ATL-7 modified

[Hawk258]

list books and pages for
NG "Not being able to reverse engineer CS tech" (can't... if it's a choice not to that is "won't" 2 different things)
As well as where it states The ATL-7 cannot be connected to an external power supply.

Also I am not arguing cannon. I am arguing common examples.

[dreicunan]

@Eliakon: It is actually Rifter 24 page 18, and it is does make the ATL-7 one of, what, 2 or 3 energy weapons that can't fire indefinitely off of a nuclear power supply.

Good memory, regardless, as I didn't recall ever seeing that before.

[eliakon]

list books and pages for
NG "Not being able to reverse engineer CS tech" (can't... if it's a choice not to that is "won't" 2 different things)
As well as where it states The ATL-7 cannot be connected to an external power supply.

Also I am not arguing cannon. I am arguing common examples.

I already did that.
The spoilers contain all the context to the discussion.
But to repost...

Spoiler:

You are correct but again Nero and the New Navy have the capability to operate globally.

<snip>

And honestly rockets aren't exactly difficult to deal with. I believe (checking) there are multiple sources of rockets in rifts.

Not THESE rockets specifically, though. This thing uses a different ammo than anything else I'm aware of.

It is not stated that it isn't an item they don't sell or trade unlike other equipment in their control. Like the Semper Fi PA.

Additionally since the ammo sizes are not stated I would rule other rockets could be used WITH the limitations of the ammo in question.

No lazer targeting and the listed damage of the rocket. As most are "conventional" weapons were based on a NATO standard. I don't imagine making the correct sized rocket Is much of an issue for Iron heart or bandito arms.

We know canonically that of them Northern Gun at least has the needed plans actually. And since NG makes most of the missiles that the black market sales (according to NG1)...
The question is if they are bothering to ramp up a factory to produce rocket propelled grenades (not any other kind of rocket or missile, they will need to be specific RPGs, which are not used by or in any other weapon)
It is a fairly niche market and unless someone is buying a few hundred thousand of them it just isn't worth their time.

And my point is the CR1, WI-23, and LAW3 is an example of "evolution of weapons"

As with everything else things in books are improved. And the ATL-7 is one such item that should be.

That does not follow.
Just because some things have improved does not support the claim that everything else should improve as well.

As I believe that the ATL-7 was the basis for NG's NG-x16 lazer cannon. Add in what is being done with solar charging and kinetic charging (laser bows) and honestly there is many ways to feed the pig.

I would just like to point out that places like Northern Gun are unable to reverse engineer CS gear with much precision. The idea that someone like that can reverse engineer a top notch golden age item.
Then figure out how it was designed (the physics of it, the mechanics that went into the design... all the back work that led to the specific design and why it was done the way it was done)
Then figure out how to improve it so that they get a better result than what the best highly paid minds of the Golden Age could get with their AI computers aiding their vast staffs of expertly trained (and genetically engineered for intelligence) scientists. With out spending trillions of credits over decades seems...unlikely.
And they have one of the better R&D programs on Rifts Earth!

Seriously the size of R&D programs is mind boggling. And the nations of Rifts Earth just don't have the population to throw at it. The US has something like 153,000 Electrical Engineers (what we call that, not the Palladium "I have a skill")...that is a tenth the entire population of Northern Gun and Ishpeming. Combined.
Don't get me started on "computer programmers" or "materials engineers" or any other specialty..
Scope and scale people. Scope and scale.
Remember that the entire population of Rifts North America is, if I recall correctly, less than that of Callifornia.
Meaning that you could almost, not quite, but almost support a tech group the size of Silicon Valley... if you used all of North America as your population base!

Spoiler:

1: "mass production" in rifts also follows your population argument.

I am not sure I understand you comment here?
Because mass production does not require giant populations...

2: I didn't say "everything" I am talking in regards to the ATL-7.
(But most everything already has been upgraded in one respect or another. (There are many variations of many types of tech that are functionally similar.)

