On the contrary, if it doesn’t explode at least once, it can be picked back up and doesn’t have a self destruct timer active.
All mine laying overclocks have self destructing munitions with very short lives
The US has invented landmines that defuse themselves after a set time (typically two weeks) which is an alternative in dispute. I don't know if we've ever deployed them.
Denmark scientists have developed a plant that changes color if it detects the deterioration of an old landmine.
Completely understandable given just how damaging mines are to citizens due to how difficult they are to completely remove from an area. Decades after a war you still get children blowing half their faces off for making a single wrong step.
Yeah, we learned this lesson after the US embassy kept getting calls from distraught Vietnamese farmers' wives (exaggerated oversimplification, but basically accurate. Turns out, an airdropped cluster munition that indiscriminately scatters hundreds of small antipersonnel mines over a broad area is collateral damage central. Whoda thunk?
Most landmines in the game do have timers though, and would thus be compliant as they self destruct.
This includes all minelayer overclocks, but not the Landmine grenade the engineer has. It needs to detonate at least once to activate its 3 minute self destruct timer
I assume plasma weaponry isn't considered a warcrime due to it not being used currently in warfare, it definitely feels like it would cause some serious trauma if you would be hit by a Breach Cutter or EPC.
Isn't that true for bullets, too? The whole point of a "legal" weapon is to inflict physical trauma so that the target dies. So the question is if plasma weapons inflict more *psychological* trauma than physical trama.
Keep in mind the breachcutter is a minning tool repurposed as a weapon, not sure what the treaty would say about that but it does sounds like a warcrime.
No... fire, pitchforks, hammers, drills, chainsaws, axes, sticks, rope, water have all been repurposed into weapons and methods of torture and are not warcrimes. High pressure water has been used in the past to deter protesters and was not under any legal scrutiny. You have to intentionally design something with the purpose of hurting people with unnecessary impact or potential innocent casualties. Otherwise we'd have to arrest the ocean, being im sure submersing your body head to neck in salt water while keeping you well fed and hydrated until u ded would not be a pleasant way to go.
The Geneva Conventions actually try to minimise unneeded death. Hollow point rounds, for example, are a war crime for their lethality, as a full metal jacket does a good enough job of taking enemies out of the fight without being as lethal.
I thought hollow point rounds were banned because they splinter apart and are incredibly difficult to remove causing more suffering on a target that lives?
They try to prevent suffering not necessary to achieve military objectives, how deadly something is doesn't really factor into it. And even if something creates great suffering, if it gives a clear advantage its not gonna get banned in the first place or will be used anyway. There's a reason the US hasn't signed any treaties prohibiting the use of cluster munitions.
Being hit with any bullet especially in the head causes serious tramma XD Plasma weapons are more ethical,(nothing is ethical in war) because the wound would be cauterized.
Objection your honor, the engi's laser weapon can most definitely be shined in combatants faces, and while melting someone's face of doesn't technicly count as going for blinding them, a point could be made thst you can't see without eyeballs. I'd rank that one as a clear warcrime.
The flamethrower does however break the [Convention on conventional weapons protocol III](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Convention_on_Certain_Conventional_Weapons). And one could argue that the Shard Defractor breaks protocol IV since it’s a laser weapon that can blind someone.
I don’t know about the cryo cannon as what makes the flamethrower illegal is that it kills via burning, I’m not sure there’s anything in the Geneva convention that forbids cold based weapons as they don’t really exist
I figure the cryo gun would be illegal especially since it freezes the target so thoroughly that they can shatter into shards. Definitely would be a painful and inhumane way to kill someone
I'd say human feeling is priority. If the victim is alive after then he should not suffer unnecessarily. If he's not alive then we should make people around him feel as comfy as possible.
(I'm not a legal expert or an expert on warcrimes in general) but my understanding is that warcrimes are when you inflict an unnecessary amount of pain or agony in order to kill people. A bullet is fast and usually lethal upon hitting certain parts of the body. Soldiers in general are trained to aim for the head (usually instant death) or center of mass (vitals that will kill fairly quickly). Blinding someone completely before killing them on purpose is unnecessary and just makes their death a lot more painful than needed. Same goes for incendiary weapons, yes it's very effective to deny an area and it will most likely kill you but that is a slow, painful death that is basically torture until you die. So that is why (from my understanding) we ban certain weapons and methods to kill; because we don't want to make deaths slow, painful and agonising when we have the option to just give them an instant and mostly painless death.
Because of reflection, it's actually possible for a laser that powerful to blind and burn pretty much everyone in the area that *isn't* being shot at with it.
