Jump to content

This Cancelled Titanfall Clone Is Beyond Ridiculous


69 replies to this topic

#21 Lily from animove

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Devoted
  • The Devoted
  • 13,891 posts
  • LocationOn a dropship to Terra

Posted 13 August 2015 - 12:48 AM

View PostMarack Drock, on 12 August 2015 - 08:08 PM, said:

The story was really good in Armored Core, but the gameplay itself wasn't very interesting to my personal tastes so it didn't keep me invested. But I do like the story and still follow it via Youtube reviews and such. Never said it doesn't have a soul, gameplay was just borish to me. Armored Core Verdict Day to me was the worst and seemed like it was trying to emulate some japanese anime mecha which really just turned me off to the series.


yeah the gameplay, felt like an arcade sidescroller that stumpled into a 3D world. it made the combats so borig.

Edited by Lily from animove, 13 August 2015 - 12:57 AM.


#22 Anjian

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • FP Veteran - Beta 2
  • FP Veteran - Beta 2
  • 3,735 posts

Posted 13 August 2015 - 01:54 AM

I would say prior to AC4, the game is about twitch, and AC4/4A is just aerial. But ACV and ACVD got it right --- very smooth, a balance between speed and smart. The game play on ACV got me hooked for a long time, and I don't think anyone else got the fast mecha playstyle done pat as well as this. It is especially fun when you go PvP, one squad vs another squad, and they got their Community Warfare done right. I still remember groups like the Nine Breakers.

The mech customization options are unbelievable. Since you build your mechs from scratch with all the parts available, every stat in those parts have to be studied, and they all have their weight, armor, energy consumption benefits and consequences. You are carefully tailoring the performance of your mech through the careful selection of their parts, which by the way also includes weapons stability.

And to play AC, its very easy to play the mech. No need to aim, since it works with an aimbot and all you have to do is lock o the target and press the trigger. But you still have to guide your mech in a way so that the aimbot falls upon the target, which can be moving quite fast on its own, while avoiding the shots aimed at you.

Always love the way the mechs are inserted in the game.



#23 Lily from animove

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Devoted
  • The Devoted
  • 13,891 posts
  • LocationOn a dropship to Terra

Posted 13 August 2015 - 03:10 AM

View PostAnjian, on 13 August 2015 - 01:54 AM, said:

I would say prior to AC4, the game is about twitch, and AC4/4A is just aerial. But ACV and ACVD got it right --- very smooth, a balance between speed and smart. The game play on ACV got me hooked for a long time, and I don't think anyone else got the fast mecha playstyle done pat as well as this. It is especially fun when you go PvP, one squad vs another squad, and they got their Community Warfare done right. I still remember groups like the Nine Breakers.

The mech customization options are unbelievable. Since you build your mechs from scratch with all the parts available, every stat in those parts have to be studied, and they all have their weight, armor, energy consumption benefits and consequences. You are carefully tailoring the performance of your mech through the careful selection of their parts, which by the way also includes weapons stability.

And to play AC, its very easy to play the mech. No need to aim, since it works with an aimbot and all you have to do is lock o the target and press the trigger. But you still have to guide your mech in a way so that the aimbot falls upon the target, which can be moving quite fast on its own, while avoiding the shots aimed at you.

Always love the way the mechs are inserted in the game.





that are exactly the two things why i don't like AC. first, isntant direction switches are not immersive, unless your body id save form any inertness. which it isn't s that gamestyle does not fit into heavy robot action.

second, it plays like a sidescroller game, keep firing and avoid getting shot by movement. Both kinda sucks, since it makes the game not play interesting or feel nice.

however mech customisation was very cool, but this alone makes it not a enjoyable mechgame.

#24 Anjian

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • FP Veteran - Beta 2
  • FP Veteran - Beta 2
  • 3,735 posts

Posted 13 August 2015 - 04:55 PM

Well you haven't played it, and it seems you like to judge things you haven't played. I don't regard your opinion highly. I played mech games since Crescent Hawks, and every version of Mechwarrior, plus quite a few others you can imagine.

Armored Core V has very smooth controls for a mech game, much smoother than MWO's. Granted this uses a console controller. Movement has a good sense of acceleration and deceleration, and depending on the mass of your mech, it has a great sense of inertia vs. lightness. I play War Thunder and other flight simulation games and I don't find the movement in Armored Core V anymore instant than in these World War 2 fighters, or for that matter, those in car racing games.

