Lord of the Stars Quest!

I'm not changing the reactor I'm saying change the FUEL. It's still a 21 body fusion plant. it just now has access to much more fuel, instead of using a cup of Hyperium as a booster it would now run off the stuff.


Also, don't forget we really don't want AM planetside much less used for ground vehicles. I'd just as soon not lose a regiment of tanks because one of them got blown up and they ran on antimatter.

Also, notice I said Bipedal platforms THAT WORK. Your tank has trouble with hills my robot can scale the side of a mountain if need be.
 
SakSak said:
Wasn't the whole point of the Titan reactor that it was a lucky one-shot, and that after it was turned on the scientists realized exactly how lucky we all were it hadn't just blown up, and that the only sane option would be to limit the socity to something like 10-body fusion?

I'd rather we research AM, and build a new super-reactor using that.

Or create a robust basic power infratructure beyond the norm in a distributed fashion. We really want to increase our economic, infrastructural and industrial ability (faster than our R&D ability) at this juncture.
That was then this is now.
 
Larekko12 said:
That was then this is now.
Have we done any more research on fusion? I don't recall any, but I could be wrong.
Dreamyr said:
Also, notice I said Bipedal platforms THAT WORK. Your tank has trouble with hills my robot can scale the side of a mountain if need be.
You still run into most of the same problems with mechs vs. tanks that you do with mechs vs. fighters. SakSak pointed this out a couple posts back. It sums up the problems with mechs nicely.

tl;dr: BOLO beats Gundam.
 
PhoenixFTW said:
Have we done any more research on fusion? I don't recall any, but I could be wrong.

You still run into most of the same problems with mechs vs. tanks that you do with mechs vs. fighters. SakSak pointed this out a couple posts back. It sums up the problems with mechs nicely.

tl;dr: BOLO beats Gundam.
WEll that's the thing we could do more research into fusion. Hell we could see if we could Make the AI Brain A Little Sister

And what's with that stuff on brain computers that midnight found.

Also we need to research HKs.
 
PhoenixFTW said:
Have we done any more research on fusion? I don't recall any, but I could be wrong.

You still run into most of the same problems with mechs vs. tanks that you do with mechs vs. fighters. SakSak pointed this out a couple posts back. It sums up the problems with mechs nicely.

tl;dr: BOLO beats Gundam.
I don't consider a BOLO a tank. It's too big. Just because something has treads does NOT mean it is a tank.

Comparing a robot and a tank to each based solely on their method of locomotion the robot comes out ahead because a robot can reach places a tank cannot.

I consider comparing a BOLO and Gundam to be such a one sided comparison it's not even funny. One is a twenty meter tall battle robot the other is a land battleship with the firepower of entire FLEETS.

it's like saying a battleship will beat a .50 cal machine gun.

Well no duh sherlock. The differences in size and technology are so absurd as to be ridiculous.


Come back when your comparison isn't so ridiculously biased. I read through that and all it does is list every single negative point the author could possibly think of to support his dislike of mechs.


It was also based off a relatively hard scifi universe which we are NOT in for this story. Already we have stuff like inertial dampers and energy shields not to mention the way our armor works is so completely different than that of btech that it invalidates several major points of that post.

Armor in battletech is ablative it comes off in sheets so the more of it you have the better protected you are. In our game armor has not anywhere been stated to be ablative in nature and while it is always GOOD to have more armor our defenses do not rely only on who has the thickest armor but also who has the TOUGHEST armor.

TL;DR

The post you linked is ridiculously biased against anything not a tank and I honestly can't take it seriously when it doesn't even TRY to pass itself off as giving a unbiased view as it does not even ATTEMPT to list any possible positives that a bipedal platform was.

Such as you know, not getting STUCK every time it tries to cross a ditch with sides that are too steep because its treads can't grip it.
 
Noxturne90 said:
Personally, this is something I expected to happen. Skylar is a new AI slotted into a Bioroid body, and I fully believed she would have initial anger and emotional issues. All our other AI's and hero's with the exception of Tori were AI's that were given time to develop and mature and learn to deal with any form of emotional response they might be capable of. Skylar is still technically a kid and has no experience like that, more so that she is in a position of incredible power at the moment.

We need to assign one of our elder hero's to mentor Skylar, and make sure we don't end up with a ticking emotional timebomb for a Fleet High Admiral.
Yeah we should have the spark mentor her.
 