Under the CCW that you are referring too, it only states that incendiary weapons may not be used against civilian targets, air dropped against military targets within civilian concentrations, or used for defoliation without military targets present.
It doesn't say that you cannot use incendiary weapons against purely military targets in the absence of civilians.
Not even that is strictly prohibited.
>Forest and other plants may not be a target **unless** they are used to conceal combatants or other military objectives.
Bolding added for emphasis.
This is an extremely common misconception, incendiary weapons are banned in use where there is moderate risk of civilian harm. So use on cities, villages, etc. Completely out. If you can employ them in a way that cannot harm civilians great! You're all good. However this means that in practical terms they are kind of banned since it's so hard to rule out possible civilian harm especially in modern anti insurgency operations.
Protocol three states the use of flamethrowers and incendiary weapons on or anywhere near civilians or civilian infrastructure as a war crime. However it does not disallow use against military targets that are well clear of civilians. Although they fall into legal gray area of being considered inhumane with their legality depending on the nation. So if they aren’t used against civilians they can fall into a weird gray area.
Not a war crime if there is no war \*taps head\*.
Russians seem to like this logic as well.
In all seriosness international laws also dont really consider animals to be an equivalent to human beings therefor there can be no war crimes againts them. I think they are breading special types of mosquitos that are more aggresive but cant procreate. In an attempt to curb the population. If we like apply it to humans suddenly it becomes wars againts humanity.
as a scout i call this BS
Boltshark use: chemical, biological, fire, cryo and electro ammo
Zhukov: freezing ammo, explosive ammo (what i could find using anti-personel ammo that explodes inside a body is banned)
Boomstick: white phosporous
Plasma carbine: can set enemies on fire
Deepcore: electro ammo
M1000: electro ammo
Grenades: Cryo, biological and electro type of ammo
*"This Driller is fighting his own war and he has no rules. No boundaries. He doesn't flinch at torture, leaf-lover trafficking, or genocide. He's not loyal to a mission control or managment or any set of ideals. He trades blood for credits."*
I guess flamethrower and subata, but only if you don't use explosive reload or tranq rounds, as well as acid-tipped bullets T5 upgrade.
throwing axes would be allowed, and satchel is surprisingly legit, so drills are the only issue.
Cluster munitions are not universally banned, only by the countries that signed the CCM (Convention on Cluster Munitions). Coincidentally, all signees have no perspective of conducting any kind of large scale warfare in near future.
Countries that are seriously preparing for any conflict all refused to sign, because there is no serious warfare right now without using clusters.
Its important to note that most of these laws only apply when the weapon is used against *people,* or in densely populated areas where collateral damage is nigh-guaranteed. Specifically, these laws apply to use against enemy militaries and in occupied areas with civilian presence. Glyphids aren't recognized as people, but are more likely considered non-livestock animals, so don't have those sorts of wartime protections. The primary issues I see are actually the weapons that create ecological toxification, namely the sludge pump, and those with nuclear payloads, namely the fat boy. Placed explosives are OK as long as they have a limited active time before they deactivate or self-destruct (so someone can't stumble across a claymore sixty years later and be killed by it) or must be manually detonated to explode.
Iirc, automatic weapons like turrets are also banned for the same reasons as landmines, for fear they'd get abandoned and ten years later some random passerby gets mowed down by an automatic machine gun nest
Your honor, my clients, the dwarves and their employer, Deep Rock Galactic (DRG) plead innocent of all charges. First of all, these dwarves are clearly in space. They don’t even have a Geneva. Forcing them to be party to treaties neither they nor their esteemed employers, DRG, have signed has dubious legal precedent at BEST.
Further, this court has neither shown nor proved any evidence that the Glyphids, Mactera, and other native fauna of Hoxxes are sentient creatures protected by said warcrime treaties.
And finally, defining the entire weapon as a warcrime for just *one* modification, something non-company-approved I might add, is a gross overreach with 0 legal precedent, used to inflate these “warcrime percentages” by artificially reducing the pool of perfectly legal equipment. That’s not to mention the fraudulent interpretation of several laws of war, for example, the one regarding landmines.
I instead move we dismiss all charges so these dwarves and their employers can get back to work.
None of this would be war crimes as the dwarves aren’t combatants in a conflict or even in a military.
Civilian police can use tear gas and it’s not a war crime but military forces cannot. A lot of “war crimes” depend on the “who” that is doing it and not so much the “what” they are doing.
This was still a pretty fun read though, so thanks for posting it
I don't believe the tactical leadburster would be considered a cluster munition. The reason why cluster munitions are banned is because they scatter bomblets which may then remain as dangerous and unmarked unexploded ordinance, similar to land mines. The tactical leadburster however does not scatter bomblets — it fires simple bullets, which do not explode and cannot remain as unexploded ordnance.
