Massassi Forums Logo

This is the static archive of the Massassi Forums. The forums are closed indefinitely. Thanks for all the memories!

You can also download Super Old Archived Message Boards from when Massassi first started.

"View" counts are as of the day the forums were archived, and will no longer increase.

☖ Forums → Discussion Forum → OhmygawdOhmygawdOhmygawd (Battlefield 2142)
123
OhmygawdOhmygawdOhmygawd (Battlefield 2142)
2006-03-22, 4:33 PM #41
Bi-pedal designs are an awful idea simply because of the fact that you can remove one leg to destroy the damned thing. Add the fact that a bi-pedal vehicle requires more complicated systems and moving parts just to remain stable and suddenly it's relatively easy to see why more conventional designs will continue to be improved and adapted in the future.
omnia mea mecum porto
2006-03-22, 4:38 PM #42
Stop fighting about it! It's sci-fi and it looks cool. Does it need any more? :p
DO NOT WANT.
2006-03-22, 5:25 PM #43
OHMYGAWD

[http://www.jrh3k5.net/misc/travolta.jpg]
the idiot is the person who follows the idiot and your not following me your insulting me your following the path of a idiot so that makes you the idiot - LC Tusken
2006-03-22, 5:28 PM #44
I agree, bipedal war machines are illogical - although admittedly, rather cool. ;)
My JK Level Design | 2005 JK Hub Level Pack (Plexus) | Massassi Levels
2006-03-22, 5:30 PM #45
I always thought the same thing ever since I saw that AT-ST slip on a bunch of logs in ROTJ as a kid.
"it is time to get a credit card to complete my financial independance" — Tibby, Aug. 2009
2006-03-22, 5:48 PM #46
READ BATTLETECH
D E A T H
2006-03-22, 5:53 PM #47
[QUOTE=Vincent Valentine]Not impressed.[/QUOTE]
.
America, home of the free gift with purchase.
2006-03-22, 5:55 PM #48
looks crap.

I always hated those Mech warrior things.
Code:
if(getThingFlags(source) & 0x8){
  do her}
elseif(getThingFlags(source) & 0x4){
  do other babe}
else{
  do a dude}
2006-03-22, 6:02 PM #49
[QUOTE=Dj Yoshi]READ BATTLETECH[/QUOTE]
Couldn't you just tell us how it explains how they get around the weaknesses of a bipedal machine? A quadraped I could understand, as the best fighting land creatures on this planet have four legs...
omnia mea mecum porto
2006-03-22, 6:10 PM #50
Actually the best fighting land creatures have 2 legs. And guns.
Warhead[97]
2006-03-22, 6:22 PM #51
Originally posted by BobTheMasher:
Actually the best fighting land creatures have 2 legs. And guns.

No, put a man into a cage with a cougar and tell me who comes out. A machine will have a human driver and weapons regardless of design, four legs good, two legs bad...
omnia mea mecum porto
2006-03-22, 6:30 PM #52
Originally posted by Roach:
No, put a man into a cage with a cougar and tell me who comes out.

It depends on if he has an automatic rifle.

OR if he's that one guy from Canada.
Bassoon, n. A brazen instrument into which a fool blows out his brains.
2006-03-22, 6:40 PM #53
No weapons, that's my point. The anatomical structure of a human being has no advantage for a combat vehicle over something more cat or dog like.
omnia mea mecum porto
2006-03-22, 6:40 PM #54
Originally posted by Roach:
Couldn't you just tell us how it explains how they get around the weaknesses of a bipedal machine? A quadraped I could understand, as the best fighting land creatures on this planet have four legs...

Not really. Quadrapeds would be too slow. Bipeds have the ease of mobility, are a lot cheaper, and have easily replace-able parts. They don't get around the weakness, and in fact it's used to great effect sometimes. But when you start to understand how they use mechs in the universe, you come to understand while it may not be the most logical thing that you see, it is indeed fairly logical, and there are other extraneous reasons for the use of bipeds. That's something that can only come from reading the books.
D E A T H
2006-03-22, 6:46 PM #55
if the Mechwarrior is a good one, they can stand on one leg, like a human does, the pilot acts as the 'inner ear' of the mech for balance
Holy soap opera Batman. - FGR
DARWIN WILL PREVENT THE DOWNFALL OF OUR RACE. - Rob
Free Jin!
2006-03-22, 6:49 PM #56
What genk said. Hell, usually mechs can even function without either leg, they're just immobile. There's cases of mechs that have fallen down still working, etc etc.
D E A T H
2006-03-22, 6:52 PM #57
[QUOTE=Dj Yoshi]...That's something that can only come from reading the books.[/QUOTE]

No thanks, I'm too busy reading ANNA KARENINA.
COUCHMAN IS BACK BABY
2006-03-22, 6:52 PM #58
Except, genk, that anything that'd blow a leg off would tip the one legged mech...
omnia mea mecum porto
2006-03-22, 6:53 PM #59
Originally posted by Roach:
Except, genk, that anything that'd blow a leg off would tip the one legged mech...

