483 replies to this topic

[Nik Van Rhijn]

Aaron DeChavilier, on 01 February 2012 - 09:19 AM, said:

did you spend your previous turn uprooting that tree? no?
then you can't use it in the Physical Attacks phase!

GM roles 2xD20 to ascertain likelyhood.

[Paladin1]

Alex Wolfe, on 01 February 2012 - 09:21 AM, said:

I stand corrected, but you're still dodging the question: would it be capable of convincingly fighting with those 20 tons. There's a world of difference between lifting/carrying and swinging. Mind the shifting center of gravity.

I'd hazard: not. My original point was that it'd likely result in leg damage (its own, not the enemy's), I guess I'll stick to it.

No, I'm not dodging the question. If something is engineered to manipulate an object in excess of it's design weight, such as a 20 ton tree in our example above, it's designed to use that object as a weapon. You're thinking of `Mechs as human in how they're built. Don't do that, they're machines. If it can lift an object, it can use that object as a weapon. Only the lack of durability keeps the object (tree) from being reused.

[Paladin1]

Aaron DeChavilier, on 01 February 2012 - 09:19 AM, said:

did you spend your previous turn uprooting that tree? no?
then you can't use it in the Physical Attacks phase!

Yes I did, I uprooted it when I showed Alex that it could be done.

Don't make me uproot another, I rather like trees. They make great wood!

[Wolf Hreda]

XxDRxDEATHxX, on 27 January 2012 - 11:26 AM, said:

You all may call me crazy but i'm devoting my entire life to inventing a battlemech. Sure fusion engines are not available but i'll probably go with a wankel engine since it doesn't have issues running if it's on it side(cuz a battlemech isn't always standing or sitting up). I'm a robotic operator at the moment. I'm starting "on the job training" to become a robot programmer next month and will be starting drafting school in the fall. After that it's off to Mechanical Engineering school and who knows what else. Probably will take my entire life to produce a working prototype. And yes i'm gonna call my prototype Mackie.

But I the first weapon i'm gonna put on my mech is a pair of hands because think about it: They are WEAPONS. What if my mech has missles, machine guns and the one mech i'm gonna invent is going to have the Abram's 120mm cannon on it...but those weapons are ammo dependant. What happens if you are in a mech in a combat scenario and you run out of ammo? You will have to use your mech's hands and use weapons of opportunity. Can't do that with no hands. What if you see an anti-tank missile coming at you? Would you want to depend on your Mech's armor or would you rather pick up a car or truck and use it to shield you from the blast? Can't do that with no hands...i can go on all day. Hands are sooo important. Very probematic to use in a simulator with today's tech but very imprtant in a RL combat scenario and MWO is a sim after all.

I demand that by the time you reach the third prototype you include jump jets. And if I ever strike it rich, I'll need your info, because I will help fund you. Then, PPCs for everybody!

[Paladin1]

Nik Van Rhijn, on 01 February 2012 - 09:23 AM, said:

GM roles 2xD20 to ascertain likelyhood.

D20s? In Battletech!?!

HERETIC!!!

Burn Him!!!

[Alex Wolfe]

Paladin1, on 01 February 2012 - 09:29 AM, said:

No, I'm not dodging the question. If something is engineered to manipulate an object in excess of it's design weight, such as a 20 ton tree in our example above, it's designed to use that object as a weapon. You're thinking of `Mechs as human in how they're built. Don't do that, they're machines. If it can lift an object, it can use that object as a weapon. Only the lack of durability keeps the object (tree) from being reused.

You're thinking of mechs like "humans, but stronger and without fatigue". Don't do that, they're machines. If it can lift an object, then it has lifted an object, doesn't necessarily have the gyro efficiency, programming and range of movement to use it as a weapon. A forklift can pick up a crate, but it cannot throw it. Mechs can only do what they're designed for. Most aren't purposefully designed for tree-swinging.

Besides the CVM-4N of course.

[Zimm Kotare]

I suddenly have an image of a group of Atlas performing the "Knights that say Ni" scene from Monty Python...


"YOU MUST CUT DOWN THEMIGHTIEST TREE ON TURKAYID, WITH... A HERRING!"

[Alex Wolfe]

ZRO Zimm, on 01 February 2012 - 09:35 AM, said:

"YOU MUST CUT DOWN THEMIGHTIEST TREE ON TURKAYID, WITH... A HERRING!"