Dodging is really what you expect from a console game, and yes, it takes skill. When I play fighter planes or fighters in space I also have to dodge. Same with FPS games or action RPGs. Really when you get shot at, do you expect to stand still? Dodging sideways is a natural action.

#25 Tesunie

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Seeker
  • The Seeker
  • 8,679 posts
  • LocationSeraphim HQ: Asuncion

Posted 13 August 2015 - 06:11 PM

To everyone, there will always be things that they do and don't like.

To everyone else, there will always be things that others do and don't like.

No need to argue against someone's opinion on if they like something, and/or why they liked it.


I personally loved AC. Particularly Silent Line. I loved training up my own little AIs by using different builds. Nothing was more fun than finishing an AI and placing it into my own personal arena. And nothing made me happier in that game than making an AI trained so well, even I found it hard to defeat it!

The game play was fast, but no so fast that skill couldn't defeat twitch. The story was really nice, and I loved the customization system of the game. For me, it was a lot of fun to play. (Though one of their Online PS3 titles annoyed me. You could go mercenary and help other players through missions. Sadly, you typically got paid less, and got less rank, for actually doing what you were suppose to do, help the other player. I was always an E rank mercenary, but an S rank solo-mission player. Go figure.)

Edited by Tesunie, 13 August 2015 - 06:12 PM.


#26 Tesunie

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Seeker
  • The Seeker
  • 8,679 posts
  • LocationSeraphim HQ: Asuncion

Posted 13 August 2015 - 06:28 PM

I'll say on the game preview discussed in this thread, they lost all my possible interest when we had "Mecha pilot piloting a mecha, who then jumps into a larger mecha, making it a MECHA PILOTING A MECHA! IT'S EPIC" concept. I'm sorry. Do you know how impractical it would be for a mecha to pilot another mecha? Even if it would just connect and become a control unit, if any connection points where damaged before it synced to the larger mecha... well... It no work!

Not to mention, no one's going to be dumb enough to drop an unpiloted suit into a warzone, and just hope that one of their own mecha happen to be comparable with it AND connect to it before the connections are damaged, the larger suit is damaged, or an enemy jacks into it and takes it over. It's an unneeded "boss" mechanic, and it seemed a bit far fetched for my tastes.

#27 Anubis Ka

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • Elite Founder
  • Elite Founder
  • 113 posts

Posted 13 August 2015 - 07:42 PM

View PostSizzles, on 07 August 2015 - 09:55 AM, said:

Nobody in any of these games knows how to military.

Shazbot.


Try this

#28 Lily from animove

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Devoted
  • The Devoted
  • 13,891 posts
  • LocationOn a dropship to Terra

Posted 14 August 2015 - 06:48 AM

View PostAnjian, on 13 August 2015 - 04:55 PM, said:

Movement has a good sense of acceleration and deceleration, and depending on the mass of your mech, it has a great sense of inertia vs. lightness.


Sry I have differnt physics applying her eon eath, go to the vid, 2:55 the "dodging" of sideway strafes are far from physically realsitic with a living person in it. you would hardly able to control your vehicles if you get shaked around like this. Dodging like this sideways in such a heavy vehilce is NOT NATURAL nor realsitic.

The Japanese mechagenre is very often filled with these supernatural behavior. One of the reasons why it never settled outside japan that much, because people here are not much into it. But claiming this is realsitic or natural, thats not objective anymore.

Edited by Lily from animove, 14 August 2015 - 06:51 AM.


#29 Lily from animove

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Devoted
  • The Devoted
  • 13,891 posts
  • LocationOn a dropship to Terra

Posted 14 August 2015 - 06:54 AM

View PostTesunie, on 13 August 2015 - 06:28 PM, said:

I'll say on the game preview discussed in this thread, they lost all my possible interest when we had "Mecha pilot piloting a mecha, who then jumps into a larger mecha, making it a MECHA PILOTING A MECHA! IT'S EPIC" concept.


random flashback



#30 Tesunie

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Seeker
  • The Seeker
  • 8,679 posts
  • LocationSeraphim HQ: Asuncion

Posted 14 August 2015 - 07:49 AM

View PostLily from animove, on 14 August 2015 - 06:54 AM, said:


random flashback


What does the Space Marine Centurion have to do with my example? That, for the record, is a powered suit inside a "mecha" armor. A power suit is basically a pilots suit, or highly responsive armor. Considering they wear their powered armor even when piloting Stormravens, Stormtalons, Rhinos, Landraiders, etc... It's not that hard to consider with them.

