Quote:
Originally Posted by Olefin
… sense and definitely seems to be added on a long time after the rest of the canon was in place - as in "oh crap we forget about the Aussies" kind of thing
|
Agreed. We can only expect so much from a small group of guys creating a game against publishing timelines before the advent of the Internet. Our Bible has limitations.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Olefin
this huge nuking of australia still makes no sense
|
Legbreaker pointed out that something like 80% of Australia’s population is urban. A couple of nukes directed at important targets in those urban areas will hurt Australia more than a couple of nukes directed against a nation with a less urban population.
I’ve included a couple of attachments regarding how Canada fared in the Twilight: 2000. We’ve now established that both Canada and Australia fought against the Soviet Union. They are both non-nuclear middle powers allied with the US. Cut the megatonnage directed against Australia in half (compared to Canada)just for the sake of being nice to Australia, and you’ll still get a pretty serious body blow to the Land Down Under. Again, I don’t say this because I like the idea of my Australian cousins being incinerated or dying of radiation poisoning. I say this so that we don’t create separate standards for important players in WW3.
All of this said, we all have to go with what we like most. I believe I told Mo that all he had to tell me was that he didn’t want to have a nuked Australia in his campaign and I’d close my mouth on the matter. However, if one wants to present a rationale for Australia being un-nuked, then that rationale a) must defend itself and b) is available for challenge. There’s no reason for it to be personal.