Shepard Quest Mk VI, Technological Revolution

any one got a different link to the tech tree, the one on the front page is borg
 
Crazy idea.



A arc reactor powered suit for Shepard, she wears it and appears professional, but in times of crisis under the clothing deploys a compacted armor suit mostly focus on agility rather then the power of other suits, lightly armored pretty much a hard suit but comes with some fancy toys like repulser powered flight and weapons as well as bullet proof.

Of course it also has its own networking computer so we can summon and buy time for a real suit to come to our aid.
 
A arc reactor powered suit for Shepard, she wears it and appears professional, but in times of crisis under the clothing deploys a compacted armor suit mostly focus on agility rather then the power of other suits, lightly armored pretty much a hard suit but comes with some fancy toys like repulser powered flight and weapons as well as bullet proof.
soooo

the suitcase suit from IM2

super light armor
 
that thing is end game shit that can shift and morph into anything

not something use for protection in emergency cases like the suitcase suit

edit: looking at the tech tree

the material and suit tree need more work, it just so simple of going 1 2 3 and done

what even is Unobtainium any way, it is the super material like Adamantium, Vibranium and the Anti-metal ( arctic Vib)

i can see us getting the Hulkbuster ( Ultra heavy suit) from researching the big mech option but where stuff like the MK 42 and it separation gimmick ( it is in the transformation tech) or where the nanotech is
 
Last edited:
i don't see energy shield

but then again, did Tony ever have an energy shield in his stuff, all i remember is physical shield
 
i don't see energy shield

but then again, did Tony ever have an energy shield in his stuff, all i remember is physical shield

Stark's S.K.I.N. armor combined an energy blade and shield; this shield could be expanded to cover the entire armor. After Steve Rogers replaced Norman Osborn, he began using a new energy shield, as the real shield was being used by Captain America. This shield uses Zero-point Energy.
 
nah, zac is thinking more of tony's nanite suit, or the suitcase suit except spread out over your back inside the jacket/dress shirt and pants
Nah its more integrated tech suit, meant to be stylish while also not being armed like a tank but can dish out damage in case of attack. All of course looking like you mean business.
 
I stopped at Antimatter warheads.

Feasibility of this as a weapon depends on
A) how good the ME Races have gotten at storing Antimatter, as in ME verse fighters are needed to get close enough to actually deliver warheads reliably, this puts a cap on how large we can actually let the torpedo be.
B) how the barriers actually work, the inherently destabilising nature of Disruptor Torpedos would probably make them extremely unreliable and undermine the storage.
C) How effective are Disruptor Torpedos in the first place? Is this increase in firepower even needed.

Then theres price to consider as well but thats mostly A.
 
A) how good the ME Races have gotten at storing Antimatter, as in ME verse fighters are needed to get close enough to actually deliver warheads reliably, this puts a cap on how large we can actually let the torpedo be.
Commercial ships use fusion torches but warships use antiprotons to supercharge their thrusters for combat:
The primary commercial engine is a "fusion torch", which vents the plasma of a ship's power plant. Fusion torches offer powerful acceleration at the cost of difficult heat management. Torch fuel is fairly cheap: helium-3 skimmed from gas giants and deuterium extracted from seawater or cometary bodies. Propellant is hydrogen, likewise skimmed from gas giants.

In combat, military vessels require accelerations beyond the capability of fusion torches. Warship thrusters inject antiprotons into a reaction chamber filled with hydrogen. The matter-antimatter annihilation provides unmatched motive power. The drawback is fuel production; antiprotons must be manufactured one particle at a time. Most antimatter production is done at massive solar arrays orbiting energetic stars, making them high-value targets in wartime.
As per the codex the limiting factor is the production capacity of antiprotons. That is actually on our tech tree:
[ ] Anti-matter Production [1600]: Anti-matter is a controlled substance on the galactic scale. It is also one of the primary warship "fuels", making it quite valuable. On the other hand It makes for some nasty bombs. Anti-matter takes a fair amount of power to make and arc-reactor technology provides that power. (Allows the creation of anti-matter production plants)
and given previous trends in addition to allowing us to establish our own anti-matter production facilities this tech would likely greatly increase the yield/production rate.
 
Yah know mass effect setting use anti mater as fuel right?
Specifically they are used as short distance accelerators in military vessels.

Article:
In combat, military vessels require accelerations beyond the capability of fusion torches. Warship thrusters inject antiprotons into a reaction chamber filled with hydrogen. The matter-antimatter annihilation provides unmatched motive power. The drawback is fuel production; antiprotons must be manufactured one particle at a time. Most antimatter production is done at massive solar arrays orbiting energetic stars, making them high-value targets in wartime.

So Fusion is used in ships for typical travel and power.
E: Ninjad
 
Specifically they are used as short distance accelerators in military vessels.

