Back to the main page

Mailing List Logs for ShadowRN

Message no. 1
From: Paul Gettle <RunnerPaul@*****.COM>
Subject: Re: Desert Wars [was: The Corp War]
Date: Fri, 4 Dec 1998 12:01:49 -0500
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

At 11:03 AM 12/4/98 -0500, Lehlan wrote:
>The desert wars originally a way for corps to settle their disputes.
>Then the networks got ahold of it, and the corps made more money
>off the broadcast rights, then the court settlement.

I'd like to add that one of the best ways to picture the Desert Wars
is to imagine Operation: Desert Storm -- crossed with Profesional
Wrestling.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGP for Personal Privacy 5.5.3

iQCVAwUBNmgVc6PbvUVI86rNAQGzYgP5Ae8gEtk+WseXJf5ytvbF9EXekUMIip1D
1B0I4/syyY3BIJoZMZkOR+r1pQUHOyIljcqO42wGLE/j7rnPgcVa6MVilioYGvwY
ZP0KTBuVZi17G37VzDwaOVNki1Dv9ga3/u4/bFusDj1ErEBQkTKcrxyADphVy2Io
hqgb1qrJCh4=
=0GCV
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--
-- Paul Gettle, #970 of 1000 (RunnerPaul@*****.com)
PGP Fingerprint, Key ID:0x48F3AACD (RSA 1024, created 98/06/26)
C260 94B3 6722 6A25 63F8 0690 9EA2 3344
Message no. 2
From: Scott W <see_scott_run@*****.COM>
Subject: Re: Desert Wars [was: The Corp War]
Date: Fri, 4 Dec 1998 13:30:40 -0800
> >The desert wars originally a way for corps to settle their
disputes. <snip a bit here>
>
> I'd like to add that one of the best ways to picture the Desert Wars
> is to imagine Operation: Desert Storm -- crossed with Profesional
> Wrestling.

Which is why the concept doesn't have much
plausibility for me. I mean, picture it:

Corp Rep #1: "And so you see, our product clearly
was copyrighted four years ago, and you've blatantly
infringed upon this. Naturally, we demand
restitution."
Corp Rep #2: "Forget it. You're wrong."
Corp Rep #1: "Am not."
Corp Rep #2: "Are too."
Corp Rep #1: "Oh yeah?"
Corp Rep #2: "Yeah!"
Corp Rep #1: "Well you wanna fight for it?"
Corp Rep #2: "All right! Let's go! I can beat your
skinny, tweed-wearing butt any day!"
Corp Rep #1: (thinks about leaping over desk, but
instead orders private army to meet Corp Rep #2's
private army in the Sahara after school)

<cut to long, costly skirmish in the desert; much
bloodshed, much destruction>

This just doesn't wash. I mean, these guys are in
it for the money, right? Fighting in the schoolyard
doesn't seem like a corp thing (I can see the economic
potential of broadcasting it, but I'm talking about
before that). Fighting it out in the courtroom, now
that's corpy. Fighting it out with shadowrunners,
even that's corpish. But duking it out with private
armies a la WWF? C'mon...
Based on what I've read about the Desert Wars (not
much, so feel free to inform me) they're a neat
concept, but not thought out.

Scott
==

"If you can't win, don't join them;
learn how to lose."
-Walt Kelly

_________________________________________________________
DO YOU YAHOO!?
Get your free @*****.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com
Message no. 3
From: "Carlton B. Davis" <davisc74@***.ACS.UWOSH.EDU>
Subject: Re: Desert Wars [was: The Corp War]
Date: Fri, 4 Dec 1998 15:39:42 -0600
On Fri, 4 Dec 1998, Scott W wrote:
> This just doesn't wash. I mean, these guys are in
> it for the money, right? Fighting in the schoolyard
> doesn't seem like a corp thing (I can see the economic
> potential of broadcasting it, but I'm talking about
> before that). Fighting it out in the courtroom, now
> that's corpy. Fighting it out with shadowrunners,
> even that's corpish. But duking it out with private
> armies a la WWF? C'mon...
> Based on what I've read about the Desert Wars (not
> much, so feel free to inform me) they're a neat
> concept, but not thought out.
>
> Scott

