wilphe

Is that good or bad?

Interesting question...

How do you size cyberlimbs and in what increments?

"Hmm, sir appears to be a 42."

"Actually I preferred the way the 44 felt. If I keep the receipt can I bring it back and change it?"

"Of course sir."

How many shades can you buy realskinn in off the shelf? Or will they do it to match?

Perhaps Bespoke Cyberware is a lot more expensive than regular stuff. The only cyberarm you can get with rippers in was one taken off a guy a foot shorter than you, do you look silly? Yes.

Do they come in mens and womens? Different ammounts of (apparent) muscle tones.

I've heard its accurate as hell though. Nice heavy body to absorb the recoil and a long barrell.

Quite,

       the AUG can fire 9x19 and 5.56x45 as standard. It should not be too difficult to get an add-on so it will fire 7.62x39, should it? Theoretically it could fire a hypothetical 9x45mm round (the receiver must be big enough to fit it, unless its some weird shape. Whether the springs could absorb the extra recoil is a different matter. Might need to change those.) Armour penetration and range with that would be low (compared to most rifle rounds), unless you used a sabot, but it would have a punch.

      On the rifling question. I was thinking of firing exactly the same bullet, but with differing ammounts of propellent behind it (helps simplify your manufacturing processes). Hence when you use the bigger round the bullet will travel down the bore faster, it will hence be worked on by the rifling faster but the spin/muzzle velocity ratio should stay constant. So it should not be an insumountable problem? Should it?

       If it is a major probelm despite that then just get a quick change barrell. If you need to change ammo and haven't got time to do that, they are probably close enough that accuracy is not a problem...

      Not that I am suggesting changing barrells in comabt would be SOP, but I was thinking of this a concept for Infiltrators/Guerillas who have to rely on captured ammo.

    Do we have any suggestions for the performance of a WWII era rifle round? I was thinking about 7d6+1 and range of 600 - 800m. 800m is probably more realistic, but is getting a bit twinktastic.

So, what are the practical difficulties involved in making a weapon so it can fire two rounds of identical calibre and differing length?

      Similar to the way that a .357 revolver can fire .38 specials, but doing it with an assault rifle or SMG.

      I was thinking of something like an AUG or M-2012, by default it would be equipped to fire a WWII era rifle round (similar to .303 or 7.92 Mauser) for long range - call it the 7.62 Full. If you could not get that then it could fire ordinary 7.62 caseless. The barrell and bolt would have to be strengthened for the more powerful round (hopefully you would end up with something more like an FG-42 and less like a BAR).

     Would you need to alter the gas parts as well? Or could you just switch magazines? I believe that at least some gas operated weapons are self-compensating and tap a consistent ammount of gas. That might affect the cyclic rate, but even so by 2020 the gun could well be self-adjusting, especially if it already has a smart processor in it.

      You could also do this with an H&K 77UK yes? No need to worry about ammunition if you can get it to fire 9mm Parrabellum as well as 9mm Long.

     Thoughts?

I live in Beaverville.

I have a vaugely edgy job (down-market Soho casino.)

I have perfected the art of of walking across Piccadilly Circus at 5 in the morning without being tapped, offered an illegal cab, offered sex or having the #### kicked out of me.

No one has ever tried to sell me drugs.

I have been known to obey the speed limit.

I consider myself stylish, but cravats, canes, wide-brimmed hats and Barbour Jackets are un-CP.

I prefer the country to the city.

I do not own a mobile phone and despise people who do.

My most significant social interactions happen on line.

I want a nano-optical rebuild (so I can get rid of glasses) and MBL +3 so as not to be a scrawny wimp, but will not address my fundamental unfitness.

I drive a rubbish car because its cheep to run.

I would go work for Arasaka.

For the record:

                  I would like to disassociate myslef from any paranoid conspiracy theories certain of my compatriots may be subscribing to.

Oh, voices being raised.

