Page 2 of 2
Re: Cost of a Soldier versus a Deadboy
Posted: Mon Jul 18, 2011 7:02 pm
by Zer0 Kay
Shark_Force wrote:on a side note, if BTS is specifically noted as *not* being our world, how do you know our dimension is an SDC dimension anyways?
after all, it presumably is not the dimension of any of the palladium settings. that means there are no published rules for it. for all we know, our dimension could very well be an MDC dimension.
you get to make up arbitrary rules after the fact, i get to do that too.
you want people to answer your question in a given context, you give the context beforehand or you don't get to complain about the answers not being in the context you wanted.
and in any case, if they were to be sent to an SDC dimension, i personally would have to apply the penetration value rules. they wouldn't have MDC perhaps, but there would be very little that there weapons would be unable to damage, and their armor would be nearly untouchable unless it gets hit by something like a tank cannon. their equipment would still not be comparable at all.
I see so when you can't win you change gears to annoy. Good bye.
Re: Cost of a Soldier versus a Deadboy
Posted: Tue Jul 19, 2011 4:37 pm
by Nightmask
Seems like without the ability to agree on various factors like training costs and gear this isn't a question that can be answered effectively. Cost effective depends on what you're dealing with and what said item is used for. So you require something arbitrary where you can go 'this one is x percent cost effective based on this and that one is y percent'. So someone should lay out a set of objective factors that they're using so everyone else can either agree with them or offer other suggestions and examine each point to see which character is more effective in its environment.
Re: Cost of a Soldier versus a Deadboy
Posted: Tue Jul 19, 2011 7:47 pm
by Zer0 Kay
Kikkoman wrote:how can a modern soldier be more cost effective? He can't hurt anything and dies instantly to any megadamage weapon.
a cave man with a wooden club is possibly more cost effective than a US soldier, unless we're putting the price of his extinct animal pelt in modern terms or something...
Yeah, that deadboy can also destroy an m1a2 or whatever really fast while shrugging off direct hits, by the rules. RIFTS is a wacky sci fi setting, it's scaled more to D&D's "don't worry I'm lvl10, a catapult can't kill me" than anything approaching realistic.
I thought SDC into MDC only affected magical stuff, representing the magic rich Earth post rifts. If it affects materials then... that's just really weird, dumb even.
The only situation that a modern soldier could be more cost effective would be in their own time with the CS trooper brought back.
The nerfing of MDC to SDC is for game ballance and is attributed to the "You never know what a Rift is going to do to you." idea after all if a CS troop goes to the Nightspawn universe anything non-organic is destroyed. I'd choose MDC to SDC over just gone.
Re: Cost of a Soldier versus a Deadboy
Posted: Fri Aug 05, 2011 1:40 pm
by Zer0 Kay
hungry_hippo wrote:Who is this great "BLACK MARKET" that everyone is talking about? The black market should be represented as more of an idea than an actual entity. If you were selling something ILLEGALLY, then you would be selling black market products. As far as the cost of equipment, the CS owns most/all of the factories that make armor and weapons for them. Anything that is CS equipment but is not property of the CS would be considered contraband and therefore would cost more to sell, trade, smuggle. On a side note, money is not important in a post apocalypse environment (where people scrounge for scraps of food, and a warm box) unless you are IN the coalition states or another society that trades in the same currency. Use the "Cost" of items as more of a guideline for the worth of something. If I'm starving and you give me the choice of a dollar or the heel off of a moldy loaf of bread, I'm going to take the bread because the currency is just something to BURN.
That is the real Black Market but when you actually have a group refering to themselves as the black market... just like in Anchorage, AK there is a store called the Black Market. So in Rifts and in Anchorage, AK Black Market could be refering to illegal trade or an actual entity... but in Rifts both the entity and the market are illegal. Now only a foolish group would actually call out what their illegal activity is and they should refer to themselves as some company name, preferably as what ever front they have set up as their legal store front. So actually saying I'm going to the black market should be incorrect of course there may be an issue of people still refering to shops they know sell illegal goods or even an outdoor meeting place where they purchase the items as "THE BLACK MARKET."
Re: Cost of a Soldier versus a Deadboy
Posted: Fri Aug 05, 2011 2:03 pm
by Killer Cyborg
Zer0 Kay wrote:hungry_hippo wrote:Who is this great "BLACK MARKET" that everyone is talking about? The black market should be represented as more of an idea than an actual entity. If you were selling something ILLEGALLY, then you would be selling black market products. As far as the cost of equipment, the CS owns most/all of the factories that make armor and weapons for them. Anything that is CS equipment but is not property of the CS would be considered contraband and therefore would cost more to sell, trade, smuggle. On a side note, money is not important in a post apocalypse environment (where people scrounge for scraps of food, and a warm box) unless you are IN the coalition states or another society that trades in the same currency. Use the "Cost" of items as more of a guideline for the worth of something. If I'm starving and you give me the choice of a dollar or the heel off of a moldy loaf of bread, I'm going to take the bread because the currency is just something to BURN.
That is the real Black Market but when you actually have a group refering to themselves as the black market... just like in Anchorage, AK there is a store called the Black Market. So in Rifts and in Anchorage, AK Black Market could be refering to illegal trade or an actual entity... but in Rifts both the entity and the market are illegal. Now only a foolish group would actually call out what their illegal activity is and they should refer to themselves as some company name, preferably as what ever front they have set up as their legal store front. So actually saying I'm going to the black market should be incorrect of course there may be an issue of people still refering to shops they know sell illegal goods or even an outdoor meeting place where they purchase the items as "THE BLACK MARKET."
\
Confused?
You won't be, after the next episode of
Rifts!
Re: Cost of a Soldier versus a Deadboy
Posted: Sat Aug 06, 2011 3:12 am
by Zer0 Kay
Killer Cyborg wrote:Zer0 Kay wrote:hungry_hippo wrote:Who is this great "BLACK MARKET" that everyone is talking about? The black market should be represented as more of an idea than an actual entity. If you were selling something ILLEGALLY, then you would be selling black market products. As far as the cost of equipment, the CS owns most/all of the factories that make armor and weapons for them. Anything that is CS equipment but is not property of the CS would be considered contraband and therefore would cost more to sell, trade, smuggle. On a side note, money is not important in a post apocalypse environment (where people scrounge for scraps of food, and a warm box) unless you are IN the coalition states or another society that trades in the same currency. Use the "Cost" of items as more of a guideline for the worth of something. If I'm starving and you give me the choice of a dollar or the heel off of a moldy loaf of bread, I'm going to take the bread because the currency is just something to BURN.
That is the real Black Market but when you actually have a group refering to themselves as the black market... just like in Anchorage, AK there is a store called the Black Market. So in Rifts and in Anchorage, AK Black Market could be refering to illegal trade or an actual entity... but in Rifts both the entity and the market are illegal. Now only a foolish group would actually call out what their illegal activity is and they should refer to themselves as some company name, preferably as what ever front they have set up as their legal store front. So actually saying I'm going to the black market should be incorrect of course there may be an issue of people still refering to shops they know sell illegal goods or even an outdoor meeting place where they purchase the items as "THE BLACK MARKET."
\
Confused?
You won't be, after the next episode of
Rifts!
Am I confused... no. Or are you saying I'm confusing? Wait now I am confused... I guess I'll have to see the next episode.
Hey is that line in your best Jim Lee impression?