Menchise

quote: First off, I've got to say that I'm enjoying this debate/discussion/blah. So am I. quote: First, the SDI is not flawed. Sure, while a "suitcase" bomb is probably more likely than a ballistic missile, if we didn't have to worry about ballistic missiles, we could cut our arsenal down as well as sending a message to future nuclear powers. That message is a peaceful one. I'd rather that they send the message that if you attack us, you will be unsuccessful rather than if you attack us we will wipe you off the face of the earth. Somehow, I think MAD is a more effective deterrent to nuclear attack than SDI could ever be. There is always a way around an anti-missile system. There is no way around Mutally Assured Destruction. Telling other nuclear powers that they no longer have power is a very poor message of peace. It would only anger them, and motivate them to either build their own SDI facilities, or develop a new weapon that can punch through them. quote: Let's not give up on fusion yet. It is getting closer and closer to reality. Fusion power has nearly boundless possibilities once harnessed. Let's not give up on solar power either. Ground based solar technology is also improving and getting closer and closer to full reliability. Solar panels built a year ago can generate more than four times the energy capable of solar panels built eight years ago. With the current advances being researched and developed, the 'cloud barrier' will soon be broken, and more energy will be gathered from indirect sunlight and other elements such as Ultra Violet Rays.

quote: Theres no fleet flaming going on. What you see here is cheerful banter of the sort that all of us who have been part of this community for the last few years expect. You havent seen any outright derogitory remarks made by anyone with fleet association, more like the sort of tongue in cheek mud slinging that you would see in any arena. Orion and the Insurgency have a special relationship and we conduct our business in this manner. Thats why we are the two most popular fleets. We have history together, and if you have been paying attention to the boards these last few months (Years?) you'd understand that. OK. As long as the banter remains cheerful I'm happy. quote: Menchise: it is the accepted practice to put items you are RPing in some sort of form, usually /rp /rp off or varients of that. thing placed outside of rp tags can be mistaken as your post was. Thanks, Epsilon. /rp Understood, Commander /rp quote: Oh, and dont fall for the Insurgent & Orion brag-o-rama recruitment bid that they got the only female commanders, its a scam I tell ya (j/k) They have female commanders?! Wow! I look forward to never meeting them in person. (another j/k). By the way, Tac, I've been away from the forum for a long time. What happened to SDF? Also, didn't Orion used to have a different fleet leader?

quote: Uhm, this is RP, man. If you want it to be realistic in the area of discipline, etc., then you're looking in the wrong place. I mean, how can someone SHOP for the fleet they want to join? You said that you would avoid a certain fleet's recruitment office. The point is, there isn't a fleet here that CARES. A civilian/potential recruit isn't going to dictate policy using THEMSELVES as the "threat". That discipline speech was also RP. I'm just asking that the fleets don't flame amongst themselves in this thread. The so-called 'threat' of not applying for those fleets that continue to flame was not an attempt to dictate policy. That was me saying that I didn't set up this topic to expand the 'flaming front'. I set up this topic to help me decide whether I'm going to apply for membership in a fleet or not by asking questions about specific issues that are not covered in FAQs or websites. I have seen flamefests take over threads before, so I'm trying to discourage them.