National pride being tweaked.

I love it, but could we please cut the abuse until I have had time to post some too?

Thanks.

This is basically a matter of perceptions:

The Germans have a problem with sending troops, other people have a problem with them sending troops also. Can't think why, maybe because of what they did last time they were in the Balkens.

The Japanese aren't allowed to send troops, because their constitution prevents them. It's a bit two faced to complain about that when an AMERICAN GENERAL wrote their constitution.

The American armed forces are very good at fighting at fighting short, decisive wars with a defined enemy, or lay terms, blowing #### up and kicking arse. When this works it works very well, when it doesn't you get a Vietnam situation, massive destruction without victory. The American Amry could never have policed Northern Ireland for 30 years in a stalemate, they would have forced a decision somehow.

The "War on Terror" is unlikely to be short, descisive or have a defined enemy. At least, not usefully defined. You can't kill everyone who hates you (or us) for that matter, and we would rather you did not try. We'd rather you try to understand, that there are people out there who hate you, not because they are evil or bad people (necessarily), but for complex and in their own terms good reasons of their own. Not everybody wants to be just like you.

        Does anybody wake up the morning thinking: "What shall I do today? Hmm, I really feel like strapping six blocks of C4 to my torso and walking into a shopping mall?" Nah, doesn't happen that way. What you get is people who are REALLY ####### PISSED OFF ABOUT SOMETHING and want to do something about it. Would you like it if you got turfed out of the village your family has lived in for generations and had to live in a shitty refugee camp? Would you fight back?

I would like an answer to that question please.

Ultimately the Isrealis always seem to win, if only because they have their backs against the wall and have the most to lose.

Pardon me if I am cynical about the US wanting to make people free around the world. I look foward to you bringing Democracy to North Korea, freedom to Tibet and invading China to bring down a quasi-communsit dictatorship. I'd also like to look foward to you not propping up "friendly" dictators, the Saudis are real big on human rights right? General Musharraf in Pakisthan is a democrat right? Is any of that going to happen? I will believe it when a pig shits on my head.

Yes the EDF is a joke. Why? Pathetic national pride that's why. Also European Gvts would rather spend their money on butter than guns. Does that suck? Yes.

Ok, I was being factitious when I commented about being Nazis being gay. They just share propes. Rohm was the only one. Goebells operated a casting couch (with an interest in non-Aryan brunettes), Goering was effeminate and corrupt but I don't think there was any evidence that he swung. I do know that the Nazis treated homosexuals very badly, for what exact reason I don't know (not making little soldiers for the Furher?).

I'm not entirely sure what function jackboots serve. but goose-stepping in ordinary boots just does not have the same effect. I also understand that in the field they are grossly impractical as they fill up with water.

As for Hitler being democratically elected, that's a little tongue in cheek. He did get 40% of the vote in 1933 (which would have given him a solid majority in any British election since 1945), he only got in government through coalition. Arguably it was the still controversial Reichstag fire and the Hindenbergs and the Armies mis-judgments that enabled him to consolidate (getting the entire army to swear a personal oath of allegience to Hitler was a very, very, dumb move). I believe I am correct in saying that he did remain the most popular leader in german history right up to the end.

Bookwyrm, it was Baroness Thatcher who said that "There is no such thing as society." Although that's suppossed to be taken out of context, but I've never found out what the context was.

When the Argentines invaded the Falklands they were under a military dictatorship.

Summary, democracy means the fate of the country is in the hands of your fellow citizens. Your fellow citizens read newspapers where the front pages carry news of which B-list celeb is shagging who and in any case go straight to the back for the sport. When the news comes on they change channels. Would you trust these people to make sensible decisons? The fate of the world lies in the hands of people too dumb to cross out boxes and punch holes out of cards. Thats not the sort of thing to inspire fanatic loyalty.