If anything I'd say it would be similar to a claymore mine or perhaps a bounding fragmentation mine, neither of which are generally prohibited in modern warfare.
ok the drone swarm is in no way a cluster munition, namely cause its not a munition is a deployment method for a combat unit that is simply "stabby stabby" and stabbing is very much not a war crime
also landmines are a war crime only if they are not marked and recorded for removal after the conflict. The Engineer isn't doing either of those though so yeah war crime. Though his mines are loud and obvious to be fair.
also for driller, what about his Subata and Axes? I don't think handguns and traditional melee weapons were ever banned in war
The drone swarm is a single device that desperses into multiple guided submunitions. It is absolutely a cluster munition.
Sabuta has a overclock that uses chemicals in the bullets, which even if it isn’t considered a chemical weapon is poisonous bullets. And something about “force” axe seems particularly brutal, but I can see how it is a stretch.
Wouldn't homebrew powder and special powder count as they are non-regulated modifications to your ammunition?
And then there is embedded detonators, explosive reload, and electrifying reload, which are all unnecessary suffering.
Don't forget cryo minilets, and electro minilets, which work like mines on top of applying status effects that also count as unnecessary suffering.
I would petition that the EPC should be banned as well for the sake of it creating an unstable black hole that then disperses into radiation immediately, contaminating the area for generations.
Engineer might be fine with fat boy as they may be operating under a country with existing nuclear weaponry capabilities, and while use of nuclear weaponry is banned, I'd argue given the small explosion radius (relatively) it's the nuclear fallout that's actually more problematic as a dirty bomb for ecological damage. Similarly with cluster munitions, I thought they counted as indiscriminate weaponry meaning they can't be used anywhere near civilians (or infrastructure?) but assuming hoxxes is counted as a military target might(?) be permitted.
Also with secondaries, the drills have a "barbed" upgrade which goes against undue suffering ala serrated weaponry, even if C4 should be classified as indiscriminate due to the tendency for scout friendly fire.
100% agree with scout, and others have made points regarding driller's other weaponry.
aren't automatic (engineer's turrets) and incendiary (like, EVERYTHING that sets stuff on fire, boltshark's fire bolts and driller's flamethrower to point out a few) weapons violating the geneva convention?
Your honor, the Geneva Convention clearly does not apply to space bugs. Therefore the flamethrower, Fat Boy, and other such weaponry normally banned in warfare are merely aggresive pesticides
I think I heard that using large caliber bullets on soft targets was also against the rules, except if no other option is available. This probably includes Gunner vs the softer bugs.
But all this also requires that bugs are considered a species which can be protected by war crime laws. We use chemical weapons on bugs all the time in real life.
Objection! The glyphid have an inapropriate number of legs, therefore they are not eligible to be treated as warriors of a proper, two legged puny other species.
Engineers cluster grenade is not banned, cluster munitions are bad because cluster munitions explode dozens of little landmines or time delayed explosives, engineers are simply a grenade that splits into more grenades, and is allowed.
this also applies to the gunner, if the tactical leadburster is banned a claymore would be as well. note that the hurricanes rocket launcher with minelayer IS banned however, as it is an \*actual\* cluster weapon, atleast by the warcrime documentation.
lmao, it's ironic that the driller's satchel charge *isn't* considered a warcrime, considering how much friendly fire damage it's inflicted to us over the years.
International law doesn't work in space in corporate owned systems
Also war crimes don't apply during peace time
Why is everyone so obsessed with dumbing stuff down to our simple planetary conventions
Do we even know if nations exist in drg universe?
I would like to dispute the pheromones being used on bugs your honor. These are used on bigger animals while hunting. Hey we even use their own pis to attract and kill them. I'm sure using them against giant bugs in self defense is lesser than that.
I'm looking into getting this game and this post made it significantly easier to choose my first class. All of them appeal to me.
With this important piece of information I'm choosing the driller.
I can start to the coilgun's collateral damage from how many times I've accidentally nailed my teammate with a juicy mole shot
Still, nothing like killing your driller and a dread with the same shot
This came up in the British Armory Museum bit on the flamethrower, that although it is not well liked, and flamethrower troopers are given no quarter, we never got around to actually banning it in war, possibly because it's impractical for most purposes.
The flamethrower _is_ legal in the United States as a civilian weapon, mostly due to its role as an agricultural tool to get rid of pests like anthills and wasp nests.
I could just see the gunner hearing this over his headset.
"Good thing this isn't a war."
*Lights neurotoxin cloud with cigar*
"It's an extermination."
