50 replies to this topic

[Foksuh]

Mechs are a horrible concept as warmachines.

Exosuits? Yeah, those we'll likely see

[msqueak]

http://techcrunch.co...s-with-a-smile/
Many are working on it.

[Merky Merc]

Lukoi, on 29 December 2012 - 03:07 PM, said:

Folks have to remember this "Tech" is based on 80's and very early 90's perceptions of what awesome might look like....clearly we've outpaced Stackpole's novels and the original TT/MW canon. Not a biggie...just needs an upgrade

The Abrams, and pretty much every other piece of modern military equipment existed before battletech. Even Vietnam era tech would be superior. They scaled everything back for BT TT so you could play on a kitchen table, and so they could give mechs axes.

[Torqueware]

Foksuh, on 29 December 2012 - 03:08 PM, said:

Mechs are a horrible concept as warmachines.

Exosuits? Yeah, those we'll likely see

No.

Lukoi, on 29 December 2012 - 02:47 PM, said:

What legged robots are we effectively using to clear minefields? Just curious. Is this a different country than the US? I've been in the US Army going on 20 years, worked with multiple NATO partners and have yet to see an effective walking mine clearer bot of some kind in a combat zone. So if there's a prototype I'm all eyes.

Also there is the exoskeleton HULC system in development.

I am once again reminded to check my sources (concerning hearsay) before opening my dumb face. I read articles in 1999 and 2009 about minefield bots and saw ieee competitions on legged minefield robots - and I have a strong tendency to believe my friends. Ick.

Anyway, I hope we develop effective remote solutions soon to help you guys out!

Edited by Torqueware, 01 January 2013 - 08:33 PM.

[Blood Officer 006]

Merky Merc, on 29 December 2012 - 03:44 PM, said:

The Abrams, and pretty much every other piece of modern military equipment existed before battletech. Even Vietnam era tech would be superior. They scaled everything back for BT TT so you could play on a kitchen table, and so they could give mechs axes.

Only partially true. Abrams and Vietnam era tech would be essentially incapable of of penetrating the various ferro-fibrous armors. (I think).

Anyway, it's called suspension of disbelief. I also don't believe in Adamantium claws or a guy who can fly because he's powered by a yellow star (yea you Supes, talking 'bout you man), but I enjoy the movies, lol....MWO is much the same in that respect. It has a realistic "feel" to it, even if it's no longer accurate.

[Merky Merc]

Blood Officer 006, on 14 January 2013 - 04:20 PM, said:

Only partially true. Abrams and Vietnam era tech would be essentially incapable of of penetrating the various ferro-fibrous armors. (I think).

Anyway, it's called suspension of disbelief. I also don't believe in Adamantium claws or a guy who can fly because he's powered by a yellow star (yea you Supes, talking 'bout you man), but I enjoy the movies, lol....MWO is much the same in that respect. It has a realistic "feel" to it, even if it's no longer accurate.

I understand suspension of disbelief, I also understand BT ranges are set so you can play on 1 table instead of 10. I would prefer if ranges were changed for the game but it's not a terribly huge deal.

And with the way most mechs are shaped I highly doubt that they could withstand hits from a 120mm DU shell. That's in reality, in battletech the abrams would have to be right next to the mech to be "in range" and the mech would probably punch the tank or something.

[verybad]

Revolver Kirin, on 18 December 2012 - 12:49 PM, said:

A note about about one of the advantages of the bipedal mech configuration, it is very intimidating when properly sized and designed. Which would be more frightening? An M1 Abrams, or a Zues? Assume the same technological base.

Until the Zeus goes down to a simple RPG while it bbounces off the Abrams because the Abrams can afford thicker front armor because it's not got so much space to cover.

If your best reason for a bipedal warmachine is because it's more intimidating than a tank, then you're not fighting very worthy counterparts.

The Kamikae pilots of WWII for instance, were more motivated than fear could turn them back.

Efficiency is a much better goal to follow when building weapons of war, because war is not a drama, it's a process led by economics, logistics, and killing.

When you're better at killing the enemy than they are at killing you, fear will come as a free byproduct.

[Pan Damonium]

While I can understand why people are inclined to think that a bi-pedal (or legged in general) design might not be the most practical idea for use in combat, I think it would be short sighted to assume that because they shouldn't be used as platforms for weapons that they couldn't have other uses - non-military uses.

I'm sure there could be many many others, but construction is the first thing that comes to mind for me. The height of a mech combined with the ability to lift, swivel, push, and pull - and being able to combine these forms of movement in a human like way could make it the ideal way to build a bridge, or an apartment complex, or even a tower on which to mount weapons. And if legs aren't the best mode for fast travel or for carrying cargo, we shouldn't overlook the numerous possibilities that open with the inevitable creation of huge arms both with and without functional hands.

Oh carbon nano-tubes, what CAN'T you do!?

[Taizan]

This thread was moved to the Off Topic Disucssions sub forum.

[Deamhan]

The thing with nature is that it often works with the best. We are looking at the shell of a crustacean to develop improved, light weight, body armor. The legs are the best way to move over various types of terrain. The problem is our ability to artificially reproduce it effectively/efficiently.

As for micro processors. The leading research is with the use of material with various refraction indexes configured on the atomic level. We can already place individual atoms like connecting Lego blocks, whether it be together or on some medium backdrop. We have developed meta materials with negative refraction indexes (a box could render itself and anything inside invisible to the naked eye). Basically what it all boils down to is not only smaller processors but rather than using an electric signal, it processes photons. The results?

Photon processors will mean smaller while at the same time having a higher frequency. Not just because it will process at the speed of light but also because it would generate significantly less heat. So you can up the frequency and not worry about melting the chip.

[HiplyRustic]

SpiralRazor, on 17 December 2012 - 01:02 PM, said:

Hmm..I dont know...while i agree that huge lumbering mechs and titans do seem like a bad idea..

Heavy Gear style powered armors make a lot of sense. We are much more familiar with how to maneuver a human shaped body and if the "skate mode" propulsion can ever be figured out I can really see them being deployed as fast cavalry. They were always lightly armed and armored compared to real tanks etc, but the mobility combined with the versatility was why they were developed in the first place. Btw, Heavy gears had rocket assisted jumps of what...100 meters? Im not sure what the fastest skate speeds were, but im guessing it was well over 60mph.

Well, it's all from Heinlein's Starship Trooper powered armor. No don't get me started on the movies, may every copy self-destruct immediately.