Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited


Everything posted by IRSWalker

  1. C'mon, admit that those aren't screen shots - they must be pen-and-ink art! Looks very cool. Better start saving for a new PC. Smiley
  2. quote:Originally posted by KreKol: Is there any reason the server will not run on NT4? Besides being older software and will not run most games. One good reason would be that NT4 is no longer supported by Microsoft as of yesterday. Smiley
  3. Had my first experience of deploying marines in anger. I located the enemy base, and teleported my 10 MI marines to the surface a short distance from the perimeter. So far so good, 10 marines on the ground. Having not much clue on how to use marines on the ground, I decided that I would set them up with 10 escorting 9 escorting 8 escorting 7 etc...... then I gave Marine 1 an order to destroy the Command and Control building in the middle of the base. Seemed like a likely target. Next came one of those things that makes BCM so cool. My ten marines running across the landscape in single file, heading for the enemy base. When they crossed the perimeter, the local grunts started appearing. The marines given the escort orders started to fan out and engage the enemy, while marine 1 doggedly ran towards his target. All of a sudden, I see tracer cutting across where he has just been, and closing in on him. Fearing for my "sergeant", I zoom in on his attacker, but my marines are way ahead of me, as I see two lines of rifle fire cut him down where he stands. By this time I am worried that my marines may be outnumbered, as the enemy has more marines, and some of them have EF designation. But zooming out, I realise that a lot of the base is grey, and that my fantastic troops have taken out some of the air defences. So I send in the fighters to provide cover. I give all four fighters orders to attack individual enemy soliders, since I want to be sure of the kill. They seem to take an age arriving, and I curse that I did not deploy them in readiness. Five marines down, and the fighters arrive. Those boys must have been glad to see the air support coming in. With so SAMs to protect the base, the fighters run riot, strafing enemy marines, destroying enemy buildings, and clearing the area around my boys. Run riot, that is, until the local flyboys turn up. Luckily my pilots seems to have been blessed with superb AI today, as they take down two of the enemy fighters with ease, leaving just some P21 Vandals to buzz them but cause no problems. I beam up my marines, then order the fighters to return to the carrier. The enemy base is a total mess, and I'm sure my CO would be pleased with the result. I watched the whole thing through Tacops, and I just can't believe how cool this game is. It just gets better and better. I wish I had some screenshots to show you, but frankly, I had my jaw on the floor the whole time, and the adrenaline that was pumping (especially waiting for the air support to turn up) meant that I was too engrossed in the game's experience to take them. Awesome!
  4. I always use TimeAndDate.com.
  5. I have just read, that sadly, after many fantastic adventures, NASA's Deep Space 1 probe has been finally turned off. When we are constantly seeing images of how awful human beings can be to each other, it is wise to take the effort to find the things that show us how fantastic the human race can be. Deep Space 1 represented the frontiers of human achievement, and has brought space exploration forward by at least ten years through the advanced technologies that it tested. If you don't know about this wonderful little probe, take some time now to read about its exploits, so that next time the media reports a bomb exploding, or people starving, you will be able to close your eyes and think of this tiny little spacecraft, and remind yourself that there are good things in the world as well. Regards, Smiley
  6. Looking forward to that VTOL landing ability. I've been trying to land by switching my engines off......
  7. [story Mode On] Commander Card groaned. The message had come through from HQ that he was to pose for some promotional pictures for a Droidan Military recruitment campaign. "Why me?", he thought as he strapped himself into his EVA suit. He stepped through the airlock and rotated his jetpack to face himself towards the flight deck. What he saw was the Royal Cheriton speeding away from him at cruising speed, cheerfully heading for an impact with the planet. Instantly, he realised what he had done. He had forgotten to give his crew any instructions on what to do while he was away. His AI brain calmly switched into problem solving mode, and he brought up his wrist-sized TACOPS computer, then ordered the Royal Cheriton to fly towards himself. In the far distance, he saw the kilometre long craft turn in space like a darting salmon and start the short cruise back towards himself. "Excellent!", he thought, as the distance between himself and the carrier shortened, then shortened some more, then got very short. Unfortunately, instead of the enormous craft slowing down to allow him to enter back through the airlock, it did not slow down. Instead, it simply smacked him in the face in a rather terminal way. The Droidan military was now slightly more intelligent collectively. [story Mode Off] All you guys who like to run down space marines in your carriers - I recommend trying it from the other side of the equation! You might not be so heartless in future!