I BID A MACKEREL!

[Paladin1]

Alex Wolfe, on 01 February 2012 - 09:35 AM, said:

You're thinking of mechs like "humans, but stronger and without fatigue". Don't do that, they're machines. If it can lift an object, then it has lifted an object, doesn't necessarily have the gyro efficiency, programming and range of movement to use it as a weapon. A forklift can pick up a crate, but it cannot throw it. Mechs can only do what they're designed for. Most aren't purposefully designed for tree-swinging.

Besides the CVM-4N of course.

Now we're getting somewhere. Let's look at your concerns here.

Gyro efficiency - Though I'm loathed to mention it, there's actually canon examples of `Mechs being able to perform all kinds of complicated physical tasks, including in one instance a hand-stand (I really, really don't like this, but it is canon.) so it's obvious that the gyro efficiency is up to the task.

Programming - I'm going to not touch on this one just yet, as it's a little bit more difficult without referencing the manuals and I don't have those with me right now. I'll revisit this later.

Range of movement - I'm not certain of the specifications for the range of movement, as the blueprints I have only show so much, but considering that a lack of actuators in the arms decreases the amount of damage you can do with a punch, I tend to think that as long as you have a full set of actuators, you should do just fine.

[Zimm Kotare]

Just a thought... Any of the devs fancy slipping a shrubbery into a level on the down low? I won't tell anyone. I'll just find it REALLY funny.

[Felbombling]

I have got it all figured out! There are Mechs with two hands, Mechs with one hand and Mechs with arms ending with some type of weapons pods.

Mechs with two hands: Carry huge vanity mirrors so that Mechs without hands can admire how awesome they look while still being in the cockpit.

Mechs with one hand: Carry smaller hand-held mirrors so they can catch a glimpse of how awesome their OTHER arm looks, as it has some type of weapon pod, OR, out of pity, let Mechs with no hands catch a small glimpse at their own awesomeness.

Mechs with no hands: Search the battlefield over looking for Mechs with vanity mirrors, or, as a last resort, Mechs with smaller hand-held mirrors so they can hopefully catch a small glimpse at their own awesomeness.

[Alex Wolfe]

Paladin1, on 01 February 2012 - 09:44 AM, said:

Gyro efficiency - Though I'm loathed to mention it, there's actually canon examples of `Mechs being able to perform all kinds of complicated physical tasks, including in one instance a hand-stand (I really, really don't like this, but it is canon.) so it's obvious that the gyro efficiency is up to the task.

Yeah. hate those too. Some authors just grab the license then smear their poop all over it, and the fans have to swallow as "a new bit of canon". Ugh.

Still, the whole point of it is that the gyro is handling the mechs' mass. The unfortunate tree is foreign mass. A jet fighter can do barrel rolls. Now tie a pickup truck on a rope to its tail and see how stable it is.

Paladin1, on 01 February 2012 - 09:44 AM, said:

Programming - I'm going to not touch on this one just yet, as it's a little bit more difficult without referencing the manuals and I don't have those with me right now. I'll revisit this later.

Range of movement - I'm not certain of the specifications for the range of movement, as the blueprints I have only show so much, but considering that a lack of actuators in the arms decreases the amount of damage you can do with a punch, I tend to think that as long as you have a full set of actuators, you should do just fine.

Most mechs cannot feasibly move their arms in front of their chests, that's not a huge range of movement for... well, punching. Look at how one swings a bat... no way a mech can do that, its arms would get stuck on the chest.

Edited by Alex Wolfe, 01 February 2012 - 09:52 AM.

[Paladin1]

Alex Wolfe, on 01 February 2012 - 09:50 AM, said:

Still, the whole point of it is that the gyro is handling the mechs' mass. The unfortunate tree is foreign mass. A jet fighter can do barrel rolls. Now tie a pickup truck on a rope to its tail and see how stable it is.

Not a good idea to mix aerodynamics into this. The problem you're going to have is when a `Mech jumps. If it can take the shock from landing after a jump, much less the shock from landing after an orbital drop, then punching isn't a big deal.

Quote

Most mechs cannot feasibly move their arms in front of their chests, that's not a huge range of movement for... well, punching. Look at how one swings a bat... no way a mech can do that, its arms would get stuck on the chest.

