Ross’s Game Dungeon: Follow-up Episode #3

7 hours ago, RaTcHeT302 said:

how would u know tho, maybe the future is fine and dandy, maybe all it took was a nuclear war or two, i mean if that's what it took, i wouldn't mind

 

i'd gladly BE in the future, after the nuclear warfare has gone through xD

i think i truly am unlucky, cuz i dont exist in the future, where everything is fine, i only get to live in the past, where everything is kinda crappy

that depends on the scale of the nuclear war, I think most science says that a full blown war will leave the planet surface uninhabitable for 1000s if not 100,000s of years.

If it would be just a show of force and then everyone settles down, might leave the world viable for a few more years (like US nukes the iranian nuclear research facilty, russia nukes some US asset

Also  in response, India nukes some desert in pakistan/afganistan, Pakistan nukes some Indian backwater in response, Japan nukes backwater north korea, china nukes the cat island in response and then everybody settles down to peace talks after they demonstrated they are willing to use their arsenal). (not that i think this will be a good thing, just an example of a less severe scenario).
But we all know that the moment they will be used once they will be used again, so full blown war is still happening.
I refuse to believe that what they say about roaches is true, radiation would also kill their babies like it would kill my sperm.

5 hours ago, kerdios said:

I refuse to believe that what they say about roaches is true, radiation would also kill their babies like it would kill my sperm.

They actually tested that on Mythbusters (as far as bugs being able to survive radiation) and a couple species were pretty damn resistant to some strong radiation (I unfortunately don't remember the specifics of the episode; I think actually some form of beetle actually did better than the rest). I'll admit though, their ability to reproduce was outside the scope of their experiment. I'll have to find and watch that episode again sometime.

10 hours ago, kerdios said:

that depends on the scale of the nuclear war, I think most science says that a full blown war will leave the planet surface uninhabitable for 1000s if not 100,000s of years.

Those estimates are for taking every part of the planet back to background radiation levels only... We don't even have that now, and we've never had a nuclear war. Most scientific estimates that are worth a damn, and have realistic expectations, say that there will be significant areas of the planet left habitable, and restoring ~90% of affected landmass is likely in under 500 years. (this is partly based on real life radiation cleanup results, like with Chernobyl)

48 minutes ago, BTGBullseye said:

Those estimates are for taking every part of the planet back to background radiation levels only... We don't even have that now, and we've never had a nuclear war. Most scientific estimates that are worth a damn, and have realistic expectations, say that there will be significant areas of the planet left habitable, and restoring ~90% of affected landmass is likely in under 500 years. (this is partly based on real life radiation cleanup results, like with Chernobyl)

Isn't that partly because they had where to bring clean soil to bury the radioactive soil under? in a full scale nuclear war where would they bring the clean soil from? (chernobyl still clicks like crazy on a geiger counter)

On 8/20/2020 at 3:59 AM, RaTcHeT302 said:

the fact that computers are getting smaller scares the crap out of me, i mean there's no way in hell for me to fix a motherboard, and hell, if my phone broke, it's dead, nobody is gonna waste their time to fix it, it's depressing

 

i feel like it should be a "right to make stuff easy to repair"

 

OK, but at what point are you just calling for a cap on the level of complexity that technology is allowed to have? You're all but saying that nothing more advanced than what was available in, roughly, the '90s should ever be allowed to be made.

And it puts me in mind of the stuff I've read about that infamous East German car, the Trabant. From what I've been able to glean, a lot of the tech behind it was pretty standard at the time it was first introduced (compared to other basic people-movers like the 2CV or the Fiat 500), and was simple enough that the average owner could indeed fix pretty much anything wrong with it with basic tools. And they had to, since it was hard enough to get ahold of in the first place, let alone replace, and the manufacturing quality was what you'd expect from a communist country where the workers had bulletproof job security. But what really hurt it was a refusal to evolve with the times. By 1989 it was still running on the same engine designed in the 1950s. Even by this point, it would have been illegal to sell new in the US due to environmental regulations, as the thing had no pollution control and burned a fifth as much motor oil as gasoline, by design.

Can the average person repair a catalytic converter by hand? Probably not. What about an electric drivetrain? A hydrogen fuel cell? Our ability to continue existing as a species hinges on having access to some pretty advanced tech that's beyond the scope of the average person's expertise. So you have to draw a line somewhere.