Representative democracy is the right to be misruled by the oligarchy the largest minority dislike least. Unless you live under PR in which case the same group stay in office, but just shuffle around. Neither of those is the worst thing that could happen.

Given the choice I'd rather live under a benevolent dictatorship, but I think it was Tallerand who said:

        "Absolute monarchy is fine under a just king,

        but who is to say we will always have an Henri Quatre?

        Experience tells us that we will have 10 bad kings for every good one."

So I'd rather live under a corupt democracy than a corrupt communism or dictatorship; as all systems become corrupt, I'd have to go for democracy.

Rocky    : Man loses boxing match.

Rocky II : Man wins boxing match.

Rocky III: Man wins boxing match.

Rocky IV: Man wins boxing match.

Rocky V : I haven't seen it so I don't know what happens.

First Blood:                     Loner nutcase flips out.

Rambo, First Blood Part II: Loner nutcase kills VCs.

Rambo III:                      Loner nutcase searches Afghanistan for Rambo II, whilst training

                                  people who will later attack America.

Cliffhanger was ok, I've seen bits of Demolition Man; that had Nigel Hawthorne in it.

      (btw: Was "The Madness of King George III" really released as "The Madness of King George" in the US so people wouldn't worry about missing the first two films? Or is that an urban myth?)

Can't you leave us alone? You did it with U-571. Every Hollywood villain is English. Don't even think about touching Zulu or remaking "The Dambusters" with B-17s.

War is a sweet thing to he who has no knowledge of it, but to he who has, it is a thing of trial.

                                     Erasmus.

Oh, you HAD to make a non-twinktastic suggestion didn't you?

Use ACPA or a Full Borg to rip the hatches off and waste the mofos inside.

Strike from orbit, its the only way.

Ahem,

       ok, the sniper only needs to pick off any surronding infantry and any tank commander stupid enough to ride around hanging out the hatch. The tank will button up and not be able to see naff all much going on around it. The defending infantry then have several options:

1) Drop an entire building on it as it goes past, hard to arrange, but very effective. Bummer if you plan on living in the city afterwards though.

2) Get an M-Kill by blowing off the tracks. Then:

          Call up artillery onto it, pretty final, but see above.

          Wait the buggers out.

          Get close to it and break bits off. Modern tanks don't have funky-german-bendy-barrell-thingies but they do have blind spots close up.

Ah!

But I have REF 15 (w/Boostmaster, Adrenal Booster, Transform Virus and Bioware), Rifle 10, a Smartlinked (+2) Barrett M-90 (WA+3). I've been aiming for three turns (+3) and I'm using a Bipod (+2). I have a base chance of 35 and burn all 10 points of luck, then I roll a ten followed by a seven (really quickly so you can't check)  for a total of 62.

My HVAPFSDSDPU round goes straight down the barrell, blows out the breach, ricochets inside, goes straight between the eyes of every single crew member, shatters anything breakable, exits back up the gun barrell and embeds itself in the wall next to me, to save me buying another bullet.

One shot one kill.

I have a lot of sympathy with that, it's otherwise very lonely being politically "Far Centre." It is possible to be that, just lonely.

       I don't have a problem with Fascism or Communism per se, nor an overwhelming commitment to Representative Democracy as practiced in the West. Statistically it is highly unlikely that we are living in the period where the perfect form of government has been reached, everybody from Aristotle onwards has thought that. The Roman Senate though they were, so did Louis XIV and Lenin.

         I DO have a problem with war-mongering, mass-murdering megalomaniacs; or with mundane power-crazed nutters. It is perfectly possible to fight a war of agression as a Democracy (certain nation beginning with I springs to mind). Even Hitler was democratically elected.

You woudln't be thinking of the Rev Ian Paisley's mob would you?

      Well, you're right, they are a bunch of raging nutters still living in the sixteenth century who think that re-unification with the South would mean that the Pope would send the Inqusition to burn the lot of them. Personally I would regard that as a good outcome. Most mainlanders stopped believing the Pope was the Anti-Christ at least 200 years ago.

