Military

kroner · Postby **kroner** » Wed Jan 21, 2004 12:15 am

Or at least that's what they'd like everyone to think.

Spider · Postby **Spider** » Wed Jan 21, 2004 2:09 am

.....nope, nitefyre had it right :lol:

, j/k, i don't know anything about them

west · Postby **west** » Wed Jan 21, 2004 4:37 am

Alcatraz wrote:I'd say that the force of the Rangers cooperating with Seatown Forest is a pretty scary army. Hasn't happened for a while, but it's the tradition for revolution around there. Just point at the town that's big and scary, and boom, the wind of death is upon it.

Bah, then they go and forget about us.

hasn't happened EVER, unless you count the fact-finding expeditions a few years ago with SF forces, Rangers, and ex-Eagles. no force was used there.

And the Rangers are extremely disjointed. But that can be good.

Alcatraz · Postby **Alcatraz** » Wed Jan 21, 2004 4:43 am

Yeah, I sorta lied. It's the KFF men, who are now in the Rangers, that joined with STF way back that were scary.

nitefyre · Postby **nitefyre** » Sun Feb 01, 2004 8:50 pm

If I'm getting this correctly: U.N. Peacekeepers=Rangers; and so if they'd act with the SF, then it'd be like U.N. legitamacy+U.S.

west · Postby **west** » Sun Feb 01, 2004 9:25 pm

sort of...but depending on who they were acting against, it'd be like UN legitimacy&US vs...France, or something.

the Rangers are supposed to be equally loyal to all regional leaders.

jeslange · Postby **jeslange** » Sun Feb 01, 2004 9:58 pm

Yep, leaders in the Union can't use Rangers against other leaders in the Union if there was ever a war between Union towns, can't use them to spy on each other, and can't use 'em as political representatives. Now a leader CAN take Rangers out with his/her/their own military if there is a threat in a non-union town, or he/she/they could keep the hometown military in the hometown, and send Rangers to the non-union town under his/her/their orders. Has to be a threatening situation in the non-union town though, 'cause leaders aren't supposed to use the Rangers to exert his/her/their will over non-union leaders.
Don't get me started

ephiroll · Postby **ephiroll** » Sun Feb 01, 2004 10:16 pm

And another important thing, the Rangers have the authority to detain any regional leader if they see fit.

nitefyre · Postby **nitefyre** » Sun Feb 01, 2004 10:32 pm

Hmm...sounds like fun. *detains Maily and Maynard in Drojf Ranger Station*

jeslange · Postby **jeslange** » Sun Feb 01, 2004 10:34 pm

Nope, Rangers have the authority to detain a leader if he/she is massacring his/her own population. That's it.

ephiroll · Postby **ephiroll** » Mon Feb 02, 2004 1:38 pm

Not unless it was changed after I suggested that part in the Ranger law, as it was discussed when the Rangers where formed, they have the right to detain any leader if they decide that it must be done for regional security. Not just if they start killing all their own subjects. Of course there could have been some changes, I haven't been keeping on top of it for a couple reasons.

ephiroll · Postby **ephiroll** » Mon Feb 02, 2004 1:41 pm

nitefyre wrote:Hmm...sounds like fun. *detains Maily and Maynard in Drojf Ranger Station*

There isn't anyone in that region that can connect Maynard to anything that would get him locked up...unless he's framed or the CR is broken

west · Postby **west** » Mon Feb 02, 2004 7:04 pm

Maybe while they're in there they can fall in love :mrgreen:

nitefyre · Postby **nitefyre** » Mon Feb 02, 2004 9:27 pm

Yesh, I was pertaining to the couples topic, heheh, not anything ic.

griogal · Postby **griogal** » Mon Feb 02, 2004 9:46 pm

ephiroll wrote:There isn't anyone in that region that can connect Maynard to anything that would get him locked up...unless he's framed or the CR is broken

Besides the fact that he has been associated with Craktar, has been a vicious warlord in his younger days etc.?

Anyhow, the days of the Rangers seem over, since the early retirement of their leader. Or am I mistaken? Sincerely I hope it is the latter.

Military

Who is online