4 hours ago, kerdios said:

chernobyl still clicks like crazy on a geiger counter

In a couple years after the CNPP explosion the exclusion zone became a blooming nature reserve overflowing with wildlife. (Note that I’m not trying to play down the aftermath of a nuclear war, I’m just cleaning up the toxic waste that the HBO’s trash fantasy left in people’s heads).

Yeah, but those are wild animals with natural life expectancies of less than a decade. They could all be getting cancer and dying at age five and we'd never even know.

A better example, I think, would be Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Both started rebuilding within a decade of getting nuked, and both are thriving cities that are perfectly safe to live in today. And while a hydrogen bomb is likely to leave nothing but a massive crater its immediate wake, I've been told it leaves no more fallout behind than a WWII-class fission bomb—and even that's only because it actually contains a fission bomb used to trigger the fusion reaction.

On 8/25/2020 at 8:07 AM, kerdios said:

Isn't that partly because they had where to bring clean soil to bury the radioactive soil under? in a full scale nuclear war where would they bring the clean soil from? (chernobyl still clicks like crazy on a geiger counter)

No. The radiation left behind really isn't as bad as the "documentaries" make it seem. While it might be dangerous for a couple decades, the rest of nature won't care, and humans can move back in after that time. If they drink a lot of alcohol regularly, they can move in sooner. (alcohol chelates radiation better than any anti-rad meds)

On 8/25/2020 at 12:56 PM, Steve the Pocket said:

Yeah, but those are wild animals with natural life expectancies of less than a decade. They could all be getting cancer and dying at age five and we'd never even know.

And it wouldn't matter anyways, because those aren't humans. We're talking about how much it takes for humans to be able to live there.

On 8/25/2020 at 12:56 PM, Steve the Pocket said:

A better example, I think, would be Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Both started rebuilding within a decade of getting nuked, and both are thriving cities that are perfectly safe to live in today.

That is an extremely apt example.

On 8/25/2020 at 12:56 PM, Steve the Pocket said:

And while a hydrogen bomb is likely to leave nothing but a massive crater its immediate wake, I've been told it leaves no more fallout behind than a WWII-class fission bomb—and even that's only because it actually contains a fission bomb used to trigger the fusion reaction.

More like, it leaves almost no radiation whatsoever, unless you add a tamper to boost the damage beyond the 50MT it already does. (see the Tsar Bomba for an excellent example)

7 hours ago, BTGBullseye said:

If they drink a lot of alcohol regularly, they can move in sooner. (alcohol chelates radiation better than any anti-rad meds)

Now I'm trying to remember if vodka in S.T.A.L.K.E.R lowered your radiation amount or not.

I will say, alcohol (specifically ethyl alcohol) works as an antidote for antifreeze poisoning though. We even had a bottle of it in the ER I worked in, ready to be administered via IV.

12 hours ago, Generic-User said:

Now I'm trying to remember if vodka in S.T.A.L.K.E.R lowered your radiation amount or not.

 

I will say, alcohol (specifically ethyl alcohol) works as an antidote for antifreeze poisoning though. We even had a bottle of it in the ER I worked in, ready to be administered via IV.

It does. It can be a good idea to carry a few bottles with you in STALKER, though you should always have anti-rad meds with you since they pretty much eliminate most/if not all rads and you get hammered when you chug bottles and that's obviously not very helpful when you're in a firefight or trying to carry out a mutant hunt lol

15 hours ago, Mode 7 said:

It does. It can be a good idea to carry a few bottles with you in STALKER, though you should always have anti-rad meds with you since they pretty much eliminate most/if not all rads and you get hammered when you chug bottles and that's obviously not very helpful when you're in a firefight or trying to carry out a mutant hunt lol

Yeah, and games generally get in trouble for promoting alcohol use, so they at the very least have to make them less effective than the meds.

Hey, with enough vodka, it's all going to be the same anyway.

I need to replay those sometimes.

On 8/7/2020 at 4:41 PM, luvearlykyary said:

>15 minute rant on why microsoft is evil

Amazing, truly great. Somewhat reminds me of the united fruit company and their shenanigans in Central America(or even the coca cola death squads in colombia).

Also, was the parts on battleforge being updated through annotations a mistake on your part or a joke I'm not getting? They're dead, right?

Ah I see you watch the "Sam o Nilla Academy" too