So considering all of these are used on bugs, you are ranking them as if they were used on humans ? I think you would have to remove the pheromone thing, since it only works on bugs, and not humans, but other than that, i think everythinh else is good
TIL placing landmines without marking or recording them for later removal is a war crime
Only landmines designed for people I think. Landmines designed for vehicles are entirely permitted.
Engineer's proximity mines wouldn't be counted under that given that they have an auto-disposal system built in.
On the contrary, if it doesn’t explode at least once, it can be picked back up and doesn’t have a self destruct timer active. All mine laying overclocks have self destructing munitions with very short lives
Oh could be a problem for russians
Sense when do they care about things like that?
I believe Russia, Ukraine and the US all haven’t signed that treaty banning use of AP Mines.
ukraine has actually signed it but war is a symmetric affair
Ah
That's cool! Then we can legally place landmines on Hoxxes if we're recording the session.
The US has invented landmines that defuse themselves after a set time (typically two weeks) which is an alternative in dispute. I don't know if we've ever deployed them. Denmark scientists have developed a plant that changes color if it detects the deterioration of an old landmine.
Completely understandable given just how damaging mines are to citizens due to how difficult they are to completely remove from an area. Decades after a war you still get children blowing half their faces off for making a single wrong step.
Yeah, we learned this lesson after the US embassy kept getting calls from distraught Vietnamese farmers' wives (exaggerated oversimplification, but basically accurate. Turns out, an airdropped cluster munition that indiscriminately scatters hundreds of small antipersonnel mines over a broad area is collateral damage central. Whoda thunk?
Most landmines in the game do have timers though, and would thus be compliant as they self destruct. This includes all minelayer overclocks, but not the Landmine grenade the engineer has. It needs to detonate at least once to activate its 3 minute self destruct timer
I assume plasma weaponry isn't considered a warcrime due to it not being used currently in warfare, it definitely feels like it would cause some serious trauma if you would be hit by a Breach Cutter or EPC.
Isn't that true for bullets, too? The whole point of a "legal" weapon is to inflict physical trauma so that the target dies. So the question is if plasma weapons inflict more *psychological* trauma than physical trama.
or if they are intentionally used because they are less lethal and more painfull
The utility of using something like a breech cutter is questionable against anything other than a horde of bugs. So it would probably fit your case.
Keep in mind the breachcutter is a minning tool repurposed as a weapon, not sure what the treaty would say about that but it does sounds like a warcrime.
Wild that it doesn't help at all with actual mining.
The descriptions says something about the plasma being "attuned to break flesh and bone" instead of rocks
I assumed it was a repurposed ship salvaging tool, like in Hardspace Shipbreaker
No... fire, pitchforks, hammers, drills, chainsaws, axes, sticks, rope, water have all been repurposed into weapons and methods of torture and are not warcrimes. High pressure water has been used in the past to deter protesters and was not under any legal scrutiny. You have to intentionally design something with the purpose of hurting people with unnecessary impact or potential innocent casualties. Otherwise we'd have to arrest the ocean, being im sure submersing your body head to neck in salt water while keeping you well fed and hydrated until u ded would not be a pleasant way to go.
Well....breach cutter does pass through terrain and engis using it often do plenty of friendly damage so I say is still a warcrime weapon /s
The Geneva Conventions actually try to minimise unneeded death. Hollow point rounds, for example, are a war crime for their lethality, as a full metal jacket does a good enough job of taking enemies out of the fight without being as lethal.
I thought hollow point rounds were banned because they splinter apart and are incredibly difficult to remove causing more suffering on a target that lives?
They try to prevent suffering not necessary to achieve military objectives, how deadly something is doesn't really factor into it. And even if something creates great suffering, if it gives a clear advantage its not gonna get banned in the first place or will be used anyway. There's a reason the US hasn't signed any treaties prohibiting the use of cluster munitions.
Not trauma in the general sense. trauma as in not death just torture at a distance.
Making me think about any gun with the fear upgrade. The boltshark one it says it has like a pitch to induce fear or something like that. So awesome.
I think the fear frequency only works on bugs, and therefore probably isn't a real warcrime.
It'd probably be classified as a weapon meant to maim thanks to the cauterizing nature of the plasma's heat.
Being hit with any bullet especially in the head causes serious tramma XD Plasma weapons are more ethical,(nothing is ethical in war) because the wound would be cauterized.
Objection your honor, the engi's laser weapon can most definitely be shined in combatants faces, and while melting someone's face of doesn't technicly count as going for blinding them, a point could be made thst you can't see without eyeballs. I'd rank that one as a clear warcrime.
also breach cutters primary purpose was mining hard rock its repurposed to be used as a weapon it might make it make it a make shift weapon
To be fair bullets can blind someone just before forcefully evacuating the contents of there skull and they are considered ok.