quote: Be forewarned: no fleet personnel (esp. fleet commander) is going to follow the 'orders' of a RECRUIT. Fleets aren't here to entertain recruits, and fleet commanders can just as easily reject you as they can accept you. I'm aware of the need for recruits to follow fleet orders, but I'm not a recruit (at least not yet). Just a curious civilian examining the pros and cons and describing what I'm looking for. quote: I have no problem with kicking cavalier (read: useless) commanders, and neither does any other fleet commander. So, to conclude, if you want to join a fleet, you ASK for acceptance - you don't go off and TELL us what we MUST do. Fleets are private, and if you aren't wanted, you aren't getting in. I wasn't trying to seize power or anything like that. At the very beginning of this thread I clearly pointed out that I only wanted descriptions of the fleets and why you think I might like being a part of them. I also pointed out that I wanted NO silly boasting. I did this for a reason, which I'll explain in the next paragraph. I don't mind flamefests in an RPG forum (I'm sure they're lots of fun), but they don't belong in this thread. I'm not expecting acceptance (that's for the fleet commander to decide), but I do expect a military fleet to have the discipline to demonstrate their power and abilities wisely. Flamefests in front of civilians, especially civilians who are thinking about applying for membership, shows a lack of discipline in the fleet. I'm looking for a fleet that is aggressive on the battlefield and respectful off the battlefield, a fleet that has power and the discipline to use it wisely. Any fleet that doesn't have those qualities will have no need to reject me because I will not ask for their acceptance. I'm going to go take another look at the websites now. [ 05-25-2001: Message edited by: Menchise ]

quote: LOL! Guys, this is an OBVIOUS joke. There's no one suing ANYONE for 23 BILLION dollars. Another statement I agree with. 23 billion dollars is nearly twice the AGNP produced by the entire computer gaming industry! No lawyer would touch this with a 20 foot pole, let alone a judge. "This is an outrage!" said Johnny Cochrane. quote: That, and I'm considering suing Derek for my falling behind at work while reading up on BCM. You might have a case on that one. All those manuals, appendices, FAQs, previews, reviews, news. How does he manage to write and refer to so much and still have time to make a game in the first place? [ 05-25-2001: Message edited by: Menchise ]

OK, that saves me some time. I already had a copy of the results analysis page from emulators.com which I was going to use as evidence, but since that's one of the previously mentioned links, I can just move on to something else. I have a Pentium III 1GHz CPU, which includes the 256Kb L2 cache. According to all the evidence, my processor is even faster than a 1.7 Ghz Pentium 4! I think I'm going to hold on to the P3 for a while. At the moment, it still exceeds recommended specs, and that's more than enough for me.

Well, I've heard from Orion, Wraith, and ISS. Now I would like to hear from Spectre fleet, specifically about why the Insurgents attack GALCOM and Earthcom (your opinions, not what the FAQs or manuals say), and the obligations of a newbie Insurgent. After that, I'll decide whether I will join an alliance or stay indie and start a non-military career. One more thing: no more bickering between the fleets in this thread. The commanders here are representatives of their fleets and alliances, and I prefer civil behaviour in this neutral place. If a commander ignores this warning and continues the unnecessary posturing, I'm taking note of his or her fleet and plan on avoiding its recruitment office. [ 05-24-2001: Message edited by: Menchise ]

I'm going to open a new topic soon on why the Pentium 4 should be avoided. Stay tuned. You'll be surprised by the stupid mistakes that Intel made with this chip.

quote: During times of heavy sunshine, our home produces enough electricity to power itself, and any surplus goes into the system. However, during nighttime and overcast days, we use the electric company to power our home. We receive incentives for producing slightly more electricity during sunny days, but we STILL pay an electric bill. OK. So instead of eliminating all consumption of non-renewable sources of electricity, it's reduced by half. It still sounds good to me. I'll bet it's a good financial investment too. quote: do you know ANYTHING about current nuclear technology? I know a few things about nuclear fission, but that's it. I would like to read your descriptions about the current technology and failsafes. quote: Who says we can use those resources effectively and efficiently? Who says we can't? Be more specific. quote: And we are moving away from petroleum powered vehicles, slowly but surely. I have seen no evidence of such a change. In fact, I have read more evidence stating that significant movements away from Petroleum have been crushed by powerful private interests that would lose a lot from this change. Epsilon 5's reference to the corruption of Hydro-Quebec is just one small example. Here is another one for you: A man in Australia invented a new type of engine for automobiles that used water as fuel (even salt water was usable). The invention was never released for production thanks to the efforts of oil producers. That was twenty years ago! We have engine designs that run on Water, Ethyl Alcohol, Coconut Oil, even body waste! Some of these designs have been around for decades. If there was any REAL effort to move away from Petroleum, it would have been done already.