The argument still stands. The justification for the increase is "this should get an increase because everything else is too"

3: quality of engineers is more important than quantity of engineers.

Which is again a problem.
Which is more likely to provide better engineers
Thousands of competing, collages in a peaceful and open society with free access to publicly funded education, universal literacy, AI educational support, on demand educational databases, world wide sharing of information can select from pools of millions of top notch candidates many of whom are genetically engineered for intelligence...
or tiny balkanized states who have to train each generation from scratch, have to rediscover everything themselves as there is no sharing, have to do all their research and teaching themselves, can't outsource anything and are pulling from population pools in hundreds (if they are really lucky they might get as many as a thousand in a ludicrously good year) of qualified candidates, a pool that is the same pool that they must draw from for their administration, politician, medical staff, military officers, police detectives and literally every other trained and expert field! ...

4: list books and pages for
NG "Not being able to reverse engineer CS tech" (can't... if it's a choice not to that is "won't" 2 different things)

The entire reverse engineering section (NG 1 pg 16) talks about how difficult it is to reverse engineer technology. That even with the exact same tech base (pre rifts US military) and decades of work... the best they could do was gain some "insights" from the SAMAS for their Red Hawk suit!
That suggests that one of the top R&D facilities on the planet has trouble reverse engineering technology, technology that they already have most of the information on mind you! So how exactly are they (or anyone else) going to pull off this amazing ATL-7 job? which is not just a knock off (which are almost invariably worse) But a categorical improvement in every way, over what the Golden Age weapons teams were able to come up with?
And how long did they take to do it?

As well as where it states The ATL-7 cannot be connected to an external power supply.

Rifter 25 page 92 the official Q&A article.
And yes, the Q&A is official, the entire series of Q&A was explicitly stated to be official while it was run.
The answer may not make sense, it may be something that is likely to be Rule Zeroed... but it is the canon.

EDIT: My mistake it should be Rifter 24 page 18 the official Q & A. Thank you Dreicunan for bringing it to my attention

Spoiler:

Also as a side note rockets, and missile tech is fairly interchangeable and most of it comes down to sizing. Much like conversation firearm rounds in regards to basic functions.

Rocket Propelled grenades are not mini-missiles.
They are not "interchangeable" at all. Seriously they have different weight, size, range, damage, blast, sensors.... the only thing the same is that they fly and explode! That is about the opposite of "interchangeable" as it gets!

Now you can make a house rule that they are identical... but there is zero canon support for the claim that an RPG is really a Mini-Missile...

Laser guidance is a another issue.

[/quote]
Laser guidance is not even something I was adressing so I'm not sure how it is relevant... but okay?

[Hawk258]

ActuallyNG1 page 16 states Reverse-engineering
competitors’ products is another common practice.

As for the Red Hawk or Blue Hawk, and "reverse engineering the samas is stated "Surprisingly, the Coalition States have not protested
about NG’s SAMAS “inspired” armor".

NG "can" they just "don't" to not **** off the CS. But they push the envelope . As they sell to anyone.

Additionally the stats are "marginally different" 10 mph slower flight, 60 mdc less main body armor and 2 ps lower.

For "a knock off" it's nearly on par with the original samas.

But also I follow this RUE Page 372

[quote]The Rifts® World Books are designed to help give gamers a foun-dation to work with by providing them with ideas, inspiration and options via the setting and/or specific villains, people, magic and events. World Books are not absolutely necessary nor are they canon written in stone. They are intended as guidelines and templates to help you create and spin your own adventures. Consequently, you do not need them to play Rifts®, but they are available should you want them[/quote]

[dreicunan]

ActuallyNG1 page 16 states Reverse-engineering
competitors’ products is another common practice.

As for the Red Hawk or Blue Hawk, and "reverse engineering the samas is stated "Surprisingly, the Coalition States have not protested
about NG’s SAMAS “inspired” armor".

NG "can" they just "don't" to not **** off the CS. But they push the envelope . As they sell to anyone.

