Jump to content

should mechs go nuclear when reactor melts down.


314 replies to this topic

Poll: should mechs go nuclear when reactor melts down. (846 member(s) have cast votes)

should mechs be able go nuclear

  1. yes (474 votes [54.61%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 54.61%

  2. no (394 votes [45.39%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 45.39%

Vote Guests cannot vote

#261 Saladin Yussuf

    Member

  • PipPipPip
  • 87 posts

Posted 08 July 2012 - 07:07 AM

totally yes. if you get a hit on the reactor it should go boom, just like table top.

#262 Fetladral

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Knight Errant
  • 525 posts
  • LocationAsgard

Posted 08 July 2012 - 07:24 AM

It would be more like a tactical nuke than a city wiping out type explosion. Some nuclear weapons of today do use a combination of fusion and fission. Should it be every mech that is taken out? No just only the ones where the reactor shielding has been damaged and possibly some other stuff to happen. I highly doubt it would be in at launch (to many variables to code). I don't even know if it should be a very often occurrence more like a once every now and then. There is cascading engine failure in tabletop which is an explosion.

Also the fusion reactor in a mech is pretty much the same thing as a star (from my understanding) and stars explode.

Edited by Fetladral, 08 July 2012 - 07:26 AM.


#263 sgt coloncrunch

    Member

  • PipPip
  • 45 posts
  • LocationPrinceton, WV USA

Posted 08 July 2012 - 07:29 AM

View PostAveram, on 22 June 2012 - 08:40 PM, said:

It's funny to me that everyone is speaking as if we've ever tried to detonate a fusion reactor. How do we really know how one will react (if there were any viable reactor types at all?)? Fusion energy is the combining of 2 atoms and harnessing the energy released from that reaction. It is assumed that the sun is a constant fusion reaction, and from here, to me it kinda looks like someone cored THAT mech and it is still burning...

So I am supposed to believe that if I were to interrupt a nuclear reaction by, say, placing a spent uranium shell into the middle of it I wouldn't be releasing said copious amounts of energy into the wild? It simply would fizzle out like a big fart? I find that hard to believe.


If I understood it correct, Cold Fusion Reactors use a vacuum chamber, with super chilled internal walls, the plasma is apparently held into place via magnetism.

If the magnetism fails, the plasma hits the super chilled walls and cools. In the event it would fail critically it's a explosive release of thermal expansion.

At least that's the way Sarna explained it, and I know there are a few real world examples of experimental cold fusion reactors that derived a frighteningly similar setup.

Then there is the LCFR being used in California, it's supposed to prove the theory of "cold" fusion, but it uses lasers as the ingnition and the source is apparently a hydrogen bead.

#264 Outlaw

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Elite Founder
  • Elite Founder
  • 321 posts
  • LocationThe Land of Hope and Glory

Posted 08 July 2012 - 07:38 AM

However, it is described by practically every author other than Stackpole that there are abundant safety measures in place to prevent it from happening and that it is one of those freakish occurrences that its practically a one in a million shot of it even happening. The most often described method is that the systems detect a breach in the core, and a dampening field drops killing the reaction immediately.

And remember, the reactor criticals were never in MW2 or MW3, the only REAL Mechwarrior games IMO

#265 sgt coloncrunch

    Member

  • PipPip
  • 45 posts
  • LocationPrinceton, WV USA

Posted 08 July 2012 - 07:44 AM

View PostOutlaw, on 08 July 2012 - 07:38 AM, said:

However, it is described by practically every author other than Stackpole that there are abundant safety measures in place to prevent it from happening and that it is one of those freakish occurrences that its practically a one in a million shot of it even happening. The most often described method is that the systems detect a breach in the core, and a dampening field drops killing the reaction immediately.

And remember, the reactor criticals were never in MW2 or MW3, the only REAL Mechwarrior games IMO


The biggest problem I see with absolutely no reactor criticals, is mech kills are horribly unrewarding visually. No satisfying bang, in fact from most of the videos around it just kinda. stops working, and then falls over with a couple charred bits.

That's not good. It needs something to add to the umph of a mech kill.

#266 BoudahXL

    Member

  • PipPip
  • Legendary Founder
  • Legendary Founder
  • 23 posts
  • Google+: Link
  • Facebook: Link
  • LocationCanada

Posted 08 July 2012 - 07:50 AM

14 pages long...

Rules VS Fun
Science VS Fun
Simulation VS Fun

Tough call even if Fun seems the obvious choice, because Rules-Science-Simulation can provide fun too...

#267 Bobfrombobtown

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Bad Company
  • Bad Company
  • 344 posts

Posted 08 July 2012 - 08:03 AM

View PostFetladral, on 08 July 2012 - 07:24 AM, said:

Also the fusion reactor in a mech is pretty much the same thing as a star (from my understanding) and stars explode.

Stars don't explode as often as you might think though. Here's the process that causes a supernova The process is called "carbon-burning" or "carbon fusion". This won't happen inside a battlemech's fusion reactor.
A Nova requires interference from a white dwarf star and thus cannot happen inside a battlemech.