Article:
In combat, military vessels require accelerations beyond the capability of fusion torches. Warship thrusters inject antiprotons into a reaction chamber filled with hydrogen. The matter-antimatter annihilation provides unmatched motive power. The drawback is fuel production; antiprotons must be manufactured one particle at a time. Most antimatter production is done at massive solar arrays orbiting energetic stars, making them high-value targets in wartime.

So Fusion is used in ships for typical travel and power.
E: Ninjad
Its still contained antimatter. So there is a chance to make photon torpedoes. Although I kinda like proton better, antimatter torpedoes could be used to destroy a planet if the ship captains are inclined to do so.
 
Its still contained antimatter. So there is a chance to make photon torpedoes. Although I kinda like proton better, antimatter torpedoes could be used to destroy a planet if the ship captains are inclined to do so.
We didn't say there is no chance, we have contained Antimatter IRL. We're saying that if containment still requires near building size arrays of electromagnetics and liquid Hydrogen cooling systems then its too large for us to put on a fighter/bomber. Things that are feasible to mount on a hundreds meter long space ship are different than things that are feasible to fit on a ship an order of magnitude or two smaller.

Not sure what the distinction between proton torpedos are? Do I need to see some specific timestamp in the video for that?

Why would we want to destroy a planet? Putting aside the inter galactic agreements not to use lesser weapons that might damage ecosystems.
Apart from that, I'm not even sure that we could literally destroy a planet. Antimatter weapons don't really change the gravity binding problem, unless you're planning on using an antimatter charge so large that it eliminates a significant fraction of the planets mass. In which case we need to create an antimatter charge that fraction of the planets size.

 
Last edited:
Guess we don't really need antimatter propulsion anymore. Repulsors seem objectively better.

ME races also seem to have sufficient containment tech since they use it in warships. If we really want to use it as weaponry, we would need to miniaturise it and make it more rugged.

Don't see the benefits of going down this path though considering what we already have...
 
We didn't say there is no chance, we have contained Antimatter IRL. We're saying that if containment still requires near building size arrays of electromagnetics and liquid Hydrogen cooling systems then its too large for us to put on a fighter/bomber.

Not sure what the distinction between proton torpedos are? Do I need to see some specific timestamp in the video for that?

Why would we want to destroy a planet? Putting aside the inter galactic agreements not to use lesser weapons that might damage ecosystems.
Apart from that, I'm not even sure that we could literally destroy a planet. Antimatter weapons don't really change the gravity binding problem, unless you're planning on using an antimatter charge so large that it eliminates a significant fraction of the planets mass. In which case we need to create an antimatter charge that fraction of the planets size.


Ah no the destroying planet isnt literal, although it would cause a lot of damage if you use enough in a wide spread pattern.

Proton is a positive charge particle, he doesnt really say what the torpedo does besides saying that upon release like a nuclear explosion that the protons would smack into other atoms and create more protons in a sort of chain reaction and can penetrate matter with destructive havoc. This process he said can be more directed and controlled then a antimatter warheads if you can make such a weapon its very effective in directed destruction. This is at the start of the video. He then goes into tactics they are used for.

 
Proton is a positive charge particle, he doesnt really say what the torpedo does besides saying that upon release like a nuclear explosion that the protons would smack into other atoms and create more protons in a sort of chain reaction and can penetrate matter with destructive havoc.
So the plan is to turn whatever it hits into a Fission bomb?
Functionally similar to the MD weapon from Enders Game?
Seems more dangerous than an Antimatter weapon with a fixed blast strength in any situation except where they're both equally overkill.
 
Last edited:
So the plan is to turn whatever it hits into a Fission bomb?
Functionally similar to the MD weapon from Enders Game?
Seems more dangerous than an Antimatter weapon with a fixed blast strength in any situation except where they're both equally overkill.
Sorta, the proton reaction I feel would lose steam after a bit. Although on a ship this wont happen because ME ships are rather small compared to most settings like star wars. So yeah its a anti ship killer weapon. It can be shot down (although with repulsor thrusters they are fast) and the proton shower can be directed thus more controlled radius of where the explosion would go.
 
P sure that ME already has the tech to make antimatter torpedoes, it's just not at all cost effective since ME point defence is so good, and disruptor torpedoes don't need a very bid warhead once they are through a ship's barriers.
 
Sorta, the proton reaction I feel would lose steam after a bit. Although on a ship this wont happen because ME ships are rather small compared to most settings like star wars. So yeah its a anti ship killer weapon. It can be shot down (although with repulsor thrusters they are fast) and the proton shower can be directed thus more controlled radius of where the explosion would go.
The definition of a chain reaction is that it only gets faster.
Although I suppose given ME fields abilities to alter the properties of reality in a localised area it might be possible to setup a chain reaction that stops functioning outside a ME Field of whatever parameters? Thats a Yog question I think.
 
Back
Top