In the video, you don't have a powered suit piloting a mecha, you have a giant mecha dropping into a war zone with no pilot, and then have a slightly smaller giant mecha (much larger than the operator) pilot their suit which then pilots the larger suit. That isn't like sitting in a vehicle with armor on. It'd be like driving a car into a tank to control the tank, which the tank got dropped into the war zone with no pilot.

#31 Anjian

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • FP Veteran - Beta 2
  • FP Veteran - Beta 2
  • 3,735 posts

Posted 14 August 2015 - 08:14 PM

View PostLily from animove, on 14 August 2015 - 06:48 AM, said:


Sry I have differnt physics applying her eon eath, go to the vid, 2:55 the "dodging" of sideway strafes are far from physically realsitic with a living person in it. you would hardly able to control your vehicles if you get shaked around like this. Dodging like this sideways in such a heavy vehilce is NOT NATURAL nor realsitic.

The Japanese mechagenre is very often filled with these supernatural behavior. One of the reasons why it never settled outside japan that much, because people here are not much into it. But claiming this is realsitic or natural, thats not objective anymore.



Again, you are full of BS. Games have a lot of dodge. If you play tanks, do you realize they have their own version of twitchy strafing and peek a booing? You turn the turret to the side, hide the hull on a corner, peek out, shoot, then quickly reverse back in. That requires a lot of strong acceleration.

Many of these aerial games have 9 to 11G maneuvers. Popular FPS games are full of super high ninja jumps, dodging and side strafing. Not to mention suddenly driving a tank or flying a jet. All sorts of supernatural behavior.

A mech can easily shake to the side by jet boosting. Anything can be done with the proper weight ratio. Games don't observe human G limits by the way, as far as it goes, its only those momentary blacking in flight sims.

Objective? I take your views as rather hypocritical. There is nothing realistic about Mechwarrior, in terms of physics. It does not observe proper acceleration and deceleration, there is no proper sense of inertia and momentum. Ballistics don't operate like true ballistics, missiles don't have true flight arcs, armor has no true angular deflection mechanics, you got health bars, weapons have no dispersion cones, weapons have no recoil, torsos swing like there is no weight, mechs are designed with no true sense of center of gravity. If a large shell hit a tall mech on the top, the lever effect should cause it to fall over. When a mech fires a large cannon, it needs to stand with one foot forward and another on the back like a true shooter's position to help absorb recoil instead of both feet flat on a straight line. How the hell you are still walking and standing with one leg blown off, much less shooting cannons? Ballistics do not observe proper ranges, like what the hell are some weapons limited to only 300m to 400m? Tanks in World War 2 are making kills over 1000m. The machineguns in WW2 fighter planes are hitting at over 750m. Plus how the F--- you reload an arm ballistic from ammunition you stored in your leg? And you really want to talk about realism?

And quite frankly, the Battletech mechagenre has not taken off either in the US or anywhere either. This is still a small, very niche game, whose player base is only a fraction of other niche games.

Games are allowed to do supernatural behavior because that's what games are all about.

Edited by Anjian, 14 August 2015 - 08:32 PM.


#32 Tesunie

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Seeker
  • The Seeker
  • 8,679 posts
  • LocationSeraphim HQ: Asuncion

Posted 14 August 2015 - 08:50 PM

View PostAnjian, on 14 August 2015 - 08:14 PM, said:

Not to be rude, but STUFF. B)


Though you present a lot o good points about typical game play, I'd like to remind you of the level of technology within BT.
- No recoil? Actually, in lore there is, but it's been compensated by advanced dampeners and other compensators.
- No armor angles? You realize BT armor is thinner than current standard of armor (I believe only a few inches thick, if that?) and is diamond infused and have intricate weaves of different materials? A current era weapon could shoot at BT armor, and probably wouldn't even really scratch it.
- Distance for weapons? These are advanced weapons, and maybe they loose the force needed to punch through and damage that advanced armor very quickly?