quote: They get incentives, but ask anyone of them - it isn't much. Solar panels don't totally power the home, either. Why else would they still be connected to the grid? They're not incentives, they're transactions. These people are being paid for the surplus electicity they are generating. How can the homes not be totally powered when they are powering other homes as well? Whether the payments are small or not doesn't matter. The fact is that thanks to renewable energy sources, these homeowners are being paid by the electricity companies instead of the other way around. quote: I'm SURE that would pass off well on environmentalists. I'm sure they may have a few things to say about the issue that are worth considering. However, just like the environmentalists, I'm more concerned about pulling humanity out of the grave that it's digging for itself. The consumption of fossil fuels is literally poisoning the air we breathe. The holes in the ozone layer have led to a sharp increase in the cases of skin cancer. Deforestation is depriving our planet of its biggest source of oxygen. I could go on and on but I don't think it's necessary. quote: I mean not in more than 50 years. And, technology gets SAFER, not vice versa. What, should be not have skyscrapers either, because of the possibility of earthquakes? Or, should we make them as earthquake-proof as possible? I mean, a skyscraper is more at risk than a nuclear powerplant. When a skyscraper goes down, it doesn't take half a city down with it. quote: Sure, but if the same ship was built today, we would have the technology to know that it was indeed sinkable. Just as we have the technology to know what an uncontrolled nuclear chain reaction can do. quote: Who said anything about progress becoming complacent? Progress isn't just moving to the sources of energy that YOU believe is necessary. Progress can be making the energy sources we have safe. Why waste time reducing the pollution levels of current energy sources by token numbers when you can use a renewable energy source that barely pollutes at all? The fact that we are still using Petroleum in our motor vehicles when we know what Carbon Monoxide does to haemoglobin is nothing more than fatal complacency.

Here is some constructive whining. I think the option to defect or change careers would be great for the Battlecruiser universe, because it provides a whole new dimension for our player characters to evolve in. Here are some examples: 1. GALCOM commander is ordered to appear before a court-martial for various offences. a) If the commander does not show up after a long period of time, his or her caste designation changes from Military to Raider, because now that commander is commandeering GALCOM property without the permission of GALCOM. In effect, that ship is now stolen. If the commander shows up, is found guilty and dishonourably discharged, he or she probably would not want to be part of GALCOM or Earthcom anymore. In either case, that commander may want to become an Insurgent later on. 2. An Undesignated player, such as a Trader, Explorer, or Paramedic, is attacked by a Raider player. The Raider boards the other player's ship, steals supplies and kills the crew. It is logical that the victim may want to join the Police or the Military on a quest for vengeance. Without these changes, the dynamic universe would be less dynamic. Anyway, I have a few other things to mention. I would like to hear more from the Insurgent commanders about why you joined Spectre or one of the other fleets. I tried accessing mission statements and objectives at the Insurgent websites, but the specific pages I wanted to read had broken links (lucky me), and the History section of the manual only has a brief description of the Insurgents' motives. Finally, I have one more question about the Paramedic caste. Wouldn't Raiders still have something to gain from boarding these vessels despite the tough penalties?

I was actually describing my reply as childish, not your post. I'll just say a couple of things and then wait for the replies to my post about renewable energy (by the way, I generally agree with Sunanta, but I may post more on that later). Steve, oil tycoons do not have energy experience. They are the ones who sell the fuel to some of the people who have energy experience. Oil tycoons also tell just as many lies as politicians do (if not more).

