We need more gasses!

  • Wilq15
    1st Sep 2010 Member 0 Permalink
    Lolzy about that less powerful reaction than plutonium... it should be same power.
  • lolzy
    1st Sep 2010 Former Staff 0 Permalink
    No it shouldn't. That would ruin the concept of it.
  • Finalflash50
    1st Sep 2010 Banned 0 Permalink
    This post is hidden because the user is banned
  • Wilq15
    1st Sep 2010 Member 0 Permalink
    Francium isn't gas it is solid.

    Ok lolzy little less power cause even then it will be more powerful used propertly.
  • lolzy
    1st Sep 2010 Former Staff 0 Permalink
    I believe he meant a radioactive element in general. We are looking for gases in this thread and Francium was rejected anyway.
  • HolyExLxF
    1st Sep 2010 Member 0 Permalink
    As far as new radioactive elements, I think the only thing that you could even argue as a "need" is a solid radioactive element - something like Radium. For every particle of RAD that decays, 2-4 neutrons can be emitted; decayed RAD can become METL or BMET or whatever. Also, this should not be an escalating reaction; decay should be constant.
  • lolzy
    1st Sep 2010 Former Staff 0 Permalink
    I like this. Under pressure it could decay faster. Not a complete nukeage but speeded decay.
  • HolyExLxF
    1st Sep 2010 Member 0 Permalink
    Yeah, something like that.
  • lolzy
    1st Sep 2010 Former Staff 0 Permalink
    I would love to try and code that but it might be a little out of my incredibly simple coding mind.