I've always seen it as a neat place to train troops and test weapons. You
get to test your new toys in battlefield conditions, while training troops
in realistic conditions. As an added bonus, if a weapon works out well,
you can use the battlefield results and recordings in your sales
literature. Think about it, whose weapon are you going to buy, the one
that just came out of the corp R&D lab, or the one that 4 out of 5 Desert
War veterans recomend?
Message no. 4
From: Scott W <see_scott_run@*****.COM>
Subject: Re: Desert Wars [was: The Corp War]
Date: Fri, 4 Dec 1998 14:34:41 -0800
---"Carlton B. Davis" <davisc74@***.ACS.UWOSH.EDU> wrote:
> I've always seen it as a neat place to train troops
> and test weapons. You get to test your new toys in
> battlefield conditions, while training troops
> in realistic conditions. As an added bonus, if a
> weapon works out well, you can use the battlefield
> results and recordings in your sales literature.
> Think about it, whose weapon are you going to buy,
> the one that just came out of the corp R&D lab, or
> the one that 4 out of 5 Desert War veterans
> recomend?

Interesting point, but in that situation, you run
the risk of this new prototype falling into enemy
hands, as it were. Also, your testing grounds are
costing you the lives of your soldiers. Remember
that thread about sinking ships and paying benefits to
dead crew? It applies here too. There's no denying
a death that was caught on trid, so the corp would
have to pay benefits, and train new soldiers. It's
a money losing situation, and corps generally don't
like to lose money.

Scott
==

"If you can't win, don't join them;
learn how to lose."
-Walt Kelly

_________________________________________________________
DO YOU YAHOO!?
Get your free @*****.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com
Message no. 5
From: Martin Steffens <chimerae@***.IE>
Subject: Re: Desert Wars [was: The Corp War]
Date: Sat, 5 Dec 1998 11:39:23 +0000
and thus did Scott W speak on 4 Dec 98 at 14:34:

> Interesting point, but in that situation, you run the risk of
> this new prototype falling into enemy hands, as it were. Also,
> your testing grounds are costing you the lives of your soldiers.
> Remember that thread about sinking ships and paying benefits to dead
> crew? It applies here too. There's no denying a death that was
> caught on trid, so the corp would have to pay benefits, and train
> new soldiers. It's a money losing situation, and corps generally
> don't like to lose money.

About the first thing, I figured that the war would have a few rules
about this, and have checks for every soldier who moves of the field
to see if they acquired foreign items.

The second item, the Corp wars are not always "played" on
full-lethality level. Instead of bullets they probably use a laser
tagging system and referees. In cases where it's an all out war the
Corp probably makes sure that their elite units stay out of the fray
and the other troops sign a waiver along the lines of "We give you
this experimental gun, if you survive you get a whopping amount of
cash, if you don't we don't owe you anything (except maybe a years
pay for the widow(er) ).

Since I figure that the ratings for Corp War are going through the
roof (judging by how popular a game like Combat Bikers and their ilk
are), I also figure that the Corps are raking in a nifty amount of
money on that. And then of course there's the usual merchandising
trick, plus sim-sense recordings, video compilations, etc.

All in all pretty profitable,


Martin Steffens
chimerae@***.ie
Message no. 6
From: Scott W <see_scott_run@*****.COM>
Subject: Re: Desert Wars [was: The Corp War]
Date: Sun, 6 Dec 1998 00:43:18 +0800
> About the first thing, I figured that the war would
> have a few rules about this, and have checks for
> every soldier who moves of the field to see if they
> acquired foreign items.

Maybe...but too open to abuse (these are nasty,
conniving corps, after all :). I still think they
wouldn't use prototypes at all.

> The second item, the Corp wars are not always
> "played" on full-lethality level.
<snip!>

That's a good point...I feel kinda goofy for not
thinking of that :P But, it doesn't answer my biggest
query, which is why the heck they're doing it in the
first place. Training? Sure, that's cool, but they
said that it was a way to resolve differences between
corps, and I can't see that kind of thing happening.
Too silly for major corporations. Besides, all the
references to the veterans of the Desert Wars make
it sound pretty gritty (and who brags about being
a veteran of a massive training exercise, anyway?).