Don't forget, we are also talking about a technological level of science that lets them either punch holes in space to travel, or fold space to instantly go from one place to another. A level of knowledge that lets them be able to replace entire lost limbs with mechanical components that function just like living flesh for the most part. They even have technology to permit Mechwarriors to digitally fuse with their mechs on a level unlike anything we can even try to compare to right now. (Nero helmet, or the clans Enchanced Imaging technology.)

Do recall, science that is advanced enough appears as magic to those who can't fully grasp it's workings or meaning.

PS: Read the books. Sure, this is a game, but we still can't really move as fast as an AC unit could. We are rather slow for reaction times overall compared to many mecha styled games. MW, BT and anything related to it moves at far more reasonable speeds.

#33 Anjian

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • FP Veteran - Beta 2
  • FP Veteran - Beta 2
  • 3,735 posts

Posted 14 August 2015 - 10:02 PM

Yeah sure. You have a level of technology that flies starships, buy an AC/20 doesn't go past 300 meters.

Advanced dampeners and compensators? Again, unrealistic physics. There will always be an opposite reaction to the action, and true compensation and dampening requires a stable foot base in order to transfer the reaction to the base. This as unrealistic as mechs that defy G forces. Even more so, you should not put the gun in the torso because all these compete for space within the torso, and it would definitely mean stress transferance to the internal frame. Hence it makes sense to put all the weapons on the arm and on the back. Allowing the mech to take stable footing (shooting position) is a far more simple and elegant solution to dealing with recoil and requires little to no extra hardware, saving weight.

You have to manually aim when LRMs and AMS can automatically lock on to their targets? We got guns today that would automatically lock and shoot at a target. In truth, Armored Core's aimbot actually gets it correct, the human only gives the manual permission to shoot, the fire control systems should do everything.

Diamond infused? What's that? Do you realize that the thinner the armor, the more brittle it is, the more prone it is to cracking, fracturing and splintering? In any case, light carbon based armor and frames would enable mechs to fly, not weigh a 100 tons.

If you are talking about that level of science, flying mechs would have been more than possible since that can be attained with high power to weight ratios and in low gravity situations. Neuro helmets? And you still have a joystick in your cockpit, and glass to see out of? Even if you made the panes out of diamond, the frames holding the panes would crack and give way to the stress, since all it takes is the enemy mech to make a head shot.

Why not just put the pilot in the most secure part of the mech, and give him a virtual reality environment. You don't need to put sensors in a helmet, just sensors around the person's environment. In fact, its very difficult to read a person's nerves directly due to skin and hair, but its much easier to read a person's eye's and muscle movements. To sense the environment, you don't need a glass cockpit, but sensors set in a package that you can form a head. Then create a virtual environment for the pilot. Actually makes sense where they put the pilots in a Gundam. You simply put it in the most secure and armored part of the mech then wrap him in a VR environment fed from a sensor pod. On a smaller mech, Votoms got it right, and you got a similar system on Heavy Gear.

Neural integration would have consequences on the psyche of the pilot. At the same time, some pilots are going to be more suited to this than others, so that you might as well genetically help create them. Gundam got it going there, as well as a few other series.

Heat sinks? Why do you need atmospheric cooling for? You cannot control temperatures with passive cooling, much less fusion reaction. Furthermore, heat sinks only work when they are in contact with the hot object. Heat sinks don't work if they are on the legs and you are trying to cool off something in the arm or torso.

And if a weapon overheats it jams, but it should not shut down the mech. At least Hawken got it right there.

Why do you want speed? Because not getting hit is always the best protection of all. Speed offers far more tactical advantages than being slow. If mech warfare truly exists, there would be an evolutionary selection process in the ideas and concepts that is going to end favoring the more mobile and the stealthier, with the designs gradually evolving more and more to optimize these attributes. If mechs are going to be more static, they need to be stealthier. Heavy Gear gets it right, along with other mech series, that mechs can go down to kneeling and prone position and snipe like a human sniper. The fact that they can grab any weapon means the sheer economy that you don't have to modify mechs to fit and suit new weapons. They grab what is available, making them extremely versatile. They can take a long sniper cannon or they can take short ranged autocannons.

