Printable Version of Topic
Dumpshock Forums _ Shadowrun _ Some corp and nation questions
Posted by: Fatum Jul 5 2011, 06:10 PM
Just a couple of quick questions on SR corps and governments that I need answered for Yakut Shuffle.
First, what are the powers supporting pro-active green activism? Amazonia is one, what are the others? I mean the ones that'd go far enough to support activists with weaponry and equipment, not just thumbs-up them.
Second, does MCT have any powerful rivals among the megas that'd not be Evo, SK or, preferably, Renraku? I mean rivals that'd do anything just to spite MCT.
Third, what's the fate of the Brazilian corps in the game timeline? Taurus, IMBEL, Avibras, Mectron, XMobots, INACE, EMGEPRON, Embraer, Helibras and Nieva are of particular interest.
Also, same question goes for Sikorsky-Bell. Does it still make copters? Who owns the corp?
Posted by: Nath Jul 5 2011, 07:33 PM
QUOTE (Fatum @ Jul 5 2011, 08:10 PM)

First, what are the powers supporting pro-active green activism? Amazonia is one, what are the others? I mean the ones that'd go far enough to support activists with weaponry and equipment, not just thumbs-up them.
Most awakened nations would consider the spread of Toxic domains a threat to the world, so they're likely candidates. They're not that numerous still. Tir Tairngire ran out of money, so I'd keep them out. Most of the Native American Nations enforce ecological regulations, so it would be a good strategy to level economic competition by hurting less stringent countries. Among awakened nations, Manchuria is another possibility.
Also, the great dragon Alamais has an history of supporting terrorist groups, whatever the cause. He'd sure favor those who target Saeder-Krupp, but since S-K is the world largest megacorp, a major in energy and heavy industry, and the leading powerhouse in Europe, a number of ecologist groups would qualify.
QUOTE (Fatum @ Jul 5 2011, 08:10 PM)

Second, does MCT have any powerful rivals among the megas that'd not be Evo, SK or, preferably, Renraku? I mean rivals that'd do anything just to spite MCT.
Megacorporations should rarely do anything just to spite someone. Phase 3 should always be : profit.
Neonet, Renraku and MCT are prime competitors in electronics and computer technology. Horizon, Ares, and MCT, do the same in media. Shiawase, Yakashima, and a bunch of other large japanacorps may vie for political influence in Japan, which translate into geopolitical influence over the world.
QUOTE (Fatum @ Jul 5 2011, 08:10 PM)

Third, what's the fate of the Brazilian corps in the game timeline? Taurus, IMBEL, Avibras, Mectron, XMobots, INACE, EMGEPRON, Embraer, Helibras and Nieva are of particular interest.
Embraer is an Aztechnology subsidiary, or possibly a Dassault subsidiary (itself a major Aztechnology subsidiary). Taurus was still around to release the Taurus-6 revolver (first appearing in the
Cannon Companion). Never read about the others in Shadowrun.
QUOTE (Fatum @ Jul 5 2011, 08:10 PM)

Also, same question goes for Sikorsky-Bell. Does it still make copters? Who owns the corp?
Sikorsky-Bell was still making helicopters by the time of
Rigger 3 in 2061. As far as I remember, the only mentions in Fourth Edition so far is the Microskimmer drone.
Posted by: Brazilian_Shinobi Jul 5 2011, 07:35 PM
Embraer, if I'm not wrong, was bought by, kid you not, Aztechnology.
Pro-active green activism?
Amazonia, I think Yakut is another one too, Asamondo and possibly Tir na nOg and NAN, although I think they would be more pragmatic.
But only Amazonia and some political circles of Tir na Nog would support eco-terrorists. Although, to be fair, the Amazonian government condemns terrorists of any kind (but support "freedom fighters") but I don't think Sirrurg gives a damn to semantics anyway.
I would think Imbel would still be a govern-owned company as it is today.
Posted by: Fatum Jul 5 2011, 09:05 PM
Thank you for your replies, they've been very informative.
I'm preparing to start writing the Yakut armoury chapter, you see. Minding what uneasy history with MCT and megas as a whole they have, I'm looking for someone who'd supply them (and wonder if enchanting bows to be more destructive is going against the fluff, minding that Winternight magically modified nukes no less...)
Posted by: Ascalaphus Jul 5 2011, 09:21 PM
I think that if you use the SR4 rules for bows, you don't need magic to make them destructive..
Also, magical bows are very iffy. It's been a constant feature that weapon foci must be in contact with their user; bullets or arrows can't stay magical while in flight.
A workaround would be to have a sustained/quickened spell on the arrow, of course. But you can only enhance arrows with magic so much before the actual bow becomes irrelevant and you might as well just throw the arrow.
Posted by: Fatum Jul 5 2011, 09:38 PM
The new rules limit the tension strength. Besides, I'm thinking of army weapons, not everyone in an army is a minmaxed troll.
No, see, I know that launched arrows can't be used as weapon foci. When I say "enchant bows to be more destructive", I mean that literally - higher launch speed for less tension strength. Generally, higher input/output efficiency.
Posted by: Ascalaphus Jul 5 2011, 10:09 PM
I'd just toss it to the material science nerds for that. Just tell them that they need to start using 21st century materials to improve on the oh-so-authentic RenFaire Agincourt stuff you got them.
EDIT: clarity.
I think bows in SR are basically an anachronism. Why not replace muscle as source of tension with a mechanical pull? Machines should be way better at generating that brute force.
On the other hand, why? Isn't gunpowder (or a railgun) basically the most efficient way of sending projectiles on their way?
Posted by: LurkerOutThere Jul 5 2011, 10:13 PM
That's a dark path of realism there, and people like their trolls being able to punch out armored assault vehicles.
And they want ware to be "balanced" at 150% max of human normal.
Posted by: CanRay Jul 5 2011, 11:27 PM
QUOTE (Ascalaphus @ Jul 5 2011, 04:21 PM)

