Stark Transcendent (Iron Man/Marvel Quest)

Chunq said:
I just think we should have talked more about fighting Deadpool.
To be fair, until Tony actually knew about Deadpool's regeneration, he'd just fight him like one would a regular human anyway. It's not like we could vote to have Tony carry around some kind of acidic death-weapon JUST for Deadpool without being far too meta.

Worst came to worst, we were carrying around an unstable mini-bomb, anyway.
 
UberJJK said:
I suppose we could always make a crappy Arc Reactor that produces 1MW, or less since a the average power of a car is 40KW-200KW, indefinitely.
This is exactly what I am proposing.
Even if it just makes that power output for, like, 10-15 years, it'd be amazing.
Make it something like 5-600 KW just in case (more power for traction and brakes mayhaps).
Make it last a long time.
Bam, done.
It fits the thematics of our tech better (ARC REACTORS IN ALL THE THINGS), and it's less annoying for users.
Making them non-infinite, but still last years, means we can keep selling them but it's still seen as a better buy for customers than gasoline.
 
KnightDisciple said:
This is exactly what I am proposing.
Even if it just makes that power output for, like, 10-15 years, it'd be amazing.
Make it something like 5-600 KW just in case (more power for traction and brakes mayhaps).
Make it last a long time.
Bam, done.
It fits the thematics of our tech better (ARC REACTORS IN ALL THE THINGS), and it's less annoying for users.
Making them non-infinite, but still last years, means we can keep selling them but it's still seen as a better buy for customers than gasoline.
And you can keep the Starkium ones for yourself (The Iron Man 2 element that stops the thing from decaying over sustained over-use and is poisoning Tony.)
 
KnightDisciple said:
This is exactly what I am proposing.
Even if it just makes that power output for, like, 10-15 years, it'd be amazing.
Make it something like 5-600 KW just in case (more power for traction and brakes mayhaps).
Make it last a long time.
Bam, done.
It fits the thematics of our tech better (ARC REACTORS IN ALL THE THINGS), and it's less annoying for users.
Making them non-infinite, but still last years, means we can keep selling them but it's still seen as a better buy for customers than gasoline.
The issue with this is that spreads arc reactor tech every where, which makes it trivial for the technology to get into hands we don't want it to, forget Vanko.

Every single remotely tech orientated villain in the setting would be able to trivially reverse engineer the arc reactor if we do this. The reason the battery tech is good idea is because we can have the massive industrial sized ones which are much easier to protect and simply pump enormous amounts of energy into the electrical grid.

Reverse engineering is pretty easy when you can do destructive analysis on the hundreds of replica devices you can buy off the market.
 
KnightDisciple said:
Make it something like 5-600 KW just in case (more power for traction and brakes mayhaps).
I can't think of a braking technology that actually consumes power and would benefit from more power. Reverse thrust, I suppose, but you don't see that on cars very often*. Regenerative braking actually consumes negative power [i.e. puts energy back in the batteries], and regular braking, once you've applied enough pressure (and cars are almost always capable of applying too much pressure, that's what ABS is for), basically just wastes the kinetic energy of the car in motion rather than using any engine/electrical power.

Not sure what you mean by traction.

*Though, repulsor hovercars are an idea we should file away for later.
 
FriedIce said:
That's going to happen anyway SSS
No, you aren't thinking this through.

Every engineer in the world with training remotely relevant would be able to perform destructive analysis and learn how to build their own arc reactors. The guy in the first film couldn't recreate it because he couldn't risk damaging the only example arc reactor they had to work with.

If you have hundreds of the things you can trivially work out how it works by damaging your different examples in different ways to see how it breaks or what happens.

Vanko building one is one thing he already knew how to do it based on his fathers documented notes, but we are talking about building tens-hundreds of millions of them and just giving them to every one if you can't see how that could cause problems well I'm not sure where to begin really.
 
Roarian said:
You got 1 tech this time + 3 free ones from other places. You guys made some tech-oriented choices, that's why.

It's not some persistent thing. The only thing that makes some tech cheaper is either getting more science buddies or moving on up in terms of tools or location, and most of that hasn't really been relevant yet. Maybe if you guys hire Peter or start on that NY connection canon went for, or the crazy moonbase people were going on about (points for style.)
I thought that the main computer upgrade improved our research. Does it give some other related bonus instead? Or does it count as moving up in tools despite the statement of such things not being relevant yet?
 
inverted_helix said:
I thought that the main computer upgrade improved our research. Does it give some other related bonus instead? Or does it count as moving up in tools despite the statement of such things not being relevant yet?
I figure it's the start of achieving that. I doubt we could get increased tech output research from the very first set of options on our different tech trees :p
 
SSS, we'll have the same problem though to a lesser extent if we sell the arc reactors out as powerplants. You can bet some bozo will destructive test them.
 
FriedIce said:
SSS, we'll have the same problem though to a lesser extent if we sell the arc reactors out as powerplants. You can bet some bozo will destructive test them.
No, No they can't.

Firstly, we simply have the facilities all owned by Stark holding inc, Security feeds can all be tied to Jarvis. Parts for it can be manufactured in our proprietary facilities again hook Jarvis into security feeds and the reactors assembled on site.