> Since I figure that the ratings for Corp War are
> going through the roof (judging by how popular a
> game like Combat Bikers and their ilk are), I also
> figure that the Corps are raking in a nifty amount
> of money on that.
<snip-a-bit>

Oh yeah, you're right about it being profitable.
But that was only after they realized the
profitability. They had to start it first. Otherwise
the sole reason it exists is for entertainment, and
while that answers my first question, it.....uh....
well, it answers my first question quite nicely, but I
don't think it's _right_.

Scott
==

"If you can't win, don't join them;
learn how to lose."
-Walt Kelly

_________________________________________________________
DO YOU YAHOO!?
Get your free @*****.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com
Message no. 7
From: Fade <runefo@***.UIO.NO>
Subject: Re: Desert Wars [was: The Corp War]
Date: Sat, 5 Dec 1998 21:43:32 +0000
> That's a good point...I feel kinda goofy for not
> thinking of that :P But, it doesn't answer my biggest
> query, which is why the heck they're doing it in the
> first place. Training? Sure, that's cool, but they
> said that it was a way to resolve differences between
> corps, and I can't see that kind of thing happening.

This is my thoughts about the Desert Wars..

It started out as a real war somewhere. I have seen no reference to
what it was about - presumably uranium mining rights in africa or
something like that. (No surviving government means no courts to
settle things in, so the argument probably escalated.). A smartass PR
person thought back to the original desert war (Desert Storm, 1991)
and televised the whole thing, sold event rights and did a huge PR
campaign. It was small scale, with some heroes, some villains, and
lots of action. Good for TV. (If you remember, Desert Storm was on
every channel, all the time, for more than a year. Anything that big
could make HUGE revenues!). Made into a proper TV circus, it was
profitable, but started out as a real conflict. Thinking, if it
works, don't kick it, they expanded the franchise and it is now a
major event. As for death benefits etc... why do you think it is in
SAHARA? ..that's the advantage of being a multinational corp.
You do it where you can get away with it as cheap as possible. You do
not use US marines, but 3rd world country roughnecks trained harder
than any civilized country would allow, and paid worse to boot. (But
a fortune by their standards). As it becomes a good road to fame &
fortune, it would not be hard to find volunteers, either, if they
wanted 1th rate soldiers there. (Good for the ratings, right?).

It's a sort of sick, twisted logic to it, it sounds 'out there' but
it could possibly happen. Much of humankind has a fascination for
war, and if that could be exploited.. someone would.

Regards,
Fade
--
Fade

And the Prince of Lies said:
"To reign is worth ambition, though in Hell:
Better to reign in hell than to serve in heaven."
-John Milton, Paradise Lost
Message no. 8
From: Martin Steffens <chimerae@***.IE>
Subject: Re: Desert Wars [was: The Corp War]
Date: Mon, 7 Dec 1998 10:42:35 +0000
and thus did Scott W speak on 6 Dec 98 at 0:43:

> Maybe...but too open to abuse (these are nasty,
> conniving corps, after all :). I still think they
> wouldn't use prototypes at all.

That entirely depends on the nature of the game. It is an excellent
way to try out new prototypes for all Corps involved, so it stands to
reason that there are fail-safes on par with the level of paranoia
encountered at the Zurich Orbital Bank to make sure that what's mine
stays mine. A simple self destruct device linked to a bio-monitor
would already be a big insurance.

> That's a good point...I feel kinda goofy for not
> thinking of that :P But, it doesn't answer my biggest
> query, which is why the heck they're doing it in the
> first place. Training? Sure, that's cool, but they
> said that it was a way to resolve differences between
> corps, and I can't see that kind of thing happening.
> Too silly for major corporations.

Okay history of the Desert Wars in my eyes:
It started out as a full war between two Corps (slowly escalated
into that after vicious shadow activity). It quickly became clear
that something like that can only be effective if it concerns
something incredibly important, because otherwise the level of
destruction would outmatch the profits really quickly. Plus I cannot
imagine that both the other Corps and Governments around them would
be to crazy about the idea. So next step would be to ritualise the
whole affair and enforce those rules through the Corp Court. Maybe at
first it was just forbidden to destroy assets not directly involved
in the issue, but negative publicity and threats from local
governments quickly saw the need for more rules and a neutral battle
ground. Basic 2050's Desert War lay-out is there.

