I am going to change my title to The Twice Betrayed.
<Snipped quote by Pepperm1nts> Don't be i'norant, son. We ain't saying that tech in Europe is stuck in the fifties. When tech leaders move on to more advanced stuff, the default tech will move up.This was never clarified until just now. There was no reason to believe we would ever go forward with anything because no one ever bothered to set an end-date for the tech limitations until now. Which is exactly what I am arguing should have been done from the start. We set up these rules without thinking of an end-date for them. It was something we made happen because shit had gotten out of hand (in part because, again, no one ever bothered to call this shit out when it was important) and we needed a quick way to fix it. So we did, but without really looking at the long-term effects.
<Snipped quote by Pepperm1nts> It'll do so on its own I'm sure. The point I am making is the "It needs to happen eventually" situation is too easy to exploit, so these things will be heavily regulated. Like I said, if you can pull it off in a way that looks good it'll be allowed. If you want to be important and get concessions, focus on writing things people want to read.You're saying this like I'm the one demanding better tech. I don't care about modern tech. What I am concerned about is that Europe will be stuck in 1950 forever for no good reason. I agree with the concerns. Hell, I was there agreeing to put the rules in place. But it shouldn't be something that is absolute and in place forever. Because that would be really stupid. The only difference here is that you and Aaron are arguing for it to be a forever-thing, while I am arguing it shouldn't be.
Would there still be old Tsarist Russia weapons floating about? And more importantly, did Russia have anything unique?1) Probably. 2) I don't think so. But you can probably make up something they invented at some point that is still old and shit.