  8. Here's a few - will do dome more some time: Screen Shots
  9. Not sure about playing the game, but it's a sure sign that you've been on the forums too much when you go to the Active Topic's page and you have four out of the top five entries!
  10. quote:Originally posted by aramike: So you're saying the child has greater well-being by being dead than alive? I'm not that what I wrote said that, but here goes... You are drawing the line of well-being at "being alive". A similar argument is used to oppose euthaniasia, so please forgive a little analogy. Now, we can't ask unborn foeti whether they want to live as a badly handicapped person, or in a slum ghetto with a drug-addict prostitute for a mother. But we can ask grown adults whether, in the event that some circumstances left them in a permanent vegatitive state, or with a illness so debilitating that their life would be a constant burden on their loved ones, whether they believe they would rather be killed in a humane manner. Personally, I would never want to be in the state where I am nothing but a useless lump of meat being kept alive for no reason. Turn me off, please. But that's my choice. You might feel differently. Now, drawing my rather wonky parallel with the topic, imagine we were able to talk to an unborn foetus and ask "When you are born, you are going to be unable to control movement, unable to express yourself in any meaningful way, depend entirely on other people that you love for your existence. You have the option of carrying this through, or you can die now. Which is it to be?" Now the foetus might answer one way or the other, but the point is that it would be their choice, not ours. The unborn baby has no facility to make that choice. We have no right to. The only other person with a stake in the whole thing is the mother, so why not let it be solely her decision? Given that she would be the largest influence in the childs life, so its sense of social responsiblity would be largely modelled on her own, it is not unreasonable to assume that the child, when fully grown, would have the same response as its mother does now. So let her make the decision on behalf of the baby, free from the imposition of our own personal views. My definition of "well-being" is rather fuzzily around the point where someone wants to live more than they want to stop living. Which is subjective and inidividual, strengthening my argument above. quote:So, then after birth a parent should be allowed to "abort" her child for well-being purposes as well... Murder? No. Put up for adoption? If it is in the best interests of the mother and child, why not? quote:No dice. Read the thread on paper/board vs. computer games then! Smiley [ 12-11-2001: Message edited by: SmileyMan ]
  11. quote:Originally posted by $iLk: Smiley, I don't think he's saying to make her keep the child, but to actually have it and give it up to those hundreds of thousands of couples who are unable but willing to have a child of their own. Before we carry on, I ought to point out that I am very pro adoption personally, but I am also very liberal with a small "l" and think that adults should be treated as such, and allowed to make choices in matters where, frankly, it's nobody elses business. And in case you doubt my (admittedly out-of-the-blue!) statement that I am pro-adoption, my wife is an adoptee, and when I was younger, my girlfriend became pregnant, carried the child (a little girl) and put her up for adoption, throughout which I supported her. So somehere out there is an 11-year old girl who is half me, and the fact that she might come and find me one day totally freaks me out. Also, and this especially applies to teenage pregnancies, many are carried to term with the intent of adoption, but the girl sees a little baby in their arms that has been part of them for nine months, and suddenly doesn't want to give them up. [ 12-11-2001: Message edited by: SmileyMan ]
  12. quote:Originally posted by aramike: You mean, you DON'T see the difference in someone getting pregnant as a result of their OWN actions as opposed to being a result of something they could not control? ... I can see the difference, I just don't think that the conditions of the conception are relevant to the future wellbeing of the mother and child quote:... Please, that is the most absurd thing I've ever read. Hyperbole - gotta love it! Examining your argument from another viewpoint, this hypothetical woman has proved to be irresponsible. Therefore make her keep the child because what society needs is a large number of irresponsible parents who don't want their children. Making her have the child will not make her love it. We have laws to protect against that? Well, yes and no - we have laws that might get around to protecting the child if the lovelessness becomes extreme. This hypothetical woman is so depressed at having this child that she did not want, that one night she gets roaring drunk and kills herself and the child in a fit of depression. Who did you help? Smiley [ 12-11-2001: Message edited by: SmileyMan ]