       However we're not allowed to call him anything nasty because he's a "Loyalist", ie: he's on our side. The fact however remains that a) The army went back into Ulster to protect the Catholics from the Protestants, not vice versa. It ended up screwed, but it started that way. An increasing minority of mainland opinion would like the Unionists to go f**k themselves.

        Its ironic that both sides are fighting to be unified with countrys that really would rather not have them. I strongly suspect that the Biritish would have left years ago, except that that would look like admitting defeat.

     When I went there for a week I found it an alien place. There are more crosses of St George, Union Jacks and Republican Tricolours than in the whole of the rest of world put together. These people paint their affiliation on their kerbs for gods sake.

      In any case they're now going through a "not killing each other quite so much" phase. We'll have to see if they can behave themselves.

Well it reminds me of that as well. Fascism and racialism in Russia or Israel I can understand, being a Nazi is a seperate matter. Actually reading Mein Kampf, wearing a Swastika and listening to Hitler's speaches in the middle of the country that a) Suffered most from the Nazis and Did the most to defeat them, strikes me as decidedly warped. I don't think you'll find any actual Nazis in Isreal at all, just people who expound a similar ideology, but not yet, such extreme methods - depends what the final report on Jenin comes up with.

        As for Britain having a strong liberal tradition; I'm not so sure about that. Depends what you mean by Liberal. I would not describe Britain as liberal in the sense used in the US, or when describing the Netherlands. If I would describe Britain in one word it would conservative, with a small c. We had our revolution a century and a half before the French and soon returned to monarchial, but constitutional government. The change to a modern democracy happened slowly and piecemeal in the 19th century; hence no one agrees what the British constitution actually is.

        Parliament kept the executive weak, so we've never experienced the absolutism of a Louis XIV, Frederick the Great or Philip II. You can thank our geographical position for this, our first line of defence has been the Navy, which was kept fully funded as it was not a threat to Parliament. A traditional peace of Whig (proto-Liberal) dogma is the idea of not maintaining a standinga army in peacetime, never fully acheived. Even now Parliament has to vote every year otherwise the armed forces lapse into unconstitutional no-mans-land.

      Bit like the US pre-WWII; traditionally the US and UK armies are very small. This is why we used to pay the Germans to do our fighting for us. The US army stayed large because of the needs of the Cold War. Its hard to develop militrism when you don't have a significant military.

RPG -43, IRA used to build copies of them.

Take a tin can.

Tamp an explosive into a hollow charge.

Fit streamers to the end so it hits face first.

Fit with an impact fuse.

Throw at tank.

Blackhands rates the commercial ones as 5d10 Heat. Of course a home made one might have different power. Bit dangerous to use though, but not quite as insane as a sticky bomb...

Sticky Bomb.

Not the sock ones from "Saving Private Ryan". This is one of those, post-Dunkirk, absolute desparation weapons.

Take a hollow sphere and fill it with Nitro-gylcerine.

Cover the sphere in glue and put a detachable cover over it so it doesn't dry out.

To use:

Walk up to tank.

Activate fuse, the cover will fall off, exposing the glue.

Stick it to tank.

Run away real fast.

I think it used about 1-2lb of explosive, 6-12d10. Not AP though. Of course the glue would stick to anything, including the user if they weren't careful, not to mention the problems involved in carrying nitrogylcerine around with you.

I don't think these were ever used in action (they're not really suited to Desert War) and by the Italian and Normandy campaigns, there were Bazookas and PIATs to be had.

Clauswitz,

            though in English it's usually rendered as:

"War is the continuation of politics by other means"

and even that is a mistranslation.

Of course I could pull out my copy of John Keegan and use his arguments as to how that is not necessarily the case, and wasn't true when and where Clauswitz was writing, but I can't be bothered.

