agree they should not be there is making the decision for others. You said you would still use the nuke in the fighter swarms.
Plus if you cause a nuclear incident your enemy will use this to vilify your unit / whomever you work for as war criminals (ie the press will destroy you – your employer will disavow your actions – and in all likelihood you will be put up on war crimes charges).
Doesn't this apply?
Doesn't matter if on world or not. There is nothing to make others believe you would not do so to civilian dropships or worlds. Just like orbital bombardment. What would prevent you from using nukes in that?
I fail to see how a comparison can be made between a WMD and Neural whip.
It was showing that things that should not be considered good, are in the game. Honestly, that is the entire war game, but this is specific to cause pain. No other reason or excuse for the whip. Not really a defensive weapon. The other examples run in the same vein. Burning people alive isn't considered nice in any way you put it. Far worse if they survive it.
Having the stats in there, does help bring focus to the game. Knowing what they do, and what can be done to stop it allows characters to try to stop it. I mean, what motivates a team to stop the enemy then the threat of a nuke? Or chemical weapon?
How far out do you have to get people to allow them to avoid it? Rescue and transport of people comes to mind.
|
Requiem
08/12/18 12:51 AM
58.175.193.140
|
War is as much concept as conduct.
Removing a splinter by cutting out a piece of the limb makes no sense whatsoever.
Perception is required as the consequences of failure are catastrophic.
By allowing them into the game, by saying it’s only a game and it therefore somehow legitimizes their use is not a valid response in my opinion.
Get thee to Coventry … Now is the winter of our discontent, made glorious by this daughter of Tharkad … Our army shall march through. Well to New Avalon tonight.
|
ghostrider
08/12/18 02:04 AM
66.74.61.223
|
The lack of imagination is showing here.
Besides using them to drop on each other, there are scenarios that require radius, effects and such when one goes off.
A nuke plant has been taken over by rebels. It is your job to take it back. If things go wrong, then you need to know how fast and far you have to get yourself way from it. As well as civilians if a city is near by.
Second scenario. A train carrying chlorine gas jumps the tracks in a city. You need to know how fast it will spread as you try to get every away from it, incase it explodes. Do you bother with anyone alive at the initial spill? They still alive or will die anyways? What will happen to your unit if they don't have gas masks or environmental suits?
Now add in trying to evacuate people. How many fit on one Karnov? How many do you have? Where is the first line that you start from, as those closer to the issue will die anyways. How long do you have?
These are story lines that don't rely on dropping bombs on people, but you could have one that doesn't go off. It isn't like it hasn't been done before.
Commando raid on the enemies stockpile of WMDs. If things go wrong, what happens? Even if you blow up the stockpile, as there isn't much else you can do to remove them from the enemy, what happens? Hopefully the unit succeeds and doesn't die in it.
And as for your nukes, why not use some imagination and find a way to shrink/minimize the standard missiles and launchers, or have one designed for the fighters that isn't a dirty bomb.
But that would take away the fun of arguing.
|
Requiem
08/12/18 03:23 AM
58.175.193.140
|
OK if your team is going into a reactor to neutralize rebels I would assume your group is on a Navy Seal rating and belong to a house unit – and if you are then you should have a computer tech / Plant specialist engineer on the line to advise how to stop it - if not then you have no business being in there as mercenaries do not have the specialist training to get the job done.
Chlorine Gas … EPA problem not military. Military would be there for evacuation purposes (those not within the initial radius) and crowd control only. EPA would go into the blast radius and do the clean up / look for survivors as they have been highly trained with the policies and procedures as well as having the specialist equipment.
And all of these are without a WMD just accident control etc which makes for an interesting plot twist and a fun game.
As for the commando raid / Nukes .. don’t need to discuss if there are no WMDs in the game – so no argument at all.
Get thee to Coventry … Now is the winter of our discontent, made glorious by this daughter of Tharkad … Our army shall march through. Well to New Avalon tonight.
|
ghostrider
08/12/18 12:05 PM
66.74.61.223
|
Not even close. All normal mech warriors that were the closest unit to the site.
Not all missions are made for what you are good at. Part of the role playing mechwarrior setting. Adventures outside the mech.
Chlorine gas. Again. Closest thing to the accident. No blast yet, but it is your job to try and avoid it if possible. That is secondary to evacuating the area, though the officials want to avoid the blast as the priority.
Not having things makes some things easier, but they were in the game's history. Knowing what they can do, and can't does have potential to making a good scenario.
You could just as easily had rebels smuggle or take over a depot with such devices in it. Or a transport was hijacked and you have to stop it before they get to their target.
Chasing a group around the world.
And a Davey Crocket is still a nuke, though it isn't one that takes out a city with just one. You don't need to wipe out the planet with one.
