what would a flashpack do?

Originally posted by Bob McDob
Still, I think we need to know more about how the pac actualy -works- before we can make any comments on it...I mean, does -anybody- know how the flash-pack -really- works? I mean, the really nitty-gritty technical aspects? LOAF? Anybody?

well we know theyre cheap and fairly simple cause pliers said he could have some made in a week. and he didnt have much to work with
 
Originally posted by Raptor

Yeah, my heart just bleeds for the Black Lancers, forced to commit mass murder with weapons whose methord of killing troubled their consciences. How those noble Nazis must have suffered...


Well, maybe not the guys down in the trenches...I meant more the leaders and weapons designers (Seether excluded). I mean, we all know as a fact that most of the BL were...well, calling them evil Nazi bastards gets repetetive after a while...but the children! THINK ABOUT THE CHILDREN! GAAAH!!!

Sorry. But my point still stands. Some of the BLs actually had a conscience - no matter how small. I think Tolwyn had a conscience. He was just really good at suppressing it to do the "rightous" thing.

[BTW, I think it's been mentioned before, but the Flash-pac fits the BL philosophy of efficiency by killing the people inside the ship, but leaving the hull more or less intact. As opposed to "wasteful" torpedos, which go out and blow the ship (and everything in it) to smitherines]

[Edited by Bob McDob on 04-24-2001 at 03:26]
 
Originally posted by OriginalPhoenix
Originally posted by wcwraith
no it (the LUSITANIA) wasnt carrying any war materials
Actually, there is in fact evidence to suggest that she WAS carrying munitions in her holds. It has not been definitely proven, and of course governments aren't talking, but the nature of her sinking and hull damage discovered once she was found does support the surmise.

Of course, the German U-boat captain who sank her had no way of knowing this, so it still remains a rather ruthless action to attack without warning, regardless.

[Edited by OriginalPhoenix on 04-23-2001 at 17:18]

The government has been warned that ships entering that area will be attacked and the Germans had a hint that she was carrying munitions.
But many rather smart people have already investigated in that matter and still disagree, so I don't claim to be right...
 
Originally posted by Bob McDob

Well, maybe not the guys down in the trenches...I meant more the leaders and weapons designers (Seether excluded). I mean, we all know as a fact that most of the BL were...well, calling them evil Nazi bastards gets repetetive after a while...but the children! THINK ABOUT THE CHILDREN! GAAAH!!!

What about the children? If learning the truth about where they came from and what their parents did strips them of all the propaganda they were taught about being members of a Master Race with a destiny to cleanse the galaxy, so much the better. It will stop the problem cropping up in another generation. After all those who fail to learn from the past are destined to repeat it.

Sorry. But my point still stands. Some of the BLs actually had a conscience - no matter how small. I think Tolwyn had a conscience. He was just really good at suppressing it to do the "rightous" thing.

And how does this make them better in any way? Know what you do is wrong and going ahead with it is even worse than not knowing the differance between right and wrong in the first place.

[BTW, I think it's been mentioned before, but the Flash-pac fits the BL philosophy of efficiency by killing the people inside the ship, but leaving the hull more or less intact. As opposed to "wasteful" torpedos, which go out and blow the ship (and everything in it) to smitherines]

Yeah, kind of like nuetron bombs. Kills all the people and leaves the property intact. After all, we can't waste anything that will help the Herronvolk in their battle to supplant the sub-humans, can we?

[Edited by Bob McDob on 04-24-2001 at 03:26] [/B]

Best, Raptor
 
Re: Huh?

Originally posted by Bob McDob
(...) A torpedo, geared specifically AGAINST mil-targets, is ineffective against civillian targets. They would still work, just not very well. (...)

Torpedoes would work great against civillian targets, i.e. they would desttroy it. It would just be a waste because you cheaper and faster weapons at disposal to destroy such civies. I think that is what LOAF says.
And I don't think that the BL tried to build cruel weapons as their primary goal. They surely had no problems with it, when it was cruel but their primary goal was IMHO to build a good (meaning effectice) weapon. And if the Flashpak is cruel remains to be seen. As it was already said, being burnt in seconds or being blown up is not that different.
If the BL had destroyed the transport with conventional weapons, not the Flashpak, Blaior would still have said that it was evil (it is, no doubt) becaus unarmed civillians were killed.

BTW, the Twilight Purchase and those other luxury liners can only be destroyed wioth torpedoes or plasma weapons, can't they?
 
The BL seemed like the "Nazi" types, using bioweapons against their own kind. Testing such devistating weapons on civi populations, using the Dragons to sneak up on them and waste them away, and for what?....glory?....honor?....or, "just following orders"?...I say it was pure and simple evil. What kind of Confederation would it be had the war with the BW actually happend? Not one that I would want to be a part of, I too would have defected to the BW without hesitation. "Fight on the side of peace and honor"-Blair

RFB
 
I have been reflecting on this, and maybe an earlier poster got it right when he said that the TOTAL devastation of the flashpack renders it an immoral weapon.

