222 replies to this topic

[Heffay]

CSJ Ranger, on 17 November 2014 - 09:53 AM, said:

Robots have no Pilots

Are you sure? Or are you using an intentionally limited definition of robot in order to support quibbling over semantics and colloquialisms?

Seriously, giant worms aren't an issue. Just because it wasn't written down before doesn't mean it didn't exist.

[Dawnstealer]

"Pirate's Bane," eh? 4spl, 2MGs...Locust Power. Yessssss...

[MW Waldorf Statler]

its give many a large X-Animals in BT ...
the
Odessan Raxx http://Odessan Raxx
Ugmar http://Ugmar
Lezard de tonnerre http://www.sarna.net...ard_de_tonnerre
Nolan http://www.sarna.net...n_%28species%29

not kaijusized Animals ...thats for Kiddie ...fight a Mechazilla vs Atlas
not AT-ATs vs Dune worms

Edited by CSJ Ranger, 17 November 2014 - 10:15 AM.

[MW Waldorf Statler]

Heffay, on 17 November 2014 - 09:55 AM, said:

Are you sure? Or are you using an intentionally limited definition of robot in order to support quibbling over semantics and colloquialisms?

Seriously, giant worms aren't an issue. Just because it wasn't written down before doesn't mean it didn't exist.

Hi Heffay
yes Im sure

Definition of robot in English:

noun

machine capable of carrying out a complex series of actions automatically, especially one programmable by a computer:

Battlemechs not autonom nor automatically actions, only driving by Pilot with Neurohelmet

300m Centipedes of terranlike Worlds= biological nonsense

Edited by CSJ Ranger, 17 November 2014 - 10:09 AM.

[Odanan]

Well, maybe the giant centipedes are too much, but the map is so beautiful and original that I won't complain.

Besides, not all planets in the lore have many details about the fauna. Some Most you can find only information about the garrison unit. There could be creatures like that out there...

Edited by Odanan, 17 November 2014 - 10:13 AM.

[verybad]

Cmdr Hurrell, on 16 November 2014 - 11:35 PM, said:

Paid ECM, not cool. And frankly I'm surprised so very few people mentioned it. I dunno if this is P2Win or not, but I know it's not ok. I already paid real money for Locusts, why do I have to pay a second time to get a decent version of it?

Ohh please . You can get CB bought fast light ECM carriers in the game easily enough (or did they remove Ravens Spiders and Commandos? and this Locust will be a one shot wonder in many cases. Not to mention ECM has been nerfed by BAP being buffed.

I complain about a lot of the things PGI does, but one of the things I think PGI has done well is not make the game

Also you don't "have" to buy the thing. The reason they "make" people buy Heros etc is so they can keep paying their employees.

Edited by verybad, 17 November 2014 - 10:14 AM.

[verybad]

Heffay, on 17 November 2014 - 09:55 AM, said:

Are you sure? Or are you using an intentionally limited definition of robot in order to support quibbling over semantics and colloquialisms?

Seriously, giant worms aren't an issue. Just because it wasn't written down before doesn't mean it didn't exist.

ro·bot

noun \ˈrō-ˌbät, -bət\

: a real or imaginary machine that is controlled by a computer and is often made to look like a human or animal
: a machine that can do the work of a person and that works automatically or is controlled by a computer
http://www.merriam-w...ictionary/robot

Robots are not driven by the official terminology.A mech is not a robot, it is a legged vehicle.

[Rufus Ingram]

Butane9000, on 16 November 2014 - 05:51 AM, said:

I still think I agree that we need a redwood forest biome and a "elephant graveyard" underground cavern biome where most of the map is underground in various corridors underground with animal bones left and visible ore/resources along the walls in their natural form.

These two map themes would be a great additions. A Trell 1esque cave map would be sweet. It would be a little tricky if we don't know where we're dropping because it would screw over LRM mechs and could severely limit jumpers, but the idea is sound. Could be done with a lot of vertical changes and paths that would still allow for LRMs and keep jumpjets useful while still getting the feel of a cave environment.

[Tannhauser Gate]

verybad, on 17 November 2014 - 10:17 AM, said:

ro·bot

noun \ˈrō-ˌbät, -bət\

: a real or imaginary machine that is controlled by a computer and is often made to look like a human or animal
: a machine that can do the work of a person and that works automatically or is controlled by a computer
http://www.merriam-w...ictionary/robot

Robots are not driven by the official terminology.A mech is not a robot, it is a legged vehicle.