I think that if you use the SR4 rules for bows, you don't need magic to make them destructive..
Can't help it: "Elves of the world - Unite!" - Chuck-Chuck Razool <19:02:34/11-17-50>
Posted by: Fatum Jul 6 2011, 12:06 AM
QUOTE (Ascalaphus @ Jul 6 2011, 02:09 AM)

I'd just toss it to the material science nerds for that. Just tell them that they need to start using 21st century materials to improve on the oh-so-authentic RenFaire Agincourt stuff you got them.
Awakened Yakut are anti-tech purists, so I'm just looking for some way to give them decent weapons to make the war interesting. After all, they're not all mages/magical beings!
QUOTE (Ascalaphus @ Jul 6 2011, 02:09 AM)

I think bows in SR are basically an anachronism. Why not replace muscle as source of tension with a mechanical pull? Machines should be way better at generating that brute force.
Why don't we do it today, and instead develop new and new composite bow materials and constructions? Same reason - it's cheap, and it's silent. Now, it's not like we use bows in actual combat, even the spec-ops units (they prefer silenced pistols to even crossbows, despite what the media might have led you to believe). No reason for SR-era warriors to do that, either - except for some weird religious reason, or because they have nothing better.
Posted by: CanRay Jul 6 2011, 12:09 AM
Or they got a Troll-Bow.
Posted by: Fatum Jul 6 2011, 06:14 AM
Well, what, less than 10% the population are troll metavariants...
Posted by: Ascalaphus Jul 6 2011, 07:47 AM
Eh. I can get behind "But I just think bows are cool!", since you should definitely make your game cool. Realism's got little to do with that; fun should always trump realism.
But I don't have any problems with Purists (of any kind) basically being screwed, because they're refusing to use the best things available. If you're anti-tech purists, you should be screwed in SR, because you're deprived of the things that bring power to the masses (guns and implants), instead of only to the magical elite.
I suppose the real reason bows aren't used all that much, is that it's probably much harder to achieve accurate long-range shooting, and that bows need to be pretty big and heavy to achieve firepower equivalent to a gun.
But even SR4A bows can be jacked up to 14P base damage for the STR 12 Troll, Ork or Dwarf.
Posted by: Fatum Jul 6 2011, 08:14 AM
Well, they are screwed, it's just that I don't want them screwed all too royally since otherwise it'd be a slaughter and not a war.
I'm away from my books right now, but isn't the bow damage Str min +2, while Str min is limited to 6 or something like that by the AE rulings?
Posted by: Ascalaphus Jul 6 2011, 09:00 AM
No, the STR is capped at 12...
Posted by: Tymeaus Jalynsfein Jul 6 2011, 09:04 PM
QUOTE (Ascalaphus @ Jul 6 2011, 03:00 AM)

No, the STR is capped at 12...
8 Actually (So DV 10), According to the Precious...
Posted by: Ascalaphus Jul 6 2011, 10:05 PM
Do you have some errata for SR4A that I don't have? Mine says it goes up to 12.
Posted by: Fatum Jul 6 2011, 10:06 PM
Well, this way or another, Str 12 guys are uncommon in the army.
Posted by: CanRay Jul 6 2011, 11:07 PM
QUOTE (Fatum @ Jul 6 2011, 05:06 PM)

