443 replies to this topic

[KuruptU4Fun]

Sifright, on 06 February 2013 - 07:29 AM, said:

Funny then that so little in the game has anything to do with reality.

It's just how us old people shared information prior to the introduction of the pornonet....

[Kousagi]

Thirdstar, on 06 February 2013 - 07:43 AM, said:

This is quite absurd, i'm sorry.

Lasers don't really work like that in RL.
I have no clue what's the RL parallel to PPCs because the effect described requires space magic.
Missiles in the 1970s had better tracking abilities than those in BT.

Mechs in general are absurd, they should collapse under their own weight without, wait for it, space magic.

There's being a fan, and then there's being bloody silly. Guess which one you're being.

I guess you don't have a clue what the word Based on means.... Back in the 80's Lasers were still being researched, So no, they didn't know Exactly how lasers would work in 2013... PPC's are particle cannons, Which there is a real life particle accelerator in the world right now. Its too big to be used as a weapon, and they are still trying to figure out how to make it a weapon, but that does not mean they could not have BASED a idea of what it could be like if a particle accelerator became a weapon....

You can't say for sure that its weight would have crushed it, as you have zero clue as to the effects of the muscle used in the mech... I mean we Just were able to make the stuff not to long ago, though its very costly and first generation. They also don't plan to use it in anything, any time soon.

[Jack Corvus]

Thirdstar, on 06 February 2013 - 07:43 AM, said:

Mechs in general are absurd, they should collapse under their own weight without, wait for it, space magic.

Let's not make posts like this, because that's being just as silly. We build taller and taller buildings that do not collapse because we continue to engineer better and better solutions. Mechs are, at their core, extremely lightweight because they are built like people - a skeleton wrapped with muscles. In this case, electrically operated ones. An Atlas' frame only weighs ten tons, and it ends up weighing a hundred in the end because it 'wears' a multitude of weapon systems and armour like we wear organs and skin. Saying that mankind could never engineer something like that is kind of arrogant, because it assumes we already know as much as we ever will about everything.

Edited by Jack Corvus, 06 February 2013 - 07:52 AM.

[Kousagi]

Sifright, on 06 February 2013 - 07:46 AM, said:

.....

So you think increasing the number of rounds fired out of a cannon would drop the total range you can shoot?

makes perfect sense would read your post again and not consider you a fanboy at all.

No.... Learn to read.... Its called, balancing... Crazy idea i know. I mean, why would anyone ever balance anything!

[Thirdstar]

Kousagi, on 06 February 2013 - 07:50 AM, said:

PPC's are particle cannons, Which there is a real life particle accelerator in the world right now. Its too big to be used as a weapon, and they are still trying to figure out how to make it a weapon, but that does not mean they could not have BASED a idea of what it could be like if a particle accelerator became a weapon....

You......you actually think they're trying to make a weapon out of something like the CERN large hadron collider..............

Do you even know what it does?

I'm speechless.

[Jack Corvus]

Thirdstar, on 06 February 2013 - 07:54 AM, said:

You......you actually think they're trying to make a weapon out of something like the CERN large hadron collider..............

Do you even know what it does?

I'm speechless.

He's not comparing PPCs with colliders, he's comparing them with actual research into particle beam weapons. Look it up. You're being deliberately ridiculous in an effort to make someone else look ridiculous and mock them, when in reality it's your own knowledge that is coming up very very short.

Edited by Jack Corvus, 06 February 2013 - 07:57 AM.

[KuruptU4Fun]

Thirdstar, on 06 February 2013 - 07:43 AM, said:

This is quite absurd, i'm sorry.

Lasers don't really work like that in RL.
I have no clue what's the RL parallel to PPCs because the effect described requires space magic.
Missiles in the 1970s had better tracking abilities than those in BT.

Mechs in general are absurd, they should collapse under their own weight without, wait for it, space magic.

There's being a fan, and then there's being bloody silly. Guess which one you're being.

Things like nuclear cores; lasers; and PPC's are "weaponized" which starts with making them small enough to be portable.

Cellphones originally looked like this:

[Sifright]

Jack Corvus, on 06 February 2013 - 07:51 AM, said:

Let's not make posts like this, because that's being just as silly. We build taller and taller buildings that do not collapse because we continue to engineer better and better solutions. Mechs are, at their core, extremely lightweight because they are built like people - a skeleton wrapped with muscles. In this case, electrically operated ones. An Atlas' frame only weighs ten tons, and it ends up weighing a hundred in the end because it 'wears' a multitude of weapon systems and armour like we wear organs and skin. Saying that mankind could never engineer something like that is kind of arrogant, because it assumes we already know as much as we ever will about everything.