In case anyone noticed the reply I wrote about Steven Schacher's reply to Korono's post, I decided to delete it. In retrospect, it was a bit childish. Charles, what does LYSAO mean? [ 05-23-2001: Message edited by: Menchise ]

I have a question that doesn't seem to be covered in the Fleet FAQ. Can I change to a different caste or fleet if I'm unhappy with the current one? [ 05-23-2001: Message edited by: Menchise ]

quote: I know about that, we are specialist, over here in Qu├®bec. When they build dams, they build reservoirs. Those reservoirs take A LOT of space. It destroy the nature and habitats around, and pollute the water with tree floating and stuff from the earth dissolving in the water. Also, some indian population have to be moved away, because they are there where there will be 200 feets of water. it gives you an idea. The dams are just one method of generating hydroelectricity. What about tidal power?

quote: The sun isn't a reliable producer of energy. solar plants can only produce a TINY amount of electricity when compared to more conventional methods, and they can only produce during half of the day (or less). Also, cloud cover could cause problems. That may have been true ten years ago, but the technology has been improving since then. In fact, homeowners with solar panels powering their houses receive money from electricity companies for generating a surplus in the grid. In other words, their solar panels are not only powering their homes, but other homes as well! This has been happening as far back as the early 90s. quote: Guess what: hydroelectric plants are on the environmentalist's sh*tlists too. I don't get it. Do you have information about why they're not accepted? quote: Not true. We may have deserts, but how do you propose getting that electricity to non-desert regions? Okay, the deserts are not the best example, but there are still many possibilities. Theoretically, a significant percentage of electricity going to the coastal cities could come from tidal power plants underwater (the technology has existed for over five years). I can just imagine all the California dudes getting their juice from the surf. quote: That argument of geographic considerations is unfounded because there are nuclear plants in ALL of the aforementioned regions. Further, not ONE of them has EVER experienced an accident due to earthquakes, tornados, etc. You mean not yet. Here is another interesting quote for you to consider. It was said by some guy in 1912: "The Titanic is unsinkable." He drowned the next day. As soon as progress becomes complacent in the face of nature's fury, disaster is bound to strike.

quote: Well since you are designated a UCV vessel, why don't u try becoming an indie instead? U Have more freedom to do what u want, roaming the galaxy, not taking orders from the fleets, and knowing the fact that u are truly in command. The possibilities r endless and u will enjoy being your own boss. This is what BCM is all about. Think about it. Hmmmm...I'm curious about the Paramedic caste. What are its capabilities in multiplayer? What ships are available in the caste? Before you start telling me to read the manual and appendixes, I have already done that and I barely understood what it said: "Having this caste in a class makes the life factor of personnel within the class increase at a high rate and their fatigue factor drops rapidly." What does that mean? What class?

I have an NVidia Riva TNT2 M64. Will I need to upgrade?

I have a new ship under construction, and I'm curious about the large number of fleets in the Battlecruiser universe. Although I registered in this forum two and a half years ago, I hadn't visited the forum in over a year till last month. I remember when there were no separate fleets in GALCOM, way back when the site was using Java applets for its buttons. I was here when Orion, ISS and Spectre were formed (I can't remember which one was first). Wasn't there another fleet around at the same time that isn't around anymore? I have SO much to catch up on. Could someone reply with a timeline of when the fleets were formed? Also, since I resigned my positions on my old ships (the GCV Grim Reaper and GCV TerraGuardian), I am now Undesignated. I have been looking into some of the fleets, but the information I have gathered is limited. This is what I know (if I made any mistakes, tell me): EarthCom is the military arm of the UFN, which aims to maintain law and order on the Terran homeworld, particularly in its campaign against the Insurgents. Home base is unknown. Prime Fleet is self-explanatory since I used to serve there. It's the heart of GalCom. Home base is GalCom HQ. ISS is a GalCom fleet that stands for In System Support, and focuses on the defense of Sol. Based in orbit around one of Saturn's moons. Spectre Fleet is the Insurgents' prime fleet. The Insurgents fight against EarthCom and GalCom over a variety of issues, namely the generous funding of the military, the restriction of information released to the public, and rumours of unethical practices in military research projects, especially the use of human test subjects in biological experiments. Home base is Sygan (I think). I would like some information about Orion and Wraith fleets, namely what makes them different from Prime Fleet. I would also like some information about how the other Insurgent fleets (Balor, Bishumen) are different from Spectre. I just want descriptions, no boasting! If any of the fleet members start writing about how their fleets are better, I'm going to avoid them entirely. [ 05-22-2001: Message edited by: Menchise ]