#268 Bobfrombobtown

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Bad Company
  • Bad Company
  • 344 posts

Posted 08 July 2012 - 08:10 AM

View Postsgt coloncrunch, on 08 July 2012 - 07:44 AM, said:


The biggest problem I see with absolutely no reactor criticals, is mech kills are horribly unrewarding visually. No satisfying bang, in fact from most of the videos around it just kinda. stops working, and then falls over with a couple charred bits.

That's not good. It needs something to add to the umph of a mech kill.

The truly rewarding part, visually, is going to e all the molten lines drawn across a 'mech (you can see these in all the videos) and the destruction of arms and such, which appear to break apart pretty nicely (in the available videos). I'm hoping for something interesting for L/R torso destruction, like giant holes and the like, but that may be beyond the capabilities technologically since there would need to be layers and layers of polys and a lot of "damage points" to model this properly. (It may be simpler than I think, I'm not a 3d modeler.)

#269 Steel Talon

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 545 posts

Posted 08 July 2012 - 08:10 AM

I love them in MWLL, simply epic scenery
Posted Image

#270 Woopass

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Fire
  • Fire
  • 209 posts
  • LocationTacoma, WA

Posted 08 July 2012 - 08:12 AM

This gave me the idea of being able to chose different reactors. That would be pretty cool when customizing your mech. having to chose from a smaller to larger Reactor. Either Nuclear or some other technology. They could be lighter, some handle heat better than others, some heavier that others ect ect. Just throwing this idea out there.

#271 Pest

    Member

  • PipPipPip
  • Legendary Founder
  • Legendary Founder
  • 58 posts
  • LocationHouston

Posted 08 July 2012 - 08:15 AM

View PostWW8Ball, on 22 June 2012 - 06:55 PM, said:

Just out of curiousity. How much Hydrogen is released? Could a laser hitting after the breach cause a good sized explosion or at least a big fireball?

I like the idea. Would be an interesting phenomena.

#272 Outlaw

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Elite Founder
  • Elite Founder
  • 321 posts
  • LocationThe Land of Hope and Glory

Posted 08 July 2012 - 09:16 AM

Its less an issue of Fun as it is balance. I mean in MWLL if you die you re-spawn so if a Mech goes critical next to you its ok because you can just re-spawn and play again. The way MWO has been presented thus far is that it is no re-spawn and if you die you are done for the match. If a Mech goes critical out of sheer bad luck it can tip the balance of the game to one side for no other reason than just flashy effects. This is why I am vehemently opposed to Mechs going critical in MWO.

#273 Neenja

    Member

  • PipPipPip
  • 60 posts

Posted 08 July 2012 - 10:44 AM

View PostFactorlanP, on 22 June 2012 - 06:32 PM, said:


^This deserves repeating.

It escapes me why so many seem to find him to be such a fine writer.

I find it hard to hate the writer who gave us the Blood of Kerensky trilogy... even if most of the other stuff he wrote was just okay.

#274 Xandre Blackheart

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 703 posts
  • LocationIn the "cockpit".

Posted 08 July 2012 - 10:50 AM

Uncontrolled plasma release.

That's about the worst you're going to get, but that's pretty bad... if you happen to be within 90m.

there was a suggestion thread about this already where it was dissected in excruciating detail.

#275 Todd Lee

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 145 posts

Posted 08 July 2012 - 11:00 AM

Be even cooler if you could choose to go nuclear (side of blowing all your energy weapons at once and causing a massive heat spike). Suicide Jenners anyone?

#276 Burnsidhe

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 118 posts

Posted 08 July 2012 - 11:14 AM

A fusion reactor that's suddenly and catastrophically breached could vent plasma. That would be a problem for that 'mech's internals, and maybe for the pilot.

It wouldn't be a problem for anyone else, unless said 'mech was an ammunition-dependent design with most of it's ammo still on board. Then maybe you'd get a 'mech "grenade." In other words, a point blank AOE. If you were in melee with said 'mech, that might mean your mech takes damage.

But the larger radius explosion? No. The 'nuclear' type explosion? No.

Fusion reactors simply aren't tactical nuclear weapons.

#277 Torban

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • The Serpent
  • The Serpent
  • 189 posts
  • LocationCanada

Posted 08 July 2012 - 12:03 PM

Why is this thread still alive. Die already.

#278 Bobfrombobtown

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Bad Company
  • Bad Company
  • 344 posts

Posted 08 July 2012 - 12:12 PM

View PostTorban, on 08 July 2012 - 12:03 PM, said:

Why is this thread still alive. Die already.

Because people keep posting in it.

#279 Kumakichi

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Bad Company
  • Bad Company
  • 1,337 posts
  • LocationYoyodyne Propulsion Factory

Posted 08 July 2012 - 12:15 PM

Explosion... ok. Nuclear meltdown not really interested. There are other things that are more important. And after the first 1000 mech kills nobody will sit there watchin the coolness factor of a mech doing nuclear.

#280 jlbdeath

    Member

  • PipPipPip
  • Knight Errant
  • 79 posts
  • Locationvermont

Posted 08 July 2012 - 12:25 PM

any thing that makes power fusion, fission, water, coal can be "MADE" to explode just have to have the right ingenuity. dont even need an external explosive. a power pack the size the mech's have i can think of a bunch of ways they can be made to go boom on command.





2 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 2 guests, 0 anonymous users