After that stage the whole issue of resolving differences became kind
of silly, since shadow operatives would be a more effective way to
settle disputes. The only way I can see it might still be of value is
when a minor Corp has an issue with a mayor one and it cannot hope to
survive in a shadow-war. They take the issue to the CC, the Court
cannot reach a verdict and proposes a limited encounter in the Desert
Wars to solve the issue. The smaller Corp at least stands a chance
there so it agrees. The bigger Corp has by this point probably
already a compromise that is acceptable when it loses, and agrees
too.

Matched to that both Corps do get a part of the profits, plus they
get a chance to show off at the worlds' largest arms show:
Ares Rep:
(Zapped and smoking Heli remains)
"As you can see our new Fire Lance can slice through 5 cm of armour
easily, plus our new fire guidance system makes a hit almost a
certainty."
Dodgy Dictator Type: " Sign me up for twenty."

> Besides, all the references to the veterans of the Desert Wars make
> it sound pretty gritty (and who brags about being a veteran of a
> massive training exercise, anyway?).

The ones that survived. Despite certain ritualisations of the rules,
there's no way to field test a gun / laser /whatever without shooting
it at an enemy target. And while I think that most planes and
vehicles used in the war are remote controlled by riggers (why
endanger a pilot that cost millions to train), the grunts are real
and they'll bleed when you strike them (or smoulder, depending on the
weapon used :)

The reasons a Corp would endanger it's personnel could be:

-Training, if you realize that nowadays the chances of a soldier
actually being shot at are fairly remote if he/she signs up for the
army (depending on the country of course, but in most cases), you
never know how they'll behave when under fire. With 2060's level of
shadowrunning (and just general mayhem in the world), chances are
reasonably high that eventually they will get fired at by very well
equipped professionals (or just unruly mobs). Desert War might be
crucial to decide which soldier warrants more training to become a
member of the elite units, or which ones are better of at a low
security job (if they're still able to move that is).

-Realism to their field test. Already mentioned above.

-Get rid of failures, disgraced people (self explanatory).

-Build a rep in the shadow community (how many newbies are willing to
risk their lives attacking heavily guarded Aztech facilities?), and
whoever else they want to send a message (our people are willing to
die to test out a gun / settle a dispute / whatever, won't you feel
more secure knowing that they do the same for you if they guard your
house / facility / collection of 20th century comics?)

If this doesn't convince you, I'll give up :)

Martin Steffens
chimerae@***.ie
Message no. 9
From: Scott W <see_scott_run@*****.COM>
Subject: Re: Desert Wars [was: The Corp War]
Date: Mon, 7 Dec 1998 05:51:02 -0800
> If this doesn't convince you, I'll give up :)
> Martin Steffens
> chimerae@***.ie

Ahhh, you'll never convince me :) (But you did have some points
that made a lot of sense).
But I'm positive I'll never swing you, either. So
let's leave it at that instead of repeating the same
arguments.
It was sure fun debating the whole thing with you
though :)

Scott
==

"If you can't win, don't join them;
learn how to lose."
-Walt Kelly

_________________________________________________________
DO YOU YAHOO!?
Get your free @*****.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com
Message no. 10
From: Martin Steffens <chimerae@***.IE>
Subject: Re: Desert Wars [was: The Corp War]
Date: Wed, 9 Dec 1998 13:59:02 +0000
and thus did Scott W speak on 7 Dec 98 at 5:51:

> Ahhh, you'll never convince me :) (But you did have some points
> that made a lot of sense). But I'm positive I'll never swing you,
> either. So let's leave it at that instead of repeating the same
> arguments.
> It was sure fun debating the whole thing with you
> though :)

Heh, sure you can convince me, I didn't really thought about the
whole concept until you mentioned it, and only then I started
thinking on how it might have evolved. Frankly the whole idea of
extra-territoriality is a bit far fetched in my eyes, so that would
make Desert Wars equally far fetched.

It was indeed fun to do a good old "what if" :)


Karina & Martin Steffens
chimerae@***.ie

Further Reading

If you enjoyed reading about Desert Wars [was: The Corp War], you may also be interested in:

Disclaimer

These messages were posted a long time ago on a mailing list far, far away. The copyright to their contents probably lies with the original authors of the individual messages, but since they were published in an electronic forum that anyone could subscribe to, and the logs were available to subscribers and most likely non-subscribers as well, it's felt that re-publishing them here is a kind of public service.

Thwap!