  13. quote:Originally posted by aramike: Now, I do believe that abortion should be an option for victims of rape or if there is danger to the mother. So you believe that she can have an abortion if her pregnancy meets your criteria for an unacceptable pregnancy, yet she is incapable of having her own opinion on what those criteria are? In my country, elective abortions are available up to a certain point in the pregnancy, and I doubt that anyone casually thinks "Whoops, pregnant again! Better schedule another abortion." So if the choice is already a moral nightmare that is really only one person's to make, why bother introducing laws to make it more complicated? Back on topic, the French ruling is interesting. If the doctor did not offer the mother abortion when it was a legal option open to her, then was he negligent? If so, was he negligent in his care of the child or the mother? This ruling says that he was negligent in the care of the child, which implies that an unborn child is legally a person, which further implies that abortion is possibly murder, which questions that legality of the abortion law in France, which then cyclicly affects this case all over again. To quote my physics professor "Whenever you reach a paradox, you've proved something. All you need to then is find out which element of the paradox is fundamentaly wrong." Note that this is intended to be ironically understated. I think, from a legal standpoint, the judgement is wrong, because if an abortion law exists, then the doctor has no duty of care towards the unborn child. But then the law in most western countries has degenerated into "how good a lawyer can you afford?" anyway. It's minus five here tonight, so keep the anti-abortion flames coming - they're most welcome! Smiley
  14. quote:Originally posted by $iLk: It would be just like that book about the Jew who wanted to cut off a pound of flesh as payment from a guy... the something merchant... The book/play is "The Merchant Of Venice" by one William Shakespeare, and the Jew's name is Shylock. A woman recently jumped off a bridge with her Down's Syndrome child, because she couldn't cope any more. I think that women should be given the choice, and that they shouldn't be pilloried for whichever choice they make. If the choice is made to brind a disabled child into the world, then of course as much support should be given to that mother and child as possible. There are four reasons a woman might want to terminate the pregnancy of a disabled foetus: 1) The woman may not want a child, whether disabled or not. Abortions happen for the sake of careers or lifestyle choices all the time. The issue here is the standard "pro life/pro choice" argument. 2) The woman may feel unable to bring up a disabled child due to socioeconomic reasons. Such a child is highly unlikely to be adopted, and if unwanted by the mother, well, what's the point? 3) The woman may wish to terminate the pregnancy because they fell it is morally irresponsible to bring a disabled child into the world. For every diabled person who is able to say "I was born disabled and my life is OK" there is probably at least one child born who is so severely disabled that they live a few days, weeks or months in utter agony and despair. If it could be guaranteed that the disabled child would live a long and fulfilling life, then doubtless many of the people having these abortions would make a different choice, but it can't be. 4) Pregnancy may be potentially very dangerous for the mother. Should she be forced to risk her life for the sake of an unborn baby, whether the child is disabled or not? To insist that pregnancies are carried to term is also, by definition, insisiting that pregnant women become mothers. This is the main argument behind the Pro Choice movement. To allow women to have abortions is, if you accept that unborn children are alive, allowing murder. This is the main argument of the Pro Life movement. I would guess that most people would have a different Pro Choice/Life view on each of the four "reasons" given above, probably with the easiest to "sanction" being the fourth (danger to the mother), moving to the hardest to "sanction" being the first (not wanting a baby by personal choice). For what it's worth, I'm Pro Choice in all four cases. My reasoning behind this view is that no-one should be forced to be a parent, because a parent who doesn't want to be one is probably not going to be a very good one, and at the end of the day, this is a very important point for the unborn child - the quality of the parenting they will recieve. Regards, Smiley
  15. 3 days to go and Battlecruiser Millennium will beat Black and White for "longest single stay in ROM drive" of any game ever. I can't see me taking it out for at least another week. Thanks SC for such a superb game. One thing though - where are us newsgroup lurkers going to find a decent flamewar any more?