It really isn't.

We will never make anything like the atlas ever.

Material science is the one area humanity really has already begun to hit the endgame in. At least in terms of things like composites and tensile strength of materials.

[Thirdstar]

KuruptU4Fun, on 06 February 2013 - 07:56 AM, said:

Things like nuclear cores; lasers; and PPC's are "weaponized" which starts with making them small enough to be portable.
Cellphones originally looked like this:

Nothing to do with what I said, with a side order of Apples to Oranges comparison.

Sifright, on 06 February 2013 - 07:58 AM, said:

It really isn't.

We will never make anything like the atlas ever.

Material science is the one area humanity really has already begun to hit the endgame in. At least in terms of things like composites and tensile strength of materials.

More to do with this.

http://tvtropes.org/...n/SquareCubeLaw

Don't like linking TVTropes instead of something more concrete but I didn't have enough time.

What DO they teach in schools these days, because it ain't basic science.

Edited by Thirdstar, 06 February 2013 - 08:00 AM.

[Joseph Mallan]

Thirdstar, on 06 February 2013 - 07:54 AM, said:

You......you actually think they're trying to make a weapon out of something like the CERN large hadron collider..............

Do you even know what it does?

I'm speechless.

Do you even know what it could do? If physicists can

Quote

For decades, the Standard Model of particle physics has served physicists well as a means of understanding the fundamental laws of Nature, but it does not tell the whole story. Only experimental data using the high energies reached by the LHC can push knowledge forward, challenging those who seek confirmation of established knowledge, and those who dare to dream beyond the paradigm.

You don't think Military sciences are tying to weaponize it???

KuruptU4Fun, on 06 February 2013 - 07:56 AM, said:

Things like nuclear cores; lasers; and PPC's are "weaponized" which starts with making them small enough to be portable.

Cellphones originally looked like this:

you can/could use one of those to call in an Artillery strike.

Edited by Joseph Mallan, 06 February 2013 - 08:02 AM.

[Thirdstar]

Joseph Mallan, on 06 February 2013 - 08:02 AM, said:

You don't think Military sciences are tying to weaponize it???

No I really don't think so. Because that's not what a particle accelerator does. It simply isn't. They may be working towards weaponizing effects discovered or derivative research. But a particle accelerator as we know it? Not built for it. Which is what the person I quoted stated. If had injected some nuance into his argument I wouldn't have pounced on him so hard.

"there is a real life particle accelerator in the world right now. Its too big to be used as a weapon, and they are still trying to figure out how to make it a weapon"

[Sifright]

Thirdstar, on 06 February 2013 - 07:59 AM, said:

Nothing to do with what I said, with a side order of Apples to Oranges comparison.



More to do with this.

http://tvtropes.org/...n/SquareCubeLaw

Don't like linking TVTropes instead of something more concrete but I didn't have enough time.

What DO they teach in schools these days, because it ain't basic science.

unghhhhh.

The primary driver behind shrinking of technology like cell phones is that transistor sizes keep dropping the physical wall for silicon transistors is about three generations away. You know there are physical hard limits to what can be achieved. We already have to move to new lithography processes to etch silicon for electronics and soon enough we will have the problem that electrons can tunnel between transistors rather than follow the actual circuit.

The knock on effect is a huge decrease in power consumption meaning smaller batteries can be used.

Edit: quoted the wrong person

Edited by Sifright, 06 February 2013 - 08:12 AM.

[Kousagi]

Thirdstar, on 06 February 2013 - 08:07 AM, said:

No I really don't think so. Because that's not what a particle accelerator does. It simply isn't. They may be working towards weaponizing effects discovered or derivative research. But a particle accelerator as we know it? Not built for it. Which is what the person I quoted stated. If had injected some nuance into his argument I wouldn't have pounced on him so hard.

"there is a real life particle accelerator in the world right now. Its too big to be used as a weapon, and they are still trying to figure out how to make it a weapon"

So, I have to ask, If they are still trying to figure out how to make it a weapon, then would that mean that all current forms of it are not a weapon?.... Just saying. totally know that the current forms of accelerators is not a weapon, but that does not mean its not the base technology to help use understand HOW to make it a weapon. We still have some time to go to make it a weapon. Does not mean that they could not have used the theory of its use to figure out what it might be like as a weapon, disregarding How it was made in to one.