In warfare, why do you have a gazillion designs? In wars, countries standardize on only a few, if not one design, to allow for production gigantism to create huge volumes and low cost per unit. Plus it makes it easier to logistically maintain one design than 10 others, rather than fragment your logistical and not just that, your training systems.

Edited by Anjian, 14 August 2015 - 10:30 PM.


#34 Tesunie

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Seeker
  • The Seeker
  • 8,679 posts
  • LocationSeraphim HQ: Asuncion

Posted 14 August 2015 - 10:47 PM

You... don't understand compensation, nor how BT reactors work (within their own lore). As items draw power from the reactor of a mech, it releases heat as it's cost. Thus, when energy dependent weapons fire, they draw energy from the reactor, increasing it's heat. This heat spills out through the structure of the mech. For the sake of ease of mechanics and to enhance this lore fact, in BT even ammo based weapons produce heat from the reactor... possibly from "compensators" drawing power to "compensate" for larger weapons greater recoil? Or maybe it's coolant from the heat sinks spreading the heat down, so the weapons will never overheat and damage themselves? Or for whatever other reason can be contrived considering it's "wondrous and unexplainable" abilities. (Also, the reactors run on Light Hydrogen. Research that a bit, and it will enlighten you on the "wonders" of BT science. ;) )

Or do you also believe that momentum can't be compensated for? if that's the case, then when a navel ship shoots it's main cannons to a side, the ship should just roll over and capsize? No. They have "compensators" to buffer the recoil.

Also, as a game, only so much can be replicated. In BT lore, the mechs walk and move like humans (and more accurately, as the pilot would typically move) due to the feedback of their "wonderious technology". This is also how a battlemech can carefully (in lore) use their hands to carefully manipulate objects, without pressing any specific controls. In game... it's not that specific, and moves in a more generalized and predictable manner. This is for game play and coding purposes. (Unless someone has invented a way to input human thoughts as commands for computer controls when I wasn't looking.)


PS: BT lore and MW game mechanics do not follow real life physics. There is no purpose in looking at BT technologies too closely. Just know that it functions, and it works as wondrously as it seems to.

As one final note, in Lore and TT, there is a reason weapons tend not to all hit the same exact spot when fired together. Some of it is recoil. Some of it is targeting computer error or pilot aiming error.


Some of this is suppose to have an edge of sarcasm and joking in it. Please, read it with a humorous tone.

#35 Anjian

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • FP Veteran - Beta 2
  • FP Veteran - Beta 2
  • 3,735 posts

Posted 14 August 2015 - 11:13 PM

What you are saying is even more ridiculous.

Ships already compensate for their fire because they have very low center of gravity. They are by design, very stable, and they try to avoid being as top heavy as much as possible. Ships don't stand up, mechs do. If you are firing from a tall, top heavy position, there will be lever effect, the feet will be the fulcrum point, and you will top over. Plus in a ship, the distance between the guns to the main center of gravity is very short, reducing that lever effect.

To absorb recoil, you need a significant amount of space in the back for the barrel to go backward. This is true for gun turrets in a tank or a battleship. This is not true for a human shaped torso, though you might find the space on a walker like torso (Daishi, Timberwolf, etc,.). They would still require to have a shooter's stance though, because a stable base is required for accurate shooting.

Ammo based weapons requiring the heat of the reactor? Except that you would need a source of gas to heat and blast the ammunition. But this does not work with a stable heat source. The gas needs to violently expand in order to push the projectile. In any case, what you are describing is not true, since AC ammo explodes when their rack is hit wwhich means they use propellant explosives. Except for gauss, since the ammunition is solid and does not have propellant charges since hitting the gauss ammo rack does not explode. If ballistics use the fusion reactor, the reactor would overheat from the stress, and it won't be any different from the energy weapon.

Heat spills out through the structure of the mech? What engineering horror is this? Materials alter their hardness and flexibility with heat, and they also lose their strength. It would also transfer heat to electrical and electronic conduits and heats affects the operations of both. Heat transfers through the frame affects the materials used for the joints, the lubrications, the fibers attached to the joints and the very attachments themselves.

If BT and MWO lore do not follow RL physics, stop criticizing other mech games for RL physics. Its just purely hypocritical.

Edited by Anjian, 14 August 2015 - 11:26 PM.