Consider the following: you are in command of 10000 men, and you have to take an enemy position. You estimate 1% casualties for the offensive, meaning 100 of your men are likely to die.

Many battles have been fought by modern armies based on casualty estimates of more than 1%.

But imagine you see a different solution. Instead of a full scale assault, a small team of 50 or so men could penetrate the enemy position and do enough damage to force the enemy to withdraw. However, it is most probable that all 50 will be killed in the operation.

Few commanders would countenance the suicide mission, even though it meant less lives lost overall.

Could this be the source of our disapproval of the flashpack?
 
I agree, Viking... the idea that it's a weapon from which there is no escape is definately part of the reason we might regard it as immoral -- also, the simple fact that it was *developed* for slaughter, and not for a specific military purpose.

Someone asked, specifically, what a flashpak does... the flashpak (real name: Internal Atmosphere Flash Ignition Bomb) attaches to a hull and, through a chain reaction, creates intense heat via fusion -- causing the internal atmosphere of an object to burn.
 
Originally posted by RFBurns
The BL seemed like the "Nazi" types, using bioweapons against their own kind. Testing such devistating weapons on civi populations, using the Dragons to sneak up on them and waste them away, and for what?....glory?....honor?....or, "just following orders"?...I say it was pure and simple evil. What kind of Confederation would it be had the war with the BW actually happend? Not one that I would want to be a part of, I too would have defected to the BW without hesitation. "Fight on the side of peace and honor"-Blair

RFB

Exactly. While I hated turning my back on Confed, I knew that if the Black Lance had won, the Confederation would have ceased to exist. Something that *called* itself the Confederation would have survived, but everything that Confed stands, like justice and honour and freedom, would have been destroyed as surely as the Border Worlders would have been.

Best, Raptor
 
hey, before I bought WC4, I read a review. It said that you would be able to stick it out on the Confed side through the whole game, what happened to that?
 
You can. You'll just lose. :)

BTW, was that a review you read, or a preview? Because we all know previews have a way of being inaccurate...:)
 
Originally posted by Viking26
I have been reflecting on this, and maybe an earlier poster got it right when he said that the TOTAL devastation of the flashpack renders it an immoral weapon.

Consider the following: you are in command of 10000 men, and you have to take an enemy position. You estimate 1% casualties for the offensive, meaning 100 of your men are likely to die.

Many battles have been fought by modern armies based on casualty estimates of more than 1%.

But imagine you see a different solution. Instead of a full scale assault, a small team of 50 or so men could penetrate the enemy position and do enough damage to force the enemy to withdraw. However, it is most probable that all 50 will be killed in the operation.

Few commanders would countenance the suicide mission, even though it meant less lives lost overall.

Could this be the source of our disapproval of the flashpack?

I read of a similar hypothetical situation. As the commander, your position is surrounded. The choice is between making a breakout which will definetly kill half of your troops, but allowing the other half to live. Your other option is to is to run the blockade, possibly allowing your entire command to survive, but also running the risk of killing them all. Or you could leave the decision to your troops, since they were the ones taking the risks. Your answer determined if you were a thinker, a fighter, or a SOB (not in that order :))
 
People who write previews are generally pretty fallible -- they probably sent him a copy of the game and he played two missions, read the press kit and decided how the game worked.
 
Originally posted by Bob McDob

I read of a similar hypothetical situation. As the commander, your position is surrounded. The choice is between making a breakout which will definetly kill half of your troops, but allowing the other half to live. Your other option is to is to run the blockade, possibly allowing your entire command to survive, but also running the risk of killing them all. Or you could leave the decision to your troops, since they are the ones taking the risks. Your answer determined if you were a thinker, a fighter, or a SOB (not in that order)
Waaaahhhh!! That's straight from the aptitude test of Daggerfall, Bob!! Your cover is gone... ;)

But seriously... I don't know, it's a tough call... If you let the troops decide, that what good are you as a leader?
If you take one of the two other options, you're either trying your luck or going for "safety", as they say in France...
I don't know, I'd choose "safety": guarantee that half the troops will surivive...
 
Originally posted by Bob McDob

I read of a similar hypothetical situation. As the commander, your position is surrounded. The choice is between making a breakout which will definetly kill half of your troops, but allowing the other half to live. Your other option is to is to run the blockade, possibly allowing your entire command to survive, but also running the risk of killing them all. Or you could leave the decision to your troops, since they are the ones taking the risks. Your answer determined if you were a thinker, a fighter, or a SOB (not in that order)

Hm..we'll, i've never BEEN in that situation so I don't REALLY know, but I think i'd run the blockade. If there's even a chance I could save everyone you gotta go for it.
 
Originally posted by Bandit LOAF
Which, in turn, is ripped off of the test things you take at the start of various Ultima games...
Really? :)
<screams> PLAGIARIIIISMM!! <screams> ;-)

BTW, I think the choice wasn't a "blockade" or "outbreak"... but rather different "paths"... one which kills half the troops, the other etc... just like the example...

At least that's the Daggerfall version... :)
 
Back
Top