quote: Menchise? I'm still here. quote: Yes, the US will always have a measure of dependency, BUT, we can become LESS dependant by utilizing all resources. Sure, the wells may dry up at some point, but then again, that is a long way off ANY things are becoming more fuel efficient with hybrids and fuel cell cars here and on the horizon. You sound like since we will run out oil before the arabs do that we shouldn't even bother going after it, that's like saying, we are going to die anyway, let's just go kill ourselves. COME ON!!! we should go after that oil and need to go after that oil. We need Nuclear power and should go after it, we need the clean burning coal, which is low sulfur content by the way, not actually CLEAN burning coal, but cleaner burning coal, and therefore should be allowed to go get it. The point is that we are only utilizing the non-renewable resources. If we took all the time and money we spend on the production of oil, natural gas, and coal, and used it to proliferate the use of renewable energy sources, such as the sun, the tides, and ethyl alcohol (believe it or not ), there would be NO dependence at all! The key to this solution is examining the geography of your country, and developing methods of generating energy that adapt to these geographical factors. Norway is the best example of an independent and environmentally friendly producer of electricity: Over 85 percent of its homes are powered by hydroelectric plants. America has two oceans and a series of deserts. The possibilities are endless! Nuclear power plants are not a good idea in the context of America's geography. They're too dangerous on the west coast, because it's prone to earthquakes. They're too dangerous on the southeast, because it's prone to hurricanes. They're too dangerous in the central states, because they're prone to tornadoes. They're too dangerous in the New York area, because it's on top of another fault line.

I did some more browsing, and found out that Chris Roberts is no longer directing Freelancer's development. He quit the Lead Designer position in December after Microsoft acquired Digital Anvil. He is now the Creative Consultant. The new guy at the helm is Jorg Neumann (former Lead Designer of Loose Cannon). In an interview with GameSpot in December, Roberts said that most of the framework was already completed and that little would be changed significantly. I'm not sure.

I spoke too soon. The final Freelancer trailer (shown at E3 a few days ago) featured a lot of in-game footage, but none of it was from the view of the cockpit. It was mostly external views in space and transition animations on the planetside area. The cinematics are stunning, though.

Wow! There's a lot of them (I only have one of the trailers from last year). *Rubbing hands together excitedly* I sense inspiration ahead.

The majority of Star Trek scripts have always been poor. Most of them just recycled old cliches. The original series only had a few really good episodes out of the 78 that were written (or was it 79?). Here is a list of them with the writer's name in brackets: The Cage (Gene Roddenberry) Where No Man Has Gone Before (Samuel A. Peeples) Balance of Terror (Paul Schneider) The Managerie (Gene Roddenberry) Errand of Mercy (Gene L. Coon) Amok Time (Theodore Sturgeon) The Changeling (John Meredyth Lucas) City On The Edge Of Forever (Harlan Ellison) Ellison's was the best of them all. Star Trek: TNG had some good ones as well, but I can't remember all of their names. Here are the ones that I do remember: Encounter at Farpoint (Gene Roddenberry, DC Fontana) The Big Goodbye (Tracy Torme) Angel One (Patrick Barry) Coming Of Age (Sandy Fries) Symbiosis (Robert Lewin, Richard Manning, Hans Beimler) Conspiracy (Tracy Torme) Elementary, Dear Data (Brian Alan Lane) The Measure Of A Man (Melinda M. Snodgrass) The Dauphin (Scott Rubenstein, Leonard Mlodinow) Q Who? (Maurice Hurley) The Best of Both Worlds (Michael Piller) All Good Things...(Brannon Braga, Ronald D. Moore) I could write more lists, but then I would be here all day.