  16. Not trying to offend, Mister $ilk, just hanging out a different point of view. And I did read your post very carefully. I don't think you can have "grades" of un/civilised when it comes to terrorists. Killing/terrorising other people, hiding behind a religious or political motive to justify the killings, is just plain wrong. So what if one group behaves in one way, and another in a different way. The arguments that these people use never stand up to much scrutiny, but they don't need to, because mob rule, peer pressure, and animal instincts take over very quickly. Nazi Germany was effectively what happened when a group that we would now call terrorists gained enough critical mass to obtain government. People joined the Nazi Party because the alternative was horrific. I doubt many people actually believed that killing Jews would end their particular miseries. But what they did believe in was self-preservation. A very rough analogy can therefore be drawn with Afghanistan under the Taleban. I doubt that the people who had previously worked in a relatively modern country which allowed women in jeans and miniskirts to work and go to university, all of a sudden said "What was I thinking? The sight of even the tiniest part of a woman's body is so provocative that they must be covered from head to foot lest I feel lustful thoughts". But when someone points a gun at you, or your family, and tells you to think that way, then only the very strongest people will make their stand. they think "It'll blow over soon and we can get back to normal". But it didn't blow over in Germany, or in Afghanistan, and all of a sudden it becomes accepted. The point I am trying to get across (very badly, I admit) is that since all terrorists are effectively the same, ie bullying mobs, then it makes no sense to differentiate between them in terms of civilisation. Cheers, Smiley
  17. quote:Originally posted by Cmdr Nova: It's all good, then. Also, I suggest you read one of the great RP classics, Preemptive Strike. It's a story about a secret attack on the Droidan homeworld. You won't be disappointed. Phew - just printed it out. That's like 300-odd pages, baby! And since I used the frankly useless IE, it's all in White on black. Mmm-mmm, that printer's sure hungry for toner now! Maybe one of the ways I could show my committment to RPing Droidans would be to distill the thing into a novella form for other people to read. Have to see about that. Good thing its not my printer. Anyway, gonna read it on the train home.
  18. quote:Originally posted by Cmdr Nova: The little bit about them joining up against the Gammulans with the Syrions basically nulls out any of that "Droidan vs. Syrion" stuff you came up with. That much I do know. I deliberately tried to avoid implying that there was any conflict between the Droidan and Syrion races, because I have read the history and the appendix and I would never contradict any official sources or established precedent. My intention was to flesh out a little how individual Droidans might feel towards the Syrions, to make RP more fulfilling. None of the three beliefs that I put down preclude the races helping each other, there are many examples in Earth history of nations helping each other (especially versus a common enemy) when the citizens of those nations held views of each other similar to those I invented. So I can play a Droidan who thinks of the Syrions as the "also-rans" in the quest to become the ultimate being, but who would run to the aid of the Syrion people because: [*]Those were my orders (quite important, I think you agree) [*]I felt sorry for them [*]An incursion into Syrion space explicitly threatens my own homeworlds and because I feel they (and, in fact, all other races) are "lower" than me, it is not worth my while to pre-emptively strike them. I hope you find the above reasonable, and in keeping with all the available material. If not, tell me why. Regards Smiley
  19. From Merriam-Webster Main Entry: civilized Function: adjective Date: 1611 : characteristic of a state of civilization ; especially : characterized by taste, refinement, or restraint Now I consider myself to be a civilised person. I can't ever imagine myself caring enough about anything to want to kill someone else for it. Especially someone I don't know. For instance: (IRA View) You live in a particular street. Therefore I am justified in shooting your children on the doorstep in front of you. (Al'Quaeda View) You are American. Therefore I am justified in flying an airliner full of people into your office block. Both of the above views are the distillation of the views of these people into their real-world implications. They try and justify them by dressing them up in distorted histories, but the simple fact is that these people kill other people because it is easier than thinking. Back to the dictionary: "characterised by taste, refinement or restraint". Well, I don't think any of those three adjectives apply to any form of killing. And especially not to terrorist actions. So no terrorist organistion is civilised in any way. Man I hope the registration DB for this site is secure!