#36 Tesunie

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Seeker
  • The Seeker
  • 8,679 posts
  • LocationSeraphim HQ: Asuncion

Posted 14 August 2015 - 11:36 PM

I never criticized real life physics in other games.

Also, Gyros? Ever heard of them? There are some great video's out there showing a simple wheel gyro being able to spin sideways and seemingly against gravity. That's just a simple gyro. Not even an advanced one.

There is a reason in lore that if the Gyro gets hit, your mech is NOT standing up.

PS: In lore. If a mech takes 20 or more damage (in a single shooting phase), they have to do a balance check to see if they fall down. This game, how would you determine a success? There are no pilot skills. We don't even have collisions and/or knock down due to issues with coding and problems it caused within the game. (We can't even flamer someone into overheat in this game for balance sake.)


My question to you is, have you actually researched BT lore and how mechs operate? Some of it is based in actual science. Other pieces are just fanciful imagination that tried to explain something science (and/or the writers) didn't actually know anything about. (Such as reactors being able to run on Light Hydrogen, for one point in case.) Also, this game kinda does a poor imitation of what the lore says should happen. Want a closer image of what is happening (and what many of us BT fans keep envisioning when we play this game using "imagination"), go read the novels. (Many of the novels are very good reads.) You can also research the technologies on Sarna. (There also is a thread on these forums discussing how BT technologies would have to work for it to do as it says it does. I don't have a link to it though.)


Needless to say though, I think we have fallen terribly off topic now... :ph34r: (It's a common fault of mine.)

#37 Anjian

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • FP Veteran - Beta 2
  • FP Veteran - Beta 2
  • 3,735 posts

Posted 14 August 2015 - 11:50 PM

Gyros do not bend physics. Period. Guns are always subjected to recoil and if you want a recoil less gun, the cartridge has to be blown out and ejected from the back. Gun blowback happens so fast and so violently gyros cannot compensate within those microfractions of a second. You need mass to counter mass. You need an equal reaction to counter that action. Accuracy means low dispersion, low dispersion means stability and stability means a solid base.

The whole BT thing is pure science fiction. Its all nonsensible science. It pollutes the mind. It's mind junk. Trying to make sense out of it? Really? That's like trying to explain religion with science. In the end you don't create a credible body of information and in short, just plain mind junk. Why don't you read something about ballistics and how guns really operate?

Edited by Anjian, 14 August 2015 - 11:57 PM.


#38 XxXAbsolutZeroXxX

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Stryker
  • The Stryker
  • 2,056 posts

Posted 15 August 2015 - 12:45 AM

How's this for a BT mech armor origins story? -_-


Quote

An Israeli company has recently tested one of the most shock-resistant materials known to man. Five times stronger than steel and at least twice as strong as any impact-resistant material currently in use as protective gear, the new nano-based material is on its way to becoming the armor of the future.

In recent research lead by Prof. Yan Qiu Zhu of the School of Mechanical, Materials and Manufacturing Engineering at the University of Nottingham, England, a sample of the ApNano material was subjected to severe shocks generated by a steel projectile traveling at velocities of up to 1.5 km/second. The material withstood the shock pressures generated by the impacts of up to 250 tons per square centimeter. This is approximately equivalent to dropping four diesel locomotives onto an area the size of one’s fingernail. During the test the material proved to be so strong that after the impact the samples remained essentially identical compared to the original material. Additionally, a recent study by Prof. J. M. Martin from Ecole Central de Lyon in France tested the new material under isostatic pressure and found it to be stable up to at least 350 tons/cm2.

http://phys.org/news...s-tomorrow.html


BT fusion reactor origins story?:

Quote



A small, modular, efficient fusion plant

New design could finally help to bring the long-sought power source closer to reality.

It’s an old joke that many fusion scientists have grown tired of hearing: Practical nuclear fusion power plants are just 30 years away — and always will be.

But now, finally, the joke may no longer be true: Advances in magnet technology have enabled researchers at MIT to propose a new design for a practical compact tokamak fusion reactor — and it’s one that might be realized in as little as a decade, they say. The era of practical fusion power, which could offer a nearly inexhaustible energy resource, may be coming near.

Using these new commercially available superconductors, rare-earth barium copper oxide (REBCO) superconducting tapes, to produce high-magnetic field coils “just ripples through the whole design,” says Dennis Whyte, a professor of Nuclear Science and Engineering and director of MIT’s Plasma Science and Fusion Center. “It changes the whole thing.”

