General ICBM and nuke Info - updated
Moderator: Defcon moderators
Hairy wrote:I didn't realise that the game was going to be set in a specific time period - it's always seemed to me like IV were being deliberately ambiguous like that.
Could of course be that I'm missing something here.
Well, this is based off of Wargames, so it's going for that 80s computer vibe. But it's not specifically set in any time period. This is just how they designed the game. The presence or absense of technologies doesn't really mean anything.
Neutron "radiation" is not a natural radiation, meaning it does not result from natural matter radioactive decay.
That's not totally exact. There are several isotopes that will emit neutrons during their decay. On the top of my head, Beryllium-13 is one of these isotopes (which is also very short-lived).
any tests? Any predictions?
going back to the time period the game is set in,
it's obvious: COLD WAR! look at the maps and country boundaries...but of course it's 'just' a game, and certain liberties were taken...
also, battleships have gone out of fashion these days, no navy uses them any more - various classes of much smaller cruisers and destroyers have replaced them - i think the USMC have a couple of mothballed battleships that they occasionally use for sea-based artillery, but that's about it except for museum pieces.
it's obvious: COLD WAR! look at the maps and country boundaries...but of course it's 'just' a game, and certain liberties were taken...
also, battleships have gone out of fashion these days, no navy uses them any more - various classes of much smaller cruisers and destroyers have replaced them - i think the USMC have a couple of mothballed battleships that they occasionally use for sea-based artillery, but that's about it except for museum pieces.
"In nuclear war, all men are cremated equal." - Dexter Gordon
are you telling me that i can't post in a thread after a certain period of time?
and what exactly is the time limit?
so long as i am not being offensive or totally irrelevant, i don't see what's wrong with posting as soon as the thread comes to my notice.
just because you don't like my few posts so far, i would appreciate it if you did not try to censor nor silence me in the future.
enola gay
and what exactly is the time limit?
so long as i am not being offensive or totally irrelevant, i don't see what's wrong with posting as soon as the thread comes to my notice.
just because you don't like my few posts so far, i would appreciate it if you did not try to censor nor silence me in the future.
enola gay
"In nuclear war, all men are cremated equal." - Dexter Gordon
enola gay wrote:are you telling me that i can't post in a thread after a certain period of time?
and what exactly is the time limit?
so long as i am not being offensive or totally irrelevant, i don't see what's wrong with posting as soon as the thread comes to my notice.
just because you don't like my few posts so far, i would appreciate it if you did not try to censor nor silence me in the future.
enola gay
This is a two year old thread about nuclear weapons. There was a short discussion about the time during which Defcon is set, but that discussion also occurred two years ago. The creator of the thread bumped it a few months ago, and was called lame for doing so (he even called himself lame for doing so). Your bump is not relevant to the thread. Thus, there was no reason to post it. In general, the older a thread is, the more important your addition to the thread should be. If the thread is only hours old, then you can post any on topic crap you like, and people probably won't mind. If it is a few days old, you should make sure that you actually have something to say, but most on topic comments will be fine. If a thread is over a month old, you really should make sure that you have something interesting or insightful to say. When a thread is two years old, you really should have something amazing to say. Your post wasn't even on topic.
xander
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 19 guests