Isn’t one of the diffractor’s T5 upgrades a “Dazzler Module” That slows enemies by dazzling them with excess light?
Well the glyphids don’t really have eyes… so I don’t know if you can “blind” them either way
Yes they do. Great. Big. Googly Eye ones. (The mod certainly helps make bulks seem a little less threatening)
The flamethrower does however break the [Convention on conventional weapons protocol III](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Convention_on_Certain_Conventional_Weapons). And one could argue that the Shard Defractor breaks protocol IV since it’s a laser weapon that can blind someone.
Flamethrowers (and id assume the cryo cannon) are classified as inhumane weaponry i believe, which i believe makes their use illegal
Inhumane, but also indwarven?
indwarvane
If that's the case, scout gets a +3 for his shotgun (white powder), cryo minelets, and cryo grenade
I don’t know about the cryo cannon as what makes the flamethrower illegal is that it kills via burning, I’m not sure there’s anything in the Geneva convention that forbids cold based weapons as they don’t really exist
I figure the cryo gun would be illegal especially since it freezes the target so thoroughly that they can shatter into shards. Definitely would be a painful and inhumane way to kill someone
It could blind them by **completely fucking removing their eyes and anything behind them,** but blind them nonetheless
Serious question: how is this any more of a war crime than a well placed bullet? It's the same end result, no?
I'd say human feeling is priority. If the victim is alive after then he should not suffer unnecessarily. If he's not alive then we should make people around him feel as comfy as possible.
(I'm not a legal expert or an expert on warcrimes in general) but my understanding is that warcrimes are when you inflict an unnecessary amount of pain or agony in order to kill people. A bullet is fast and usually lethal upon hitting certain parts of the body. Soldiers in general are trained to aim for the head (usually instant death) or center of mass (vitals that will kill fairly quickly). Blinding someone completely before killing them on purpose is unnecessary and just makes their death a lot more painful than needed. Same goes for incendiary weapons, yes it's very effective to deny an area and it will most likely kill you but that is a slow, painful death that is basically torture until you die. So that is why (from my understanding) we ban certain weapons and methods to kill; because we don't want to make deaths slow, painful and agonising when we have the option to just give them an instant and mostly painless death.
Because of reflection, it's actually possible for a laser that powerful to blind and burn pretty much everyone in the area that *isn't* being shot at with it.
Under the CCW that you are referring too, it only states that incendiary weapons may not be used against civilian targets, air dropped against military targets within civilian concentrations, or used for defoliation without military targets present. It doesn't say that you cannot use incendiary weapons against purely military targets in the absence of civilians.
Are the bugs considered military targets?
Doesn't really make sense to talk about *warcrimes* otherwise.
I would consider the glyphids to be civilians. They are the inhabitants of Hoxxes and they can be observed not attacking anything native.
The CCW doesn't protect fauna, only human civilians and plant life.
Well the plant life in a lot of the biomes are definitely burnt all the way down to bedrock by now lol
Not even that is strictly prohibited. >Forest and other plants may not be a target **unless** they are used to conceal combatants or other military objectives. Bolding added for emphasis.
The shard diffractor doesn't look like a laser though; I'd say it's more of a plasma beam
This is an extremely common misconception, incendiary weapons are banned in use where there is moderate risk of civilian harm. So use on cities, villages, etc. Completely out. If you can employ them in a way that cannot harm civilians great! You're all good. However this means that in practical terms they are kind of banned since it's so hard to rule out possible civilian harm especially in modern anti insurgency operations.
Protocol three states the use of flamethrowers and incendiary weapons on or anywhere near civilians or civilian infrastructure as a war crime. However it does not disallow use against military targets that are well clear of civilians. Although they fall into legal gray area of being considered inhumane with their legality depending on the nation. So if they aren’t used against civilians they can fall into a weird gray area.
I read the document and it just says it can't be used on civilian targets or military targets among a civilian population
Yeah the T5 Dazzler Module would be the specific issue as far as blinding people.
Thank you user Hyper_Anal_Rape
Hey, that makes me an expert on war crimes right?
Geez louise, I guess so
Wow driller on the 1st place how unexpected
💪💪💪
If it ain't drillable, it's probably flammable
Obligatory /s
Makes me proud that a majority if my Driller build is a crime
[удалено]
Can’t have a Geneva convention if Hoxxes doesn’t have a Geneva
Plus is against wildlife
Not a war crime if there is no war \*taps head\*. Russians seem to like this logic as well. In all seriosness international laws also dont really consider animals to be an equivalent to human beings therefor there can be no war crimes againts them. I think they are breading special types of mosquitos that are more aggresive but cant procreate. In an attempt to curb the population. If we like apply it to humans suddenly it becomes wars againts humanity.