The stronger magnetic field makes it possible to produce the required magnetic confinement of the superhot plasma — that is, the working material of a fusion reaction — but in a much smaller device than those previously envisioned. The reduction in size, in turn, makes the whole system less expensive and faster to build, and also allows for some ingenious new features in the power plant design. The proposed reactor, using a tokamak (donut-shaped) geometry that is widely studied, is described in a paper in the journal Fusion Engineering and Design, co-authored by Whyte, PhD candidate Brandon Sorbom, and 11 others at MIT. The paper started as a design class taught by Whyte and became a student-led project after the class ended.

Power plant prototype

The new reactor is designed for basic research on fusion and also as a potential prototype power plant that could produce significant power. The basic reactor concept and its associated elements are based on well-tested and proven principles developed over decades of research at MIT and around the world, the team says.

“The much higher magnetic field,” Sorbom says, “allows you to achieve much higher performance.”
Fusion, the nuclear reaction that powers the sun, involves fusing pairs of hydrogen atoms together to form helium, accompanied by enormous releases of energy. The hard part has been confining the superhot plasma — a form of electrically charged gas — while heating it to temperatures hotter than the cores of stars. This is where the magnetic fields are so important—they effectively trap the heat and particles in the hot center of the device.

While most characteristics of a system tend to vary in proportion to changes in dimensions, the effect of changes in the magnetic field on fusion reactions is much more extreme: The achievable fusion power increases according to the fourth power of the increase in the magnetic field. Thus, doubling the field would produce a 16-fold increase in the fusion power. “Any increase in the magnetic field gives you a huge win,” Sorbom says.

Tenfold boost in power

While the new superconductors do not produce quite a doubling of the field strength, they are strong enough to increase fusion power by about a factor of 10 compared to standard superconducting technology, Sorbom says. This dramatic improvement leads to a cascade of potential improvements in reactor design.

The world’s most powerful planned fusion reactor, a huge device called ITER that is under construction in France, is expected to cost around $40 billion. Sorbom and the MIT team estimate that the new design, about half the diameter of ITER (which was designed before the new superconductors became available), would produce about the same power at a fraction of the cost and in a shorter construction time.

But despite the difference in size and magnetic field strength, the proposed reactor, called ARC, is based on “exactly the same physics” as ITER, Whyte says. “We’re not extrapolating to some brand-new regime,” he adds.

Another key advance in the new design is a method for removing the the fusion power core from the donut-shaped reactor without having to dismantle the entire device. That makes it especially well-suited for research aimed at further improving the system by using different materials or designs to fine-tune the performance.
In addition, as with ITER, the new superconducting magnets would enable the reactor to operate in a sustained way, producing a steady power output, unlike today’s experimental reactors that can only operate for a few seconds at a time without overheating of copper coils.

Liquid protection

Another key advantage is that most of the solid blanket materials used to surround the fusion chamber in such reactors are replaced by a liquid material that can easily be circulated and replaced, eliminating the need for costly replacement procedures as the materials degrade over time.
“It’s an extremely harsh environment for [solid] materials,” Whyte says, so replacing those materials with a liquid could be a major advantage.

Right now, as designed, the reactor should be capable of producing about three times as much electricity as is needed to keep it running, but the design could probably be improved to increase that proportion to about five or six times, Sorbom says. So far, no fusion reactor has produced as much energy as it consumes, so this kind of net energy production would be a major breakthrough in fusion technology, the team says.
The design could produce a reactor that would provide electricity to about 100,000 people, they say. Devices of a similar complexity and size have been built within about five years, they say.

“Fusion energy is certain to be the most important source of electricity on earth in the 22nd century, but we need it much sooner than that to avoid catastrophic global warming,” says David Kingham, CEO of Tokamak Energy Ltd. in the UK, who was not connected with this research. “This paper shows a good way to make quicker progress,” he says.

The MIT research, Kingham says, “shows that going to higher magnetic fields, an MIT speciality, can lead to much smaller (and hence cheaper and quicker-to-build) devices.” The work is of “exceptional quality,” he says; “the next step … would be to refine the design and work out more of the engineering details, but already the work should be catching the attention of policy makers, philanthropists and private investors.”

http://newsoffice.mi...sion-plant-0810

Edited by I Zeratul I, 15 August 2015 - 12:58 AM.