I disagree. That infers that they are simply tractors or conveyances with legs. Mechs are autonomous to the point of operating independently while its higher decision making is reserved for the pilot. IIRC, mechs are able to travel and negotiate terrain independently and also respond to combat against it when the pilot is incapacitated or dead.

We could split hairs between types and technoloy such as agro mechs various levels of technology used or missing from a mechs by location and era but when one thinks of a battlemech, they almost always mean a mech that is able to connect to a pilot with a neurohelmet predicting their movements and action and can operate autonomously in more than a limited way.

Describing mechs as vehicles with legs would be inaccurate because its omitting quite a bit capability and autonomy that would blur this description. Are they robots in the sense of an Iron Giant or Terminator designed to be completely independent? No. But mechs are way more like robots with a pilot than a legged tractor with an operator or a tank with a crew.

Edited by LakeDaemon, 17 November 2014 - 11:11 AM.

[verybad]

Mechs aren't autonomous. Period. They require a driver. Therefore they're not robots. The distinction is clear and simple. You can disagree all you want, but the official definition is already set in stone.

[Tannhauser Gate]

Heffay, on 17 November 2014 - 09:55 AM, said:

Are you sure? Or are you using an intentionally limited definition of robot in order to support quibbling over semantics and colloquialisms?

Seriously, giant worms aren't an issue. Just because it wasn't written down before doesn't mean it didn't exist.

Agreed. There are loads of cases of fauna on other planets (chose any Clan name for example). Giant worms may not have been described in the novels but they would probably exist. My advice is to embrace the larger canon of BT's universe not yet written and not just the literal.

[Heffay]

CSJ Ranger, on 17 November 2014 - 10:08 AM, said:

300m Centipedes of terranlike Worlds= biological nonsense

Well, ok then! Big worms have no place in an imaginary universe.

[Tannhauser Gate]

Heffay, on 17 November 2014 - 11:32 AM, said:

Well, ok then! Big worms have no place in an imaginary universe.

Oh pish. 300m creature could exist in an aquatic world where weight was supported and food plentiful. The exoskeleton could have evolved to defend against other even larger sea predators. Imaginary universe my arse! This is real.

[Odanan]

Heffay, on 17 November 2014 - 11:32 AM, said:

Well, ok then! Big worms have no place in an imaginary universe.

No place at all...

[Odanan]

Some animals can actually grow forever, like the lobster.

[0bsidion]

CSJ Ranger, on 17 November 2014 - 10:08 AM, said:

Hi Heffay
yes Im sure

Definition of robot in English:

noun

machine capable of carrying out a complex series of actions automatically, especially one programmable by a computer:

Battlemechs not autonom nor automatically actions, only driving by Pilot with Neurohelmet

300m Centipedes of terranlike Worlds= biological nonsense

I happen to agree with you on the mech vs robot debate, but in regards to your biological nonsense comment, to assume you know everything that is possible in the universe after having experienced only .0000000001% of it is the very definition of nonsense.

[Rebas Kradd]

0bsidion, on 17 November 2014 - 12:54 PM, said:

I happen to agree with you on the mech vs robot debate, but in regards to your biological nonsense comment, to assume you know everything that is possible in the universe after having experienced only .0000000001% of it is the very definition of nonsense.

Not really. Odds aren't cumulative. Ridiculous things don't get less ridiculous the more observations you make.

[Heffay]

0bsidion, on 17 November 2014 - 12:54 PM, said:

I happen to agree with you on the mech vs robot debate

In the great Merriam-Webster wars of the late 2200s, the root of the battles were based around the disagreement between whether robots could be semi-autonomous or not. Millions died over their beliefs on either side of the debate, but at the end of the battles the noble warriors from the Webster faction culled the last remaining Merriam holdout, and ever since then the term robot has been used to include semi-autonomous vehicles, like mechs.

That is why they are referred to as giant stompy space robots from the future, and that definition is 100% accurate. I'm just ahead of my time.

[0bsidion]

Rebas Kradd, on 17 November 2014 - 12:58 PM, said:

Not really. Odds aren't cumulative. Ridiculous things don't get less ridiculous the more observations you make.

So you can tell from that video what the gravity of the planet is? What that creature is composed of? If it is even a carbon based life form? You're making an awful lot assumptions based merely on a visual inspection. If that's how you base your judgement I'll take a fun house mirror and show you a giant mound of gold I'd be willing to part with for the low price of $1000. No refunds though.

[Dirus Nigh]

Robot is a modern form of the word robota, which is Czech for Forced Labor. In another word slave. IT was originally used in play in 1920.