[Sifright]

Kousagi, on 06 February 2013 - 08:14 AM, said:

So, I have to ask, If they are still trying to figure out how to make it a weapon, then would that mean that all current forms of it are not a weapon?.... Just saying. totally know that the current forms of accelerators is not a weapon, but that does not mean its not the base technology to help use understand HOW to make it a weapon. We still have some time to go to make it a weapon. Does not mean that they could not have used the theory of its use to figure out what it might be like as a weapon, disregarding How it was made in to one.

do you really have that little idea of what a particle accelerator does?

Like seriously ignorant much?

[KuruptU4Fun]

EMP was an unknown effect that was discovered on the first few nuclear detonation tests. Now there are specific EMP weapons designed to take out an enemies communications altogether. Lasers are now small enough and powerful enough to put on a fighter to knock down incoming missiles that are targeting it.

And yes, someone in the military has looked at the Hadron collider and said: "How can we use it to stop our enemies from doing us harm?". It may not be a reality for decades to come, but I guarantee you someone has said it. Most likely to a politician to convince them give money to find out how to.

[Steven Dixon]

The devs are already working on MG balance, it's not like they are ignoring them (it's just not top priority). As a side note in the BT boardgame I actually made an extremely effective build using only MGs as weapons, it was a fast mech with huge numbers of MGs, it had to get point blank range but it would shred up any mech when it got there. Unfortunately (or fortunately ) this isn't something you can't do with MWO's hardpoint system.

[Joseph Mallan]

Thirdstar, on 06 February 2013 - 08:07 AM, said:

No I really don't think so. Because that's not what a particle accelerator does. It simply isn't. They may be working towards weaponizing effects discovered or derivative research. But a particle accelerator as we know it? Not built for it. Which is what the person I quoted stated. If had injected some nuance into his argument I wouldn't have pounced on him so hard.

"there is a real life particle accelerator in the world right now. Its too big to be used as a weapon, and they are still trying to figure out how to make it a weapon"

I can live with that rebuttal.

[Critical Fumble]

DocBach, on 06 February 2013 - 07:49 AM, said:

THIS, so MUCH THIS. My best friend was the 2nd tank in the Thunder Runs into Baghdad, he said it felt like playing a video game with the cheats on. They were getting shot by hundreds of bullets and they didn't even scratch the paint. Machine guns aren't anti-Mech weapons, and they aren't suppose to be.

Hell, most of the time our MRAP, which was just an armored paddy wagon, was shot by automatic fire we usually didn't even realize it until someone told us "hey you guys just took fire from that alley."

So, because in the real world conventional infantryman weapons don't do anything to heavily armored vehicles, a weapon that goes by the same name in a science fiction universe shouldn't either? Bearing in mind that this same universe has "long" range missiles that have less reach than a modern sniper.

So is it that you're stuck on the name of the thing, and if they changed that you'd be ok with an effective light ballistic; or do you not follow that they've gimped at least two chassis because of the forced hardpoint mechanic combined with the current MG?

[Thirdstar]

Kousagi, on 06 February 2013 - 08:14 AM, said:

... totally know that the current forms of accelerators is not a weapon, but that does not mean its not the base technology to help use understand HOW to make it a weapon.

Completely convinced. Now tell me, even in theoretical terms, how to to turn a particle accelerator into a weapon. I'll wait.

KuruptU4Fun, on 06 February 2013 - 08:15 AM, said:

And yes, someone in the military has looked at the Hadron collider and said: "How can we use it to stop our enemies from doing us harm?". It may not be a reality for decades to come, but I guarantee you someone has said it. Most likely to a politician to convince them give money to find out how to.

You too.

KuruptU4Fun, on 06 February 2013 - 08:15 AM, said:

Lasers are now small enough and powerful enough to put on a fighter to knock down incoming missiles that are targeting it.

I'm sure you have a link for this, I mean you would surely not just have pulled that out of your nether regions to attempt to make a point. No, clearly you are a better man than that.

Edited by Thirdstar, 06 February 2013 - 08:25 AM.

[Kousagi]

Sifright, on 06 February 2013 - 08:15 AM, said:

do you really have that little idea of what a particle accelerator does?

Like seriously ignorant much?

Do you really have that little of a clue? Just because we have zero clue how to make particle acceleration a weapon today, does not mean that we will never figure out how to make it a weapon. Its much like the idea of concentrating light went from flash lights, to laser beams that burn holes in to things.

If you think someone is not trying to make a weapon out of it, then you are very mistaken.

Edited by Kousagi, 06 February 2013 - 08:25 AM.