#39 Lily from animove

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Devoted
  • The Devoted
  • 13,891 posts
  • LocationOn a dropship to Terra

Posted 17 August 2015 - 12:40 AM

View PostAnjian, on 14 August 2015 - 08:14 PM, said:



Again, you are full of BS. Games have a lot of dodge. If you play tanks, do you realize they have their own version of twitchy strafing and peek a booing? You turn the turret to the side, hide the hull on a corner, peek out, shoot, then quickly reverse back in. That requires a lot of strong acceleration.

Many of these aerial games have 9 to 11G maneuvers. Popular FPS games are full of super high ninja jumps, dodging and side strafing. Not to mention suddenly driving a tank or flying a jet. All sorts of supernatural behavior.

A mech can easily shake to the side by jet boosting. Anything can be done with the proper weight ratio. Games don't observe human G limits by the way, as far as it goes, its only those momentary blacking in flight sims.



No it cant not do it like that and in those tankgames they do also nto isntant respond like this and do not accelerate this instant.
And as you said, games do not care abotu human G toleranzes, and thats exactly what makes immersion feel off for people with a slight sense for this: knowing when a "dodge" would probably make you pass out or lose control by violently shaking your body too much.
The AC mech would probably in best case feel like a hardcore rollercoaster with some sudden side G effect elements and this wouldn't really leave you able to properly control it anyore.
If you can't even see the difference and why one is off from "immersion" and the other not, it makes no point to argue with you.

#40 Anjian

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • FP Veteran - Beta 2
  • FP Veteran - Beta 2
  • 3,735 posts

Posted 17 August 2015 - 02:00 AM

View PostLily from animove, on 17 August 2015 - 12:40 AM, said:


No it cant not do it like that and in those tankgames they do also nto isntant respond like this and do not accelerate this instant.
And as you said, games do not care abotu human G toleranzes, and thats exactly what makes immersion feel off for people with a slight sense for this: knowing when a "dodge" would probably make you pass out or lose control by violently shaking your body too much.
The AC mech would probably in best case feel like a hardcore rollercoaster with some sudden side G effect elements and this wouldn't really leave you able to properly control it anyore.
If you can't even see the difference and why one is off from "immersion" and the other not, it makes no point to argue with you.



Really and how is a game about warfare on walking machines that are much more vulnerable than tanks, firing at extremely short ranges that occasionally hits the environment, constantly overheating, sometimes gets its feet stuck, that is clumsy, clunky, can be immersive?

Here is why Armored Core was very immersive for me:

The overall gameplay is much smoother in ACV than I had in MWO or for that matter in any mech game I have ever used, and I have played a lot. The AC mech feels like a part of you, instead like the case of MWO, fighting you. I believe the whole tactical purpose and value of a mech is not to be a tank --- tanks do the tank job better and nothing beats them at that --- but in the whole point of a mech being an extension of the soldier, and turning him into a superman. You are not piloting a mech --- you become the mech.

Maps are much larger, much more alive. Cities maps truly look like cities. There are towers, crisscrossing skyways, tunnels... Winds blowing, there is fire and smoke in the sky, helicopters constantly flying, flak shooting about. There are drones flying about, sniper mechs hiding, tanks rolling in the street. War feels like war.

Combat is much more 3D. Being able to jump up to the top of a building and let go at the ones below, that is quite a feeling.

The missions are terrifying in the sense they send you up against great odds, sometimes nearly hopeless ones, as well as constant duels with other AC pilots. Sometimes you are sent up against things that are far bigger than you, some of those things you even wonder if they are alien.

The feeling that ACs are rare and therefore special. Those who pilot them are an extremely elite breed (Ravens, Lynxes), and yet you get the sense that they also have a screw loose in their head. When you duel another AC pilot, and read his or her bio, yeah, he or she is nuts. Most of the time, they are looking out for Number One. You get the immense satisfaction of putting away these troubled, vindictive creatures. But these personalities makes the ACs come alive, creating memorable characters like 9Ball and White Glint.

This online mission is one of my favorites in ACV. It pits a four man team against a kaiju sized mech. Much more often than not, people fail in this mission.







1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users