Additionally the stats are "marginally different" 10 mph slower flight, 60 mdc less main body armor and 2 ps lower.

For "a knock off" it's nearly on par with the original samas.

But also I follow this RUE Page 372

The Rifts® World Books are designed to help give gamers a foun-dation to work with by providing them with ideas, inspiration and options via the setting and/or specific villains, people, magic and events. World Books are not absolutely necessary nor are they canon written in stone. They are intended as guidelines and templates to help you create and spin your own adventures. Consequently, you do not need them to play Rifts®, but they are available should you want them

Yeah, and if you want to keep quoting that, then preface all your posts with a disclaimer that you are only interested in posts affirming your positions and will will promptly stick your fingers in your ears and sing loudly if anyone notes information in books that contradicts it. It will save time when someone starts wondering why you claim that Northern Gun sells TW Chromium Serpent Armor with a double-barrelled boom gun and a greatest rune halberd.

[Mack]

Yeah, and if you want to keep quoting that, then preface all your posts with a disclaimer that you are only interested in posts affirming your positions and will will promptly stick your fingers in your ears and sing loudly if anyone notes information in books that contradicts it. It will save time when someone starts wondering why you claim that Northern Gun sells TW Chromium Serpent Armor with a double-barrelled boom gun and a greatest rune halberd.

Let's not get personal.

[dreicunan]

Yeah, and if you want to keep quoting that, then preface all your posts with a disclaimer that you are only interested in posts affirming your positions and will will promptly stick your fingers in your ears and sing loudly if anyone notes information in books that contradicts it. It will save time when someone starts wondering why you claim that Northern Gun sells TW Chromium Serpent Armor with a double-barrelled boom gun and a greatest rune halberd.

Let's not get personal.

Well, then let me rephrase it in a less personal way: if someone is going to eliminate the common point of reference we all have for the Rifts Earth universe, the texts published by Palladium, as being valid for their conversation, then they should preface their posts with that information, as the assumption here is that people are talking about what is in Palladium's published texts unless stated otherwise. This will kindly allow other posters to know ahead of time that one is not interested in objections to what they have posted based on those texts. That way other posters know ahead of time if investing their time in responding is worth it.

[Hawk258]

Yeah, and if you want to keep quoting that, then preface all your posts with a disclaimer that you are only interested in posts affirming your positions and will will promptly stick your fingers in your ears and sing loudly if anyone notes information in books that contradicts it. It will save time when someone starts wondering why you claim that Northern Gun sells TW Chromium Serpent Armor with a double-barrelled boom gun and a greatest rune halberd.

Let's not get personal.

Well, then let me rephrase it in a less personal way: if someone is going to eliminate the common point of reference we all have for the Rifts Earth universe, the texts published by Palladium, as being valid for their conversation, then they should preface their posts with that information, as the assumption here is that people are talking about what is in Palladium's published texts unless stated otherwise. This will kindly allow other posters to know ahead of time that one is not interested in objections to what they have posted based on those texts. That way other posters know ahead of time if investing their time in responding is worth it.

Please read signature. I have also been pretty consistent on that aspect.

Also that is a common reference from the creator

RAW: keep it balanced and fun
RAI this is flexible do what you want
Canon: what you make it in game play.

[Shark_Force]

canon does not remotely mean whatever you use in your games.

it comes from its use regarding (primarily Christian) scripture; the 'canon' scriptures are the ones that you judge other potential works by to determine if they're consistent with the 'canon' (which are the ones that are officially accepted as being authoritative). as i understand it, the root word literally comes from a measuring stick, as in, you are measuring other stuff against the canon to see if it fits.

the use has since expanded to other areas as well, but the general idea is the same; in comics, you might say that a one-off crossover story is 'not canon' because it isn't intended to be an official part of that fictional universe, for example. a fanfiction story written by J K Rowling's kids may have the advantage of being close to the source, but is also 'not canon' by default, although at any time Rowling herself could declare it to be canon and at that point it would be an official part of her created universe.