Dreamyr said:
Chill out. I wasn't making the BOLO vs. Mech a valid point in my argument. It was a joke. I linked the post to show several arguments against mechs, not to give an unbiased argument for both sides. Heck, the post itself says that it is a rant. It does, however, make several valid arguments against mechs, and I ask that you either admit that they are valid arguments or refute them with arguments of your own, rather than dismiss the post as a whole.
It was also based off a relatively hard scifi universe which we are NOT in for this story. Already we have stuff like inertial dampers and energy shields
None of this invalidates the arguments made in the linked post. Sure, we could research tech to make mechs viable (pending GM approval), but we could also use those research slots to make better tanks.
not to mention the way our armor works is so completely different than that of btech that it invalidates several major points of that post. Armor in battletech is ablative it comes off in sheets so the more of it you have the better protected you are. In our game armor has not anywhere been stated to be ablative in nature and while it is always GOOD to have more armor our defenses do not rely only on who has the thickest armor but also who has the TOUGHEST armor.
Where the heck does the post I linked mention BattleTech? What does BattleTech have to do with anything? Additionally, what points are invalidated? Regardless, I agree that the toughness of the armor matters, but thickness also matters, and the front of a tank has less surface area exposed than the front of a mech, which means that given the same tonnage of armor, a tank's armor is thicker, and therefore the tank is better protected.
Such as you know, not getting STUCK every time it tries to cross a ditch with sides that are too steep because its treads can't grip it.
Use the research slot that would go to making mechs viable to research hovertanks. As you said, this setting is relatively soft Sci-Fi.
Noxturne90 said:
Personally, this is something I expected to happen. Skylar is a new AI slotted into a Bioroid body, and I fully believed she would have initial anger and emotional issues. All our other AI's and hero's with the exception of Tori were AI's that were given time to develop and mature and learn to deal with any form of emotional response they might be capable of. Skylar is still technically a kid and has no experience like that, more so that she is in a position of incredible power at the moment.
We need to assign one of our elder hero's to mentor Skylar, and make sure we don't end up with a ticking emotional timebomb for a Fleet High Admiral.
I think Tori should mentor her, as Tori is both female and in a Bioroid body.
 
...You gave me a link to a post in the Btech RR that went on a biased rant against battlemechs/giant robots in favor of tanks. What else exactly in particular was I supposed to take away from it?
 
Noxturne90 said:
I would agree. Tori or Aven. Tori could get her socially up to par, and Aven can mentor her from a more military approach. While he can't teach her how to be a Admiral, he can teach her to control herself and how to understand the officers under her.
She's learning military stuff form her job. What she's not learning is social stuff, which is where Tori comes in.
Personally, either one is good. But we need to put someone on it this turn. I do not want someone in control of our fleets who's first response to something that frustrates them is to smash the nearest bot and make a paper-weight out of their CPU!
Slow down. This is all hypothetical, and nothing has been mentioned about any homicidal tendencies. The only way I think this could happen is if we get a fail/crit fail, and if that happens something bad will occur regardless. Mentoring is a nice bit of fluff, but not some super important action we need to take to prevent a bit disaster.
 
....Derp.


I read mechs vs tanks and immediately assumed that it was from the btech RR. There was a pretty similar thread there I think and it generally sounded like something that would be posted there.


My bad.:oops:

Point still stands though that that post is biased as hell. He doesn't even attempt to discuss any positive points a bipedal platform might have like the ability to scale mountains without having to be airlifted and thus spotted and rain artillery fire down on anything that comes in range.
 
Dreamyr said:
...You gave me a link to a post in the Btech RR that went on a biased rant against battlemechs/giant robots in favor of tanks. What else exactly in particular was I supposed to take away from it?
This will be the last post from me regarding this topic, on this thread. WIsh to continue it? Create a new thread.

The point of that thread was that for any given tech level, due to the inherent differences in form, a combat-unit shaped like a tank will always be a more stable firing platform, simpler, harder to hit, better armored and have more motive power per tonnage of engine, over a mech-type humanoid shape.

Likewise, for a given tech level, a dedicated fighter will always be better than a mech in atmospheric flight. A dedicated space fighter, given equal tech, will always be better than a mech-style space combat unit.

The form of a tank is always better optimized for ground combat, over a mech built from equal technology. Because if you have the armor tech to make a mech capable of withstanding hits from... say, Abrams MBT cannon with their large armor (and thus thinner for any given tonnage) surface areas, then equal material used to create the glacis of a tank will shrug off superior weaponry. If you can make joints that can support huge-ass weapons being held in hand-like extension of a mech, you can use those same joints to create ball-turrets for the same weapons at smaller, simpler and lighter yet equally versatile configurations on top or side of a tank hull.