Well, this way or another, Str 12 guys are uncommon in the army.
But not unheard of. Still, not something you'd want to see in a military.
Now, big game hunting, that's a different story altogether.
Posted by: Tymeaus Jalynsfein Jul 7 2011, 01:54 AM
QUOTE (Ascalaphus @ Jul 6 2011, 03:05 PM)

Do you have some errata for SR4A that I don't have? Mine says it goes up to 12.
Indeed I do...
QUOTE (SR4A, Pages 315-316)
Bows: A traditional longbow of fiberglass or wood, or a modern
compound-and-pulley bow. Reloading the bow takes one “Ready Weapon” Action (p. 147).
Bows have minimum Strength ratings that indicate the minimum Strength a character must have to use that weapon. When attacking with a bow, a character whose Strength is less than the Strength minimum sufers a –2 dice pool modifer per point below the minimum; this penalty refects the diffculty they have in pulling the bow and nocking an arrow. The weapon’s minimum Strength rating is also used to determine the weapon’s range and damage. Material science limits high-tech bows to a maximum Strength rating of 8. Calculate base damage using the lower value of the bow rating or the arrow rating.
Relevant Text is Highlighted...

You might try downloading the most recent copy of the SR4A Document, or purchase a 2nd+ Printing of the Book... My Copy of the Precious, as well as the 2 production copies I own, all say the exact same thing as the PDF.
Posted by: Ascalaphus Jul 7 2011, 10:10 AM
Ah, one of those stealth updates then, my PDF says 12.
A bit of a cheesy fix really. Material science in 2072 should be able to accommodate any STR score. In order to balance bow damage, they could've used half-STR just like with close combat attacks.
Posted by: Tymeaus Jalynsfein Jul 7 2011, 12:40 PM
QUOTE (Ascalaphus @ Jul 7 2011, 04:10 AM)

Ah, one of those stealth updates then, my PDF says 12.
A bit of a cheesy fix really. Material science in 2072 should be able to accommodate any STR score. In order to balance bow damage, they could've used half-STR just like with close combat attacks.
Ehhh... No worries...
Posted by: Snow_Fox Jul 9 2011, 04:58 PM
I have no idea how Taurus is around today! they're like Barretta 2nd's compensating for poor metalurgy with bulk. I'd see them as a subsidiary of AZT
Posted by: Fatum Jul 9 2011, 05:00 PM
I doubt that an amazonian company would be an AZT subsidiary...
Posted by: Snow_Fox Jul 9 2011, 05:02 PM
Sikorsky's main stuff in Connecticut is fairly close to the Electirc boat and General Dynamic's palts around Hartford- only about an hour away by car in 2011. so they'd probably all get gobbled up by Ares.
Posted by: Nath Jul 9 2011, 05:56 PM
QUOTE (Snow_Fox @ Jul 9 2011, 07:02 PM)

Sikorsky's main stuff in Connecticut is fairly close to the Electirc boat and General Dynamic's palts around Hartford- only about an hour away by car in 2011. so they'd probably all get gobbled up by Ares.
Not before 2061, or not openly at least. Sikorsky-Bell got its own entry in
Rigger 3, page 21, separate from Ares Macrotechnology
Posted by: Fatum Jul 9 2011, 09:46 PM
I just need them as supplier of something Arpia-like.
Posted by: Snow_Fox Jul 10 2011, 08:02 PM
Sikorsky's plant is near enough to the big defense contractors in Connecticut that the runs between Hartford, New Haven and Stamford would be pretty intyense.
QUOTE (Fatum @ Jul 9 2011, 01:00 PM)

I doubt that an amazonian company would be an AZT subsidiary...
openly at least. but what better way for AZT to potentially paralyze their biggest oponent in south America if need be.
Posted by: CanRay Jul 10 2011, 08:04 PM
And if there's one thing a Narcoterror Gang (Er, I mean Aztechnology) knows how to do, it's make a realistic looking front!
Posted by: Snow_Fox Jul 10 2011, 08:07 PM
Exactly!
Posted by: Brazilian_Shinobi Jul 11 2011, 11:46 AM
QUOTE (Fatum @ Jul 9 2011, 02:00 PM)

