Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Added DiffLines:
*** Those plans are slow, need setup, and rely just as much, if not more, on the surprise factor as anything else. It's good for taking down any member of the League ''once''. But if you intend to take them down, throw them behind bars, and then have to take them down again? "Throw a batarang" is a lot more reliable.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 39 (click to see context) from:
*** As a matter of fact, yes. Tests have been done with EMPs on internal combustion vehicles without computer systems and the pulse burns out the plugs. Steam engines by contrast do not rely on anything electrical so they would survive. That said, Savage also simply presented it as an example.
to:
*** As a matter of fact, yes. Tests have been done with EMPs {{EMP}}s) on internal combustion vehicles without computer systems and the pulse burns out the plugs. Steam engines by contrast do not rely on anything electrical so they would survive. That said, Savage also simply presented it as an example.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Added DiffLines:
*** As a matter of fact, yes. Tests have been done with EMPs on internal combustion vehicles without computer systems and the pulse burns out the plugs. Steam engines by contrast do not rely on anything electrical so they would survive. That said, Savage also simply presented it as an example.