so no, canon is not what you make it in game play. it is literally the official meaning, though in palladium the official meaning tends to be murky at best (given that rules are often unclear, conflicting, missing parts, or otherwise require a GM to decide what they think it means, particularly since kevin is notoriously unwilling to specify what his intended meaning was).

you need to pick another word, because that one is an absolutely terrible choice for what gets used in actual game play; the entire *point* of canon is that my measuring stick is the same as your measuring stick, and as such using it to mean whatever happens to get used in actual game play is only going to make communication more difficult, because you are using a word to mean the exact opposite of what it means, which is *much* closer to "Rules As Written" (that being the common measuring stick which we all have by which other things can be measured to determine whether they fit in or not).

[Hawk258]

canon does not remotely mean whatever you use in your games.

it comes from its use regarding (primarily Christian) scripture; the 'canon' scriptures are the ones that you judge other potential works by to determine if they're consistent with the 'canon' (which are the ones that are officially accepted as being authoritative). as i understand it, the root word literally comes from a measuring stick, as in, you are measuring other stuff against the canon to see if it fits.

the use has since expanded to other areas as well, but the general idea is the same; in comics, you might say that a one-off crossover story is 'not canon' because it isn't intended to be an official part of that fictional universe, for example. a fanfiction story written by J K Rowling's kids may have the advantage of being close to the source, but is also 'not canon' by default, although at any time Rowling herself could declare it to be canon and at that point it would be an official part of her created universe.

so no, canon is not what you make it in game play. it is literally the official meaning, though in palladium the official meaning tends to be murky at best (given that rules are often unclear, conflicting, missing parts, or otherwise require a GM to decide what they think it means, particularly since kevin is notoriously unwilling to specify what his intended meaning was).

you need to pick another word, because that one is an absolutely terrible choice for what gets used in actual game play; the entire *point* of canon is that my measuring stick is the same as your measuring stick, and as such using it to mean whatever happens to get used in actual game play is only going to make communication more difficult, because you are using a word to mean the exact opposite of what it means, which is *much* closer to "Rules As Written" (that being the common measuring stick which we all have by which other things can be measured to determine whether they fit in or not).

I think I showed several different metrics in this thread that supports my point. In this case book 1 states "not written in stone".

There are exceptions to every rule. And if you have an adventure there is always ways of making things happen.

In rifts many things move around in the megaverse

In rifts earth there is a war for survival. And it is fact that they will do it by any means necessary.

With the story as written there are many ways ideas can become a reality in the game setting.

I am sharing an idea that others may chose to include in their settings. And I believe my idea meets the basic minimum standard of balance and fun.

Also as demonstrated repeatedly in this forum no one has the same interpretation of the rules. Your standards nor mine don't necessarily represent others standards either.

[Shark_Force]

I think I showed several different metrics in this thread that supports my point. In this case book 1 states "not written in stone".

There are exceptions to every rule. And if you have an adventure there is always ways of making things happen.

In rifts many things move around in the megaverse

In rifts earth there is a war for survival. And it is fact that they will do it by any means necessary.

With the story as written there are many ways ideas can become a reality in the game setting.

I am sharing an idea that others may chose to include in their settings. And I believe my idea meets the basic minimum standard of balance and fun.

Also as demonstrated repeatedly in this forum no one has the same interpretation of the rules. Your standards nor mine don't necessarily represent others standards either.

i have no idea what you're even talking about here, or why you've written it in response to my post.

all i'm saying is that if you use 'canon' to mean 'the way things work in my game', you are creating confusion and making it impossible to communicate clearly, because that is completely contradictory to the way the word is used by everyone else. canon is exactly the *wrong* word for that. if you had sat down and had a meeting of the committee of naming things badly, canon would have been one of the committee's top picks for words for "what you make it in game play" because it is literally a word that everyone else would use specifically to exclude that possibility.

[Jefffar]

I think we've hit the end of useful discussion.