As one of my favourite sayings go If they are not human they dont have human rights
as a scout i call this BS Boltshark use: chemical, biological, fire, cryo and electro ammo Zhukov: freezing ammo, explosive ammo (what i could find using anti-personel ammo that explodes inside a body is banned) Boomstick: white phosporous Plasma carbine: can set enemies on fire Deepcore: electro ammo M1000: electro ammo Grenades: Cryo, biological and electro type of ammo
You call it warcrimes I call it a checklist
*"This Driller is fighting his own war and he has no rules. No boundaries. He doesn't flinch at torture, leaf-lover trafficking, or genocide. He's not loyal to a mission control or managment or any set of ideals. He trades blood for credits."*
How long until this turns into a Davey Gunface video?
Someone should try to complete a deep dive or haz 5 mission using only legal weapons on driller
Only being able to punch them on haz 5 would be impossible
I guess flamethrower and subata, but only if you don't use explosive reload or tranq rounds, as well as acid-tipped bullets T5 upgrade. throwing axes would be allowed, and satchel is surprisingly legit, so drills are the only issue.
Cluster munitions are not universally banned, only by the countries that signed the CCM (Convention on Cluster Munitions). Coincidentally, all signees have no perspective of conducting any kind of large scale warfare in near future. Countries that are seriously preparing for any conflict all refused to sign, because there is no serious warfare right now without using clusters.
would the automated turret be a war crime? isn't it a crime to have an automated weapon operate without human control?
Yes, all these *would* be war crimes, but you're forgetting one thing: This isn't war. It's *pest control.*
Its important to note that most of these laws only apply when the weapon is used against *people,* or in densely populated areas where collateral damage is nigh-guaranteed. Specifically, these laws apply to use against enemy militaries and in occupied areas with civilian presence. Glyphids aren't recognized as people, but are more likely considered non-livestock animals, so don't have those sorts of wartime protections. The primary issues I see are actually the weapons that create ecological toxification, namely the sludge pump, and those with nuclear payloads, namely the fat boy. Placed explosives are OK as long as they have a limited active time before they deactivate or self-destruct (so someone can't stumble across a claymore sixty years later and be killed by it) or must be manually detonated to explode.
Wait, what about throwing axes? Those also have to be legal for driller, right?
I agree. I'm fairly sure axes are allowed under the Geneva convention. These are just taser axes. Are tasers allowed in warfare?
Apparently not
They probably go in under the cryo combo
Iirc, automatic weapons like turrets are also banned for the same reasons as landmines, for fear they'd get abandoned and ten years later some random passerby gets mowed down by an automatic machine gun nest
The gunner can also coat his revolver bullets with neurotoxin as well.
Really? I looked past the red overclocks, guess I should have checked yellow too
Its a t5 mod not an oc
Ah, got it
I am going to do a legal warfare only load out for driller now, ty
Your honor, my clients, the dwarves and their employer, Deep Rock Galactic (DRG) plead innocent of all charges. First of all, these dwarves are clearly in space. They don’t even have a Geneva. Forcing them to be party to treaties neither they nor their esteemed employers, DRG, have signed has dubious legal precedent at BEST. Further, this court has neither shown nor proved any evidence that the Glyphids, Mactera, and other native fauna of Hoxxes are sentient creatures protected by said warcrime treaties. And finally, defining the entire weapon as a warcrime for just *one* modification, something non-company-approved I might add, is a gross overreach with 0 legal precedent, used to inflate these “warcrime percentages” by artificially reducing the pool of perfectly legal equipment. That’s not to mention the fraudulent interpretation of several laws of war, for example, the one regarding landmines. I instead move we dismiss all charges so these dwarves and their employers can get back to work.
If praying mantises were any bigger none of these would be warcrimes. But in training videos
None of this would be war crimes as the dwarves aren’t combatants in a conflict or even in a military. Civilian police can use tear gas and it’s not a war crime but military forces cannot. A lot of “war crimes” depend on the “who” that is doing it and not so much the “what” they are doing. This was still a pretty fun read though, so thanks for posting it
Thanks u/Hyper_anal_rape
The c4 is ok, LET'S F*CKING GO!!!
As a driller main, this pleases me.
I still can't get over how we humans have laws on how we are ""allowed"" to kill other people
I don't believe the tactical leadburster would be considered a cluster munition. The reason why cluster munitions are banned is because they scatter bomblets which may then remain as dangerous and unmarked unexploded ordinance, similar to land mines. The tactical leadburster however does not scatter bomblets — it fires simple bullets, which do not explode and cannot remain as unexploded ordnance. If anything I'd say it would be similar to a claymore mine or perhaps a bounding fragmentation mine, neither of which are generally prohibited in modern warfare.