Okay, here's where you're running into problems again. Why wouldn't a `Mech be able to have the same range of movement as a human if it's got all the actuators? You're saying that it can't bring it's arm over it's chest, but not explaining why. I can show, via blueprints of humanoid designs such as the Battlemaster, how it's capable of doing so due to the inclusion of shoulder and elbow actuators.

[Alex Wolfe]

Paladin1, on 01 February 2012 - 10:00 AM, said:

Not a good idea to mix aerodynamics into this. The problem you're going to have is when a `Mech jumps. If it can take the shock from landing after a jump, much less the shock from landing after an orbital drop, then punching isn't a big deal.

We're talking about adding 20% of foreign mass there, not punching with its own arms.

Also, I used the plane because it actually has to worry about staying aloft, just like a mech's gyro is constantly working to keep the machine upright, as its natural state would be "prone" (as opposed to, say, a car which is stable on its four wheels).

Paladin1, on 01 February 2012 - 10:00 AM, said:

Okay, here's where you're running into problems again. Why wouldn't a `Mech be able to have the same range of movement as a human if it's got all the actuators?

To be able to punch and swing weapons, of course. If it doesn't, then it's not designed for it. Q.E.D.

Paladin1, on 01 February 2012 - 10:00 AM, said:

You're saying that it can't bring it's arm over it's chest, but not explaining why. I can show, via blueprints of humanoid designs such as the Battlemaster, how it's capable of doing so due to the inclusion of shoulder and elbow actuators.

Oooh, interesting. Please do! I'm always up for learning new things and eating my own words.

Edited by Alex Wolfe, 01 February 2012 - 10:06 AM.

[joemomma]

I always pictured "tree attacks" as more of a one handed javelin toss motion myself (i.e. stab not swing). Minimize the contact area to maximize force, only needs one arm, removes that whole issue of "swinging motion". Of course then you overbalance the poor mech by only holding the tree with one side.

[Paladin1]

Alex Wolfe, on 01 February 2012 - 10:04 AM, said:

We're talking about adding 20% of foreign mass there, not punching with its own arms.

Also, I used the plane because it actually has to worry about staying aloft, just like a mech's gyro is constantly working to keep the machine upright, as its natural state would be "prone" (as opposed to, say, a car which is stable on its four wheels).

Maybe I wasn't being clear here, but the whole point of mentioning the landing of phase of a jump or even an orbital drop is that if the gyro is complicated enough to allow a `Mech to not only perform an orbital drop but survive it, then punching isn't a big deal, even using a foreign object like a tree.

Quote

To be able to punch and swing weapons, of course. If it doesn't, then it's not designed for it. Q.E.D.

See, I'm still not tracking on what you're hung up on here. A `Mech has all the actuators that are analogous to a human's arm and shoulder joints.

Quote

Oooh, interesting. Please do! I'm always up for learning new things and eating my own words.

Although it's not a very good picture, you'll notice that the shoulder actuator is capable of a wide range of motion. Granted, it's not the ball-socket type of actuator that the AS7-D utilizes, but it's a good example all the same.

[Paladin1]

One other thing that I'd like to point out is that while I had to pull the image from Sarna, there's actually quite a bit of data missing from this image that actually is on the original blueprint, mostly to do with scale and other details. For a picture of the actuator packages in a typical `Mech though, it performs fairly well.

And no, I'm not taking my blueprints out of their cases and scanning them just to show you. They're worth too much to do that at this point.

[Alex Wolfe]

Paladin1, on 01 February 2012 - 10:19 AM, said:

Although it's not a very good picture, you'll notice that the shoulder actuator is capable of a wide range of motion. Granted, it's not the ball-socket type of actuator that the AS7-D utilizes, but it's a good example all the same.

Regardless of the actuators, if you cannot see how the arm would get stuck at its own chest (offending angles marked red), then I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree.

Edited by Alex Wolfe, 01 February 2012 - 10:34 AM.

[Nik Van Rhijn]

Paladin1, on 01 February 2012 - 09:31 AM, said:

D20s? In Battletech!?!

HERETIC!!!

Burn Him!!!

Taken from original Mechwarrior - (before name was Hijacked)

[Paladin1]

No, not regardless of the actuators. Without those actuators, I'd agree that a `Mech's arm couldn't cross it's chest but you seem to be forgetting about the elbow actuator which would allow you to bend your arm around those areas. Sure, punching something below you're waist is going to be a bitch, but that's where you kick instead of punch.