Hell, you could be in the military base one is being sent to, and have to stop it. That isn't going to happy if they are sending a truck load of puppies. Chemical and biological things work as well. Not something a few people want to think of, but for those that see it as a motivation to get their characters moving, it isn't the horrible nightmare.
And how many games has the hero making a desperate run into the enemy's moving fortress with a nuke to take it out? Alien infestation needs to be stopped. Wipe out the city it is in, or risk the entire planet?
|
Requiem
08/12/18 06:24 PM
58.175.193.140
|
There is no way in any reality this is a plausible and realistic option that just because a unit are in the vicinity they should deal with it when it comes to a reactor – orders would come down to secure the surrounding area – assist in evacuate civilians – hold until experts can be assigned (ie. SAS together with a plant engineer – as they are trained for this type of scenario).
But in a RPG anything is possible even the improbable.
But who am I to criticize it is up to each individual group to determine how the game is run, and if they enjoyed it, and thought it was plausible or not.
So, what happened after it went Three Mile Island? Who was blamed for the explosion …. Any repercussions to your unit?
As for transporting WMDs they have multiple layers of security as well as highly specialised armament codes etc. Transporting them I doubt any regular troops would even know what they are guarding.
But again if they are not in the game at all – nil worries
Sorry I find scenario of the hero running in to do this and that in the nick of time an insipid plot development.
Get thee to Coventry … Now is the winter of our discontent, made glorious by this daughter of Tharkad … Our army shall march through. Well to New Avalon tonight.
|
ghostrider
08/12/18 07:27 PM
66.74.61.223
|
So not sending in anyone to try and shut it down is the way to go?
Not even trying to avoid the destruction is the only way to settle this?
Not every city or even world will have the individuals that can do what is needed. But again. Supposition that everything needed is there in so massive quantities, that there is no room for anything else.
This is very much like sending in a team from the U.S. to Africa in a helicopter and you only have 20 minutes. They are not going to make it. But having a local team secure the facilities and talk them thru how to shut it down would never happen.
Looking for story lines, yet can't see anything outside of the numbers, which are not there. Making them up and using them as the basis for any logic... never mind.
|
Requiem
08/13/18 12:00 AM
58.175.193.140
|
No, waiting for the experts to shut it down / secure the facility or getting the plant engineers to shut it down to avoid the destruction is the way forward.
Again, I would have though each plant as part of their security control procedures would have its own multiple security details that have been trained in anti-terrorist activity and also in the means of shutting the plant down in the event that it is required.
Also I would assume that they would have been on planet at the time.
Get thee to Coventry … Now is the winter of our discontent, made glorious by this daughter of Tharkad … Our army shall march through. Well to New Avalon tonight.
|
Requiem
10/05/18 02:42 AM
58.175.193.140
|
Continuing on from the inherent weakness of the Sibko / Trial of position post .....
Internally we can’t have one endless war game because of the establishment of the FC.
Ad we can’t kill off the CC because that would be racist. (Pandering to the PC?)
Thus only solution is an outside force that is made up of a large number of states.
As only a large number of eternally waring states can save us from an era of peace and stability.
And yet due to the introduction of the large number of states the reverse has happed.
Writing a story with any credible reality no longer exists – the narrative has devolved into a mockery where writer and game developer fiats rules.
Weapon systems and tactical strategy that should have been considered appropriate to the game are not allowed.
So rather than write a way out of the FC we get a scenario that has no reality – just the endless madness of war. As plot holes continue to grow in size and number and the stories cannot contain any credible narrative.
The era of the Jihad where no novels were produced due to the shocking undertone of the story and how it would be received in real life – if people believed the fall of the CC was racist how would they take this plot when it is released in the real world? Thus just keep it to game supplement books only.
And then let the pendulum swing a full 180 degrees to an era of peace where our ‘Mechs are taken away and we all sing kumbaya and a single world like Northwind is guarded by only two ‘Mechs – one disaster after another.
And now the metaphorical lights go out scenario with the fall of the HPG grid.
Does anyone consider this story progressing in a positive direction or has the game’s cannon history truly lost the plot?
And yet war is good for business and business is good – as long as you have a score card on hand to know whom each side is allied with and whom they are fighting against.
And if we get more than two novels a year to expand upon the history.
Get thee to Coventry … Now is the winter of our discontent, made glorious by this daughter of Tharkad … Our army shall march through. Well to New Avalon tonight.
|
|
|
Extra information
|
1 registered and 239 anonymous users are browsing this forum.
Moderator: Nic Jansma, Cray, Frabby, BobTheZombie
Print Topic
|
Forum Permissions
You cannot start new topics
You cannot reply to topics
HTML is enabled
UBBCode is enabled
|
Topic views: 7098
|
|
|
|
|
|
|