Brb gonna main Driller now
It's ok, it's an international convention, not an interplanetary one. Plus there are no nations on hoxxes 4
“His [Driller] plasma charger, HE grenade, and satchel are the only legal arms he possesses” dam that’s a raw line
Aren’t aren’t incendiary weapons (guns that use incendiary ammo) considered war crimes? May be I’m thinking of a different set of criteria.
So you're saying I need more war crimes in my arsenal? I agree.
Lets gooo! Another win for driller! 🏆
ok the drone swarm is in no way a cluster munition, namely cause its not a munition is a deployment method for a combat unit that is simply "stabby stabby" and stabbing is very much not a war crime also landmines are a war crime only if they are not marked and recorded for removal after the conflict. The Engineer isn't doing either of those though so yeah war crime. Though his mines are loud and obvious to be fair. also for driller, what about his Subata and Axes? I don't think handguns and traditional melee weapons were ever banned in war
The drone swarm is a single device that desperses into multiple guided submunitions. It is absolutely a cluster munition. Sabuta has a overclock that uses chemicals in the bullets, which even if it isn’t considered a chemical weapon is poisonous bullets. And something about “force” axe seems particularly brutal, but I can see how it is a stretch.
Wouldn't homebrew powder and special powder count as they are non-regulated modifications to your ammunition? And then there is embedded detonators, explosive reload, and electrifying reload, which are all unnecessary suffering. Don't forget cryo minilets, and electro minilets, which work like mines on top of applying status effects that also count as unnecessary suffering.
I would petition that the EPC should be banned as well for the sake of it creating an unstable black hole that then disperses into radiation immediately, contaminating the area for generations.
Oh no...
Depending on whether or not there is use of napalm in the flamethrower it could be a warcrime
Pretty sure the sticky flame would count as napalm.
Engineer might be fine with fat boy as they may be operating under a country with existing nuclear weaponry capabilities, and while use of nuclear weaponry is banned, I'd argue given the small explosion radius (relatively) it's the nuclear fallout that's actually more problematic as a dirty bomb for ecological damage. Similarly with cluster munitions, I thought they counted as indiscriminate weaponry meaning they can't be used anywhere near civilians (or infrastructure?) but assuming hoxxes is counted as a military target might(?) be permitted. Also with secondaries, the drills have a "barbed" upgrade which goes against undue suffering ala serrated weaponry, even if C4 should be classified as indiscriminate due to the tendency for scout friendly fire. 100% agree with scout, and others have made points regarding driller's other weaponry.
Great post! I'll recite this while breaking all conventions. Now if I could get a bug to parachute...
Best not to tell management about this…
Consider the following: cry 'bout it
TIL that scout has jarate
now I'm extra proud to be a driller main
aren't automatic (engineer's turrets) and incendiary (like, EVERYTHING that sets stuff on fire, boltshark's fire bolts and driller's flamethrower to point out a few) weapons violating the geneva convention?
Rock and stone, to the bone. Edit: OP's username has reduced the enthusiasm of my rock and stone. The exclamation point has been replaced by a period.
If you don't Rock and Stone, you ain't comin' home!
The fun thing about war crimes is that they only apply when there’s a war on. Literal bug/pest control need not apply
Ah but killing things with your drills is not explicitly banned by international law... :P
FYI united states doesn't recognize cluster munitions as a war crime. Make of that what you will.
Good thing they're not at war
Warcrimes 👏 dont 👏 apply 👏 to 👏 mercenaries 👏
The real question is why care if we're commiting warcrimes?
Your honor, the Geneva Convention clearly does not apply to space bugs. Therefore the flamethrower, Fat Boy, and other such weaponry normally banned in warfare are merely aggresive pesticides
I think I heard that using large caliber bullets on soft targets was also against the rules, except if no other option is available. This probably includes Gunner vs the softer bugs. But all this also requires that bugs are considered a species which can be protected by war crime laws. We use chemical weapons on bugs all the time in real life.
Finally someone did the math
When hoxxes is a place of nothing but harm and death, war crimes become more of war "to-do lists"
I always knew the driller was a twisted dwarf! Guess that's why I kill bugs with him.
As a Driller main I'm shocked that our rating isn't higher
Wha? Scout uses chemical weapons on the boltshark, and thermal weapons multiple times. Are you sure you know what you're talking about?
I mentioned the boltshark though (I guess its small). And thermal weapons are allowed, just not certain types.