And so forth.
Point still stands though that that post is biased as hell. He doesn't even attempt to discuss any positive points a bipedal platform might have like the ability to scale mountains without having to be airlifted and thus spotted and rain artillery fire down on anything that comes in range.
If you can construct legs with sufficient grip to scale mountains that steep, you can apply that same material to the simpler configuration of a track or a tire. If you have jetpacks of a mech, those same jetpacks can be applied to a tank and it will fly better than the mech because unlike the complex and unstable form of the mech the tank is 'just' a flying brick. If you have grappling hooks on a mech, you can apply those exact same grappling hooks to a tank. And it will be better, because the tank is simpler, smaller and lighter, or if at same tonnage: of superior performance.
 
Dreamyr said:
Point still stands though that that post is biased as hell. He doesn't even attempt to discuss any positive points a bipedal platform might have
Being unbiased wasn't the point of the post! SakSak linked it, and I pointed out his linking of it, to give several arguments against mechs, not give an unbiased review of the whole debate.
like the ability to scale mountains without having to be airlifted and thus spotted and rain artillery fire down on anything that comes in range.
Again, hovertanks.

Edit: SakSak's right. And I'll follow his example, and drop this subject. This thread's been derailed enough.
 
Just had a very scary thought.


The TI drones are networked right?

We need to make sure that they don't go geth on us then. :eek:
 
Admiral Vesca said:
Uh, why would them going Geth on us be a bad thing?
We are a society of AI. They ask do we have a soul? We say no. But we don't either and are still alive.

But really it goes. You spontanesouly developed sentience? Yes. Cool your just like tori. Now get back to work while we work out your wages as much as you may need them.
 
...These are the guys we treat like slave labor.

Perchance they might be a bit pissed about that when they wake up?
 
Why would they be? Does an AI value freedom? Did we program them to value freedom?

The reason the Geth asked about souls is because they saw Quarian religion and were curious if the same applied to them. There was nothing nefarious about that question.
 
Dreamyr said:
...These are the guys we treat like slave labor.
Perchance they might be a bit pissed about that when they wake up?
Why? They weren't alive then, and if they wake up we'll start treating them like any other citizen. If you really want, we can put a text document in every TI Drone's Hard Drive that says 'if you gain Sapience, we'll give your rights' or something.
 
Dreamyr said:
...These are the guys we treat like slave labor.

Perchance they might be a bit pissed about that when they wake up?
1. we don't treat them that bad.
2. full sentience/sapience AI have different rights/privileges/responsibilities than task-intelligence drones. if a TI drone gains full Sen/sapience, then it isn't a TI drone anymore.
 
I don't really think that would be a good idea.

It would be easy enough for an enemy to negate or disrupt the magnetic field holding the armor in place. A single good shot from a weapon that disrupts magnetic fields, not sure what exactly that would be but I'm sure they exist, would leave you defenseless.

Another problem is that they could simply melt that armor with some kind of thermal weapon into one solid mass that you can no longer move. A large solid mass that has no framework to hold it to the suit I might add.

I'm also not seeing how you would fit all that on a single battle armor sized frame, pilot or no pilot given we're robots. You've got all these advanced features and gadgets and are somehow expecting to fit them, a reactor big enough to power this plus your fancy armor as well as weapon systems into a something rather small.


So in all honesty, I can't really vote for this.
 
It's easy enough to find something that will react badly with mercury or just plain combine it with something else and turn it useless in reference to the thermal weapon being useless against it.

If you use a thermal based weapon on the other ones like nano sized ball bearings it will melt the metal and turn it into one big blob that when it cools back down is now a single solid blob that is rather unusable. I don't care what it's made of, you apply a high enough temperature to it it WILL melt.


Aside from the technical problems of doing this that I have pointed out, and I can most assuredly find others if I look hard enough. I don't find that this fits that well with the setting. I honestly don't know why I just don't feel that this fits with the overall theme we're going-
is the one where it is basically invincible.
Oh wait.

Nevermind I found it.


Yea no. Taking a bunch of the fun out of it with an "invincible" unit that you can't kill without quite literally going "overkill" on it.

Let me borrow something from another poster here in how much I'm opposing this right now.
Orm Embar said:
No. A hundred times no. If my 'no' were a Servant, it would be a Berserker, made of hate and rage and the word 'no'. He would have the personal skill of "Oh, HELL No!" at the Rank of 'No' and his Noble Phantasm would be a clock that spat out the word 'no' at high speeds in order to properly convey how much 'no' I feel about that.
 
Back
Top