  20. quote:Originally posted by $iLk: I believe the IRA are somewhat more civilized. Have a look at BBC News Online - The Omagh Bomb and see if it looks "civilised" to you.
  21. quote:Originally posted by Badgerius: [QB]The Droidans are a race of robots, which seem to have been created by the Syrions. It's all very mysterious. Maybe you worship the Syrions as gods. Maybe you serve them as slaves. Maybe they are "The Creator"[QB] Interesting that you should see it that way. I thought that perhaps the way the history of the two races had played was that the Droidans were the Syrions who went all the way with the mechanical enhancements. Suffice so say that any such split happened too far in the past for records to be clear. So now we have the basis of Droidan belief-systems. There are the Creationists, who believe we were created by the Syrions as slaves and that we escaped/earned our freedom. Then there are the Supremacists, who believe that the Syrions are an inferior race who were too afraid to walk the path to mechanical perfection. Finally, we have the minority AntiSyrions, who believe that we are totally separate races who happen to share similar features and location in space. All I need now is another Droidan to RP some of the internal politics with! Punch [ 12-03-2001: Message edited by: SmileyMan ]
  22. Nightstar Heavy Carrier, without a doubt. It just looks so cool, plus you get the Shuttle Mk IIIs which look cool as well. And it gets the coolest name. Can't lose with a Nightstar.
  23. quote:Originally posted by Cmdr Nova: To my knowledge, you're going to be the first person to RP as a Droidan ever. You'll be setting the standards for the future. Good luck. Sounds like a good way to upset the SC then! Still, I've checked out the race spec, and it seems fairly simple. Help the Syrions, Hate the Gammulans, attack anyone trespassing in Droidan sectors, never leave the Syrion quadrant. That much is clear. Now, the only named Droidan is Mega Byte, so I'm going with the premise that this is perhaps some strange artifact of whatever translation software is used to process Droidan into English, i.e. Droidan names translate to 1000-year-old technology terms. There is ample scope for plenty of names from this selection, for instance the famous Droidan heroes Ram Bus, Hard Drive, See'ar Tee and Cee'Pee Yu. Not to forget the infamous Droidan gigolo Floppy Disk! From this rich heritage, I have been named Punch Card, and I hope to emulate the exploits of my esteemed Nanotechnology Genetic Algorithm Personality Randomiser Y-Chromosome Subroutine Donator (that's father in your terms) Peecee'Emcee'Eye'Ay Card. For all those wishing to impinge on the Droidan systems, you will receive a warm welcome. A very warm welcome in fact! Shortly followed by a very cold goodbye...... Anyone got any ideas as the the artificial life form personality to head for, from sci-fi examples? For instance, Data, HAL, Cybermen (no mining gold then!), Daleks, C3P0, Robbie......any others?
  24. Is there any information of the Droidan race that would help me RP better? For instance, names - what is a typical Droidan name? Is it Terran, or a number (Cmdr 7 of 9 ) or what? Also, now that BCM is out and there are (hopefully) hundreds more players out there, what are the plans for the alien military fleets? At the moment, I play Droidan Military Commander, and I hope I will be able to play that in BCO. Is there anyone else who plays Droidan? Or should I give up now...... Regards, Smiley
  25. Badgerius - thanks for the offer. Unfortunately, I am rather taken with the idea of playing a non-Terran race, since this is a fantasy after all. At the moment I am playing Droidan Military. I don't think there is anything even close to an organised fleet for me. But I have two systems to protect, and there seems to be a lot of gauntlets being thrown at my feet. Out of interest, are there any guidelines written down for creating correctly formatted BattleCruiser Universe signatures. I've had a go below..... And yes, I did search the board, and there appear to be lots of messages saying "search the board!" on this topic. [ 11-29-2001: Message edited by: SmileyMan ]
  • Create New...