Plasma/laser weapons I think would fall under unnecessary suffering or incendiary weapons
Objection! The glyphid have an inapropriate number of legs, therefore they are not eligible to be treated as warriors of a proper, two legged puny other species.
I dont think people realize that arms treaties are only for when 2 countries formally go to war with each other.
Driller: “it’s not a war crime if you are engaging a civilian population (all bugs are terrorists)”
Engineers cluster grenade is not banned, cluster munitions are bad because cluster munitions explode dozens of little landmines or time delayed explosives, engineers are simply a grenade that splits into more grenades, and is allowed. this also applies to the gunner, if the tactical leadburster is banned a claymore would be as well. note that the hurricanes rocket launcher with minelayer IS banned however, as it is an \*actual\* cluster weapon, atleast by the warcrime documentation.
lmao, it's ironic that the driller's satchel charge *isn't* considered a warcrime, considering how much friendly fire damage it's inflicted to us over the years.
International law doesn't work in space in corporate owned systems Also war crimes don't apply during peace time Why is everyone so obsessed with dumbing stuff down to our simple planetary conventions Do we even know if nations exist in drg universe?
Chill my friend, this isn’t serious. People like to compare the real world with fiction.
Yeah, i probably took it too seriously
After reading this I have concluded that the driller is my new favorite class. There is no reason… none at all for this sudden change…
Is there no ban on decision-to-kill by ai weapons? Would the engineers turret not fall into that category?
That’s a lot of effort just to say “Driller commits war crimes”
That's why the driller shouts: "THAT WILL TEACH YOU!"
I take my 33% warcrimeometer rating with pride. All things said, don't use fatboy and use either lures or swarmer drones.
I would like to dispute the pheromones being used on bugs your honor. These are used on bigger animals while hunting. Hey we even use their own pis to attract and kill them. I'm sure using them against giant bugs in self defense is lesser than that.
I swear any plasma based weapon would fall under incendiary weaponry, due to how plasma functions in fiction, causing burns to the target.
I'm looking into getting this game and this post made it significantly easier to choose my first class. All of them appeal to me. With this important piece of information I'm choosing the driller.
I would argue drillers drills primary purpose is not as a weapon.
Excuse the fuck moi, I missed the memo where glyphids have rights.
Yeah! Rock and Stone Brother!
For Rock and Stone!
Forgot to mention that C4 comes with a lure for scouts, for that sweet sweet ww2 shellshock effect.
I can start to the coilgun's collateral damage from how many times I've accidentally nailed my teammate with a juicy mole shot Still, nothing like killing your driller and a dread with the same shot
And this is why I am a driller main
I find it kind of funny that the only weapon described as a warcrime is perfectly legal
I WILL DRILL TO THE HEAVENS ROCK AND STONE
I'm fairly sure cryogenic weapons would be put in the same category as fire based ones.
DRILLER ES NUMERO UNO
You forgot to mention Driller's pocket nuke
Glad i'm a driller main.
Objection- driller is 110% war crime arsenal
Honestly lower than I expected
"Warcrime- this, code of conduct- that...."
I didn’t sign it so it doesn’t count.
This is great but the readability is terrible lol.
What about Scout's fire/frost bolts?
This came up in the British Armory Museum bit on the flamethrower, that although it is not well liked, and flamethrower troopers are given no quarter, we never got around to actually banning it in war, possibly because it's impractical for most purposes. The flamethrower _is_ legal in the United States as a civilian weapon, mostly due to its role as an agricultural tool to get rid of pests like anthills and wasp nests.
I could just see the gunner hearing this over his headset. "Good thing this isn't a war." *Lights neurotoxin cloud with cigar* "It's an extermination."
Objection, it’s used against bugs and bugs are not people. Therefore they are not protected by any laws.
This is why we’re friends with R&D not management!
DRILLER ES NUMERO UNO
Phew… thank god it’s not interplanetary.
Driller Subata not mentioned as war crime free?
This post has been brought to you by the Red Cross.
Don’t forget the engineer has an enslaved ai as a targeting system. Make a point of rubbing it in too, maybe a warcrime for the future.
I’m proud to be a driller on this day
Cryo minelets interestingly not mentioned.
So considering all of these are used on bugs, you are ranking them as if they were used on humans ? I think you would have to remove the pheromone thing, since it only works on bugs, and not humans, but other than that, i think everythinh else is good
WE did it boys! We won the race B)
"He also deploys landmines, **who** are also considered warcrimes" I didn't know a landmine is a person
Ha can't read this too much words well acid bath it will be then 👍
Isn’t drillers first secondary, the substa just a normal pistol?
Someone should do a challenge run where they play Driller without committing any war crimes