Not really. Read the books.

Plus, sometimes the mechs can raise themselves back up.
D E A T H
2006-03-22, 6:56 PM #60
Well, I suppose in the 31st century we'll have floating battle brains and un-existing beam weapons that destroys the target before it exists...
omnia mea mecum porto
2006-03-22, 6:57 PM #61
by then no one would freaking care about mecha, voila, too bad in battletech history, mechs weren't invented till around 2400 or so
Holy soap opera Batman. - FGR
DARWIN WILL PREVENT THE DOWNFALL OF OUR RACE. - Rob
Free Jin!
2006-03-22, 7:02 PM #62
I'm sure a quad mech in 2400 would be better at battle than a bi...
omnia mea mecum porto
2006-03-22, 7:09 PM #63
How? Why? Can you support your theory?

You forget one important thing--turning radius. A bi-mech can fairly easily turn while standing still, and has a revolving turret. A quad mech wouldn't fare as well, especially since the chances of a revolving turret are much slimmer considering the design.
D E A T H
2006-03-22, 7:18 PM #64
First you're going to have to explain why the back of a quad mech isn't a better place to have a turret?

4 legs = better stability, better survivability (can lose a leg and still operate), more weapons, speed (I can only think of large birds that can reach high speeds on two legs, all other fast creatures have 4).

2 legs = smaller, less survivability (loss of one leg means it can no longer travel), quicker turn rate.
omnia mea mecum porto
2006-03-22, 7:19 PM #65
Heh. A bi mech.
Sorry. *ahem*
What aboot Tripods? Stalkers, that sort of thing.

-As Mr. Hyde once said, "I'm no engineer, but isn't three legs a bad idea? I mean, god created a lot of stupid, worthless creatures on this planet, but I don't believe any of them have three legs."
2006-03-22, 9:08 PM #66
Originally posted by JediKirby:
Why are Mechs the future? By then we'll be flying everything, and soldier-to-soldier combat won't be a concept at all.



i would just like to point out that while we have tanks, jets, ships, artillery, nukes, and all sorts of **** that can blow stuff up with exceeding efficiency, we still fight "soldier to soldier". we have since the dawn of man's existence, and I see no reason why that will ever change.
Moo.
2006-03-22, 9:11 PM #67
Originally posted by A_Big_Fat_CoW:
i would just like to point out that while we have tanks, jets, ships, artillery, nukes, and all sorts of **** that can blow stuff up with exceeding efficiency, we still fight "soldier to soldier". we have since the dawn of man's existence, and I see no reason why that will ever change.

Agreed, you'll always need boots on the ground to win a war.
omnia mea mecum porto
2006-03-22, 9:11 PM #68
Originally posted by Roach:
First you're going to have to explain why the back of a quad mech isn't a better place to have a turret?

4 legs = better stability, better survivability (can lose a leg and still operate), more weapons, speed (I can only think of large birds that can reach high speeds on two legs, all other fast creatures have 4).

2 legs = smaller, less survivability (loss of one leg means it can no longer travel), quicker turn rate.

Mainly because the 2-legged creature will sustain less fire because it will be more agile, and much faster, not to mention it will be able to use its arsenal better. Also, if you see the mechs (they have arms that rotate along with the turret), you'll see why the arsenal is better utilized on a biped.
D E A T H
2006-03-22, 9:18 PM #69
Agile, maybe. Speed? Why? Take a look at animals, bipeds tend to be slow. And quads could have arms with weapons as well (think a centaur versus a satyr). My point is, two legs on the ground doesn't provide enough advantages for battle over a quad.
omnia mea mecum porto
2006-03-22, 9:22 PM #70
Originally posted by Emon:
It depends on if he has an automatic rifle.

OR if he's that one guy from Canada.