I doubt that an amazonian company would be an AZT subsidiary...
Embraer is owned by Dassault which in turn is owned by Aztechnology.
On the document I wrote describing the Amazonian Military I even describe this non-sense giving an explanation for it.
Posted by: Fatum Jul 11 2011, 12:11 PM
Yeah, I remember. It was kind of a shocker for the original writer in the first War! discussion thread, too, if I remember.
Posted by: Snow_Fox Jul 12 2011, 03:29 PM
Welcome to the twisted world of Shardowrun, where you have no idea who really owns who or what and why you're running. We've all been on runs where the johnson hires you to hit his own company the only time you really know who has all the pieces, you have titles like "The Great Dragon..."
Posted by: CanRay Jul 12 2011, 03:57 PM
There's also the question of how much ownership a company has even if it is open.
Sure that subsidiary of the subsidiary owns shares in the company, but so does Momma Corp. But they vote against each other on the meetings because of corporate politics due to the fact that the secondary subsidiary is owned by one part of Momma Corp's board members, and Momma Corp has to knuckle under the Chairman.
Corporations are a legal entity, but if they had a psychological exam they'd be Sociopaths with Dissociative Identity Disorder (formerly "Multiple Personality Disorder") at the very least.
...
With the exception of S-K. Then the shrinks would just end up insane trying to figure out Lofwyr's mind and get a nice padded room and a jacket with sleeves that are too long.
Posted by: Nath Jul 12 2011, 07:57 PM
Proper use of the term "subsidiary" implies control, usually through ownership of at least half the voting stock plus one. If a shareholder with half the vote doesn't get to choose at least half the board, it's only because he doesn't want to (which is still some kind of control). The only limits to their control then are minority shareholders rights local laws, if any, and possible "golden share" provisions.
In Embraer case, there's a more specific problem, as several books stated Amazonia bans Aztechnology from doing any business in the country. As I said in the aforementionned alt.War! discussion, the best explanation I could come up with is that Aztechnology or Dassault took over Embraer before the Amazonian forces overthrew the Brazilian government ; the Amazonians nationalized Aztechnology assets (probably to produce some eco-friendly airships and maintain the Amazonian non-awakened air force), and the megacorporation only retains actual ownership of the brand, patents and blueprints, customers' maintenance contracts and existing facilities in the rest of the world (though ironically, Embraer only production site outside of Brazil in real life would end in Manchuria in SR, another country hostile to megacorps).
Posted by: Brazilian_Shinobi Jul 12 2011, 08:41 PM
Yes, in the end I wrote something like this: There are two Embraer companies. One is owned by Aztechnology and can seel and operate in any country signatory of the Business Recognition Accord. The other one, is owned by Amazonia and can only operate in Amazonia and non-signatory countries of the BRA.
Posted by: CanRay Jul 12 2011, 08:54 PM
Another possibility is that Embraer got a bunch of contracts without an escape clause in them, then got bought out through back-door channels by AZT Fronts, and it's now public, and Amazonia has to take it up the hoop, hard, with no lube or foreplay.
...
That came out exactly as I intended to write it.
Posted by: Tymeaus Jalynsfein Jul 12 2011, 09:31 PM
QUOTE (CanRay @ Jul 12 2011, 01:54 PM)

Another possibility is that Embraer got a bunch of contracts without an escape clause in them, then got bought out through back-door channels by AZT Fronts, and it's now public, and Amazonia has to take it up the hoop, hard, with no lube or foreplay.
...
That came out exactly as I intended to write it.

Heh... Then I guess that Congratulations are in order...
Posted by: CanRay Jul 12 2011, 09:58 PM
Sometimes I channel Butch Patterson, Private Dick.
Posted by: Nath Jul 12 2011, 10:17 PM
QUOTE (CanRay @ Jul 12 2011, 10:54 PM)

Another possibility is that Embraer got a bunch of contracts without an escape clause in them, then got bought out through back-door channels by AZT Fronts, and it's now public, and Amazonia has to take it up the hoop, hard, with no lube or foreplay.
Don't like it. Why would the Amazonian care about paperworks ? Amazonia never signed the Business Recognition Accords to recognize megacorporate extraterritoriality. Amazonian law did ban Aztechnology from doing business in the country, a sovereign decision, fair and square. If Tir Tairngire, Denver, California or Pueblo can give the middle finger to Aztechnology, I don't see why the jungle awakened-ruled eco-crazed Amazonian dictatorship could not. Moreover, Aztlan and Aztechnology themselves got out with limited financial penalties when they went for massive nationalizations, so I would expect all the other corps to stare at them, smile, and say "Your turn."
I mean, it's like an Iranian, Guardian Council owned company announced tomorrow it is now a major shareholder in Lockheed.
Posted by: CanRay Jul 12 2011, 11:04 PM
Good point. Colour me confused now.
Powered by Invision Power Board (http://www.invisionboard.com)
© Invision Power Services (http://www.invisionpower.com)