Berlusconi is just a spiv, a very, very rich, corrupt-as-hell spiv, but still a spiv*, I wouldn't describe him as a fascist or nutter. He's got neo-fascists in his coalition - now led by Mussolini's grandaughter (I think that's their relationship). The Dutch have thier guy, but he's gay - for god's sake, and from what I've heard is fairly reasonable.

Makes you wonder why the SS were into peaked caps and shiny leather boots though. I'm sure there is a dance remix of "Horst Wessel" out there....

I've also heard about actual Nazis in Russia, which is the one place I would expect not to find any after Israel. Hello, The Nazis killed 20million Soviet citizens, what sort of wierdos are you?

The British don't seem to have much of an extremist problem (left or right). You can probably thank a First Past the Post electoral system for that, when the BNP won a council seat on the Isle of Dogs I remember the Anti-Nazi League starting a riot there. Then there's been the trouble in Oldham last year. On the other hand nobody goes around fire-bombimg synagogues. We do have David Irving though, but he just writes books. This has probably something to do with the fact that the British haven't suffered the trauma of defeat &/or occupation that helps extremist regimes into power - and we're not just proud about that, no,no we're SMUG about it.

Suriel, there are French people who call you a Nazi?

I thought it was just my countrymen who were so insufferably stupid and self-righteous. I'm not sure whether to feel glad about that or not.

I still have trouble with an MLA style military take over of the UK though, a populist leader (ab)using the military though, that's another matter.

Acid test of loyalty question:

Which side would you gone and fought for in the Spanish Civil War?

I would probably have gone for the Nationalist, because at the time, I would have seen the Soviets as the greater threat.

* British term for WWII era black-marketeer, in CP terms a Fixer sub-class. Pvt Walker from Dads Army is the best example I can think of.

Stallone is not Carter.

I like you very much Phipps, however:

"You're a big man, but you're out of shape and I'm going to have to hurt you."

The only person who has played Carter is Michael "Don't you throw, those bloody spears, at me." Caine. And don't you forget it.

The idea of Carter being played by a guy who has single-handedly defeated the Russian and Vietnamese armies, not to mention David Caruso, fills me with dread.

"In a straight glass."

I think they "take him out" to Vegas, show him a good time, take in a show, throw in a couple of classy hookers and then release him as a good trustworthy "friend of the west and upholder of our interests".

This is related to the post about Nazis from a few months back, but new enough for a new topic I think.

So, with an unresponsive, gutless, self-serving and narrow elite in France being given the thumbs down in favour of an extremist nutcase. How much more likely to do we think an emergent anti-regime (any alignemnt - the Trotskyists did well to; Greens exist too) is likely to be in a future Europe? As, at least in the R-Tal universe, the european elite becomes more unresponsive, self-serving and narrow, a reaction is sure to set in - probably not a nice one. Who do you want to be ruled by, the Corps or the Commies?

I never really liked the MLA before, but I'm starting to come round to them now.

Note to all yanks: Yes we have nutters too! Except that we don't let them own assault rifles.* It's hard to form a militia using air-rifles.

In case anybody does decide to flame me, yes I do want Le Pen to win, if only because that's the only way anybody will do anything to stop him. That and the fact that I am getting really pissed that the other European leaders have taken it upon themselves to tell the French who they can and cannot elect as president. I thought it was a democracy. In any case: a) He would be a lame duck president as he doesn't have anything like a majority in the legislature and If he does invade the channel islands we'll just take them back, along with Normandy and Bourdeaux, they can keep Calais - where would we go to pick up cheep booze?

* Except in Switzerland.

I think this a case of an unecessary and vain-glorious attempt to duplicate something that already exists (proto-national pride), rather than spend thier minescule defence budgets on anything actually useful. If they buy guns they might actually feel the need to use them rather than bumming of the Anglo-Saxon powers; ok, the Anglo-Saxon power and the US's bitch. Why do I get the impression that the French are behind this?