Didn't that guy have a knife though?
"it is time to get a credit card to complete my financial independance" — Tibby, Aug. 2009
2006-03-22, 9:23 PM #71
Originally posted by Roach:
Agile, maybe. Speed? Why? Take a look at animals, bipeds tend to be slow. And quads could have arms with weapons as well (think a centaur versus a satyr). My point is, two legs on the ground doesn't provide enough advantages for battle over a quad.

But you're forgetting we're talking about machines--not animals. Animals have thousands, millions of years of evolution telling them how to use their legs in synch, along with visual perception which tells them what's coming up and how to compensate. Machines don't. You have a lot less legs to worry about moving at the same time.

My point is you're mistaken :p
D E A T H
2006-03-22, 9:26 PM #72
:p

Ok, well, our machines won't have evolution on its side, carpenters started with 4 legged tables to maintain stability over two legged ones right? ;)
omnia mea mecum porto
2006-03-22, 9:28 PM #73
Originally posted by Roach:
:p

Ok, well, our machines won't have evolution on its side, carpenters started with 4 legged tables to maintain stability over two legged ones right? ;)

Different types of legs.

Code: 
Mech legs:

\
  \
    \
      \
      /
    /
  /
/

Table legs:
|
|
|
|
|
D E A T H
2006-03-22, 9:32 PM #74
Haha, right, and add two more and you increase it's battle survivability by 100% ;)
omnia mea mecum porto
2006-03-22, 9:36 PM #75
Regarding Disabled Mechs

http://i22.photobucket.com/albums/b329/Cmd598/Last-DitchEffort.jpg
Mobile Suit Gundam: 08th MS Team

While this Zaku I lost the mobility of it's legs to an unguided rocket launcher, it was still capable of firing off several rounds and launching anti-personel countermeasures(Which were quite effective...poor SOBs didn't even see it comming...).


Quote:
No, put a man into a cage with a cougar and tell me who comes out.


Unfair comparison. I believe the couger has an advantage in armament. Of course the human is capable of finding some sort of weapon...(Manipulator hands FTW!)

Actually, this might be a good comparison... But only if the man has some form of a melee weapon. Most likely a sharp stick.
<Rob> This is internet.
<Rob> Nothing costs money if I don't want it to.
2006-03-22, 9:37 PM #76
Originally posted by Roach:
Haha, right, and add two more and you increase it's battle survivability by 100% ;)

Not if it's a behemoth that is the target of every missile/laser/gauss rifle/rail gun/PPC this side of the Inner Sphere

:p

Commander--we're talking about mechs that are technologically feasible. Not only are gundams made up of made up materials, but nobody even knows what drives them.
D E A T H
2006-03-22, 9:52 PM #77
Haha, ok, I need to step out of this. I can't argue this anime stuff, I'm trying to argue as realistic feasibility.
omnia mea mecum porto
2006-03-22, 9:53 PM #78
That has nothing to do with a Gundam aside from the universe.

Zakus are made of some sort of high tensile steel(Blame the lack of technological breakthroughs in the 70s) and powered by an ultracompact fusion reactor. Hell, Zakus don't even have a beam weapon of any kind...

Questionable size aside, it is no more feasable than Battletech's rusty endo-steel hackjobs. BTW, how old is the Atlas now...?
<Rob> This is internet.
<Rob> Nothing costs money if I don't want it to.
2006-03-22, 10:01 PM #79
[QUOTE=Commander 598]That has nothing to do with a Gundam aside from the universe.

Zakus are made of some sort of high tensile steel(Blame the lack of technological breakthroughs in the 70s) and powered by an ultracompact fusion reactor. Hell, Zakus don't even have a beam weapon of any kind...

Questionable size aside, it is no more feasable than Battletech's rusty endo-steel hackjobs. BTW, how old is the Atlas now...?[/QUOTE]
High tensile steel? Mmm...sure...

And they're not "hackjobs" (unless you're talking about the solahmna mechs). They also use some ferro-titanium alloy, not steel.

And what exactly drives zakus? Motors? Because if so, you'd better start convincing me that they came up with a damn good way to utilize the motors, otherwise you can scrap that idea. (by drive I mean what makes the limbs move/gives it strength. I don't mean like the fusion reactor).
D E A T H
2006-03-22, 10:07 PM #80
All I can say is incredible. I love mechs, I love first ps, and I was one of the few who liked the day after tomorrow... Thank god I am making a computer right now that can run games like these... for once in my life...
"You're only supposed to blow the bloody doors off!" Anyone who recognizes this quote is awsome.
123

↑ Up to the top!