The Arc reactors that would make an actual power station are going to be huge, Hell we could just have centralized conglomeration of the plants in one site considering how absurdly cheap the power is and just build a crap load of electrical links to the rest of the country. Sure the infrastructure would be expensive but no one is going to complain about the cost of those links when their energy prices plummet.

We shouldn't need hundreds of them to pull this off either, destructive testing is only really workable if you have a lot of examples to burn through to get results. So if they kill an arc reactor powerplant attempting to learn how it works it won't help that much.
 
FriedIce said:
SSS, we'll have the same problem though to a lesser extent if we sell the arc reactors out as powerplants. You can bet some bozo will destructive test them.
Not really. You don't see people testing power plants to destruction.

There is a very big difference between something that there might only be a couple hundred of built and something where a couple billion are built.
 
Roarian said:
And you can keep the Starkium ones for yourself (The Iron Man 2 element that stops the thing from decaying over sustained over-use and is poisoning Tony.)
Right.
Hm, while we're at it we should find something other than palladium for these low-density reactors.
Random832 said:
I can't think of a braking technology that actually consumes power and would benefit from more power. Reverse thrust, I suppose, but you don't see that on cars very often*. Regenerative braking actually consumes negative power [i.e. puts energy back in the batteries], and regular braking, once you've applied enough pressure (and cars are almost always capable of applying too much pressure, that's what ABS is for), basically just wastes the kinetic energy of the car in motion rather than using any engine/electrical power.

Not sure what you mean by traction.

*Though, repulsor hovercars are an idea we should file away for later.
I am, admittedly, not an automotive engineer.

On the "traction" I was thinking something like 4-wheel drive, which generally requires more power from the engine but provides greater stability and control. Some vehicles can toggle it on and off to save gas for normal road conditions.

As for braking, since we're talking about non-gasoline vehicles, I figured we'd be looking to help design cars that use 4 smaller individual electric motors to each wheel, and thus, yeah, reverse "thrust" could legitimately be used for braking.
SuperSonicSound said:
No, you aren't thinking this through.

Every engineer in the world with training remotely relevant would be able to perform destructive analysis and learn how to build their own arc reactors. The guy in the first film couldn't recreate it because he couldn't risk damaging the only example arc reactor they had to work with.

If you have hundreds of the things you can trivially work out how it works by damaging your different examples in different ways to see how it breaks or what happens.

Vanko building one is one thing he already knew how to do it based on his fathers documented notes, but we are talking about building tens-hundreds of millions of them and just giving them to every one if you can't see how that could cause problems well I'm not sure where to begin really.
"Spreading the tech" is ALREADY going to happen because we're building Industrial reactors.

My proposal is ones to drive a car.

If we purposefully alter the design so that it a.) doesn't require palladium (since the energy density is lower) and b.) are different enough from our Real Arc Reactors you can't just plug in palladium and power an armor suit, the risk becomes exactly the same as what there is with the Industrial models.

If people are truly concerned about the "Arc Reactor Genie Getting Out Of The Bottle", you should be convincing us that we shouldn't even develop the Industrial Reactors and instead pursue, I dunno, regular Fusion or something.

But if you aren't concerned about the Industrial Reactors then the concept I'm proposing carries no greater risk than those.

If you're still concerned about people stealing our tech build in anti-tamper measures that fry everything (important or not) if they're improperly disassembled or scanned too heavily.
 
KnightDisciple said:
"Spreading the tech" is ALREADY going to happen because we're building Industrial reactors.
No, that doesn't spread the tech at all. The reactors will all be housed in Stark tech owned facilities and it's pretty much impossible to run destructive analysis on a powerplant.

For one thing it's pretty obvious when an entire state loses tens of megawatts of power and for another you won't learn much from breaking a single arc reactor.

The whole point of going with the industrial scale reactors is that you can centralise them and keep the technology under control. The small reactors spread it the industrial ones don't.
 
KnightDisciple said:
On the "traction" I was thinking something like 4-wheel drive, which generally requires more power from the engine but provides greater stability and control. Some vehicles can toggle it on and off to save gas for normal road conditions.
If we're designing our own electric car we probably want to do something like wheel motors [yeah, I see you mentioned it below] rather than a conventional engine/differential model. If we're partnering with Tesla we can just build it to their specs.
As for braking, since we're talking about non-gasoline vehicles, I figured we'd be looking to help design cars that use 4 smaller individual electric motors to each wheel, and thus, yeah, reverse "thrust" could legitimately be used for braking.
Reverse thrust is not the same as regenerative braking. Reverse thrust means you are throwing actual jet exhaust in front of you. Regenerative braking does not consume power, and "reverse spin" on wheels would be equivalent, in braking power, to having the wheels locked up (which is generally bad, and why we have ABS).
 
Delve into carbon magic. That would solve the battery issue, open a wider market where he can supply every device that needs power, but is too small for a arc reactor and is not plugged in a electric socket. Like smartphones.

Also, energy densities wouldn't be small compared to a reactor and a terrorist would be better of making home made explosives or buy C4.

His gadgets would not be abused because it would not be practical to try.
 
Roarian said:
You got 1 tech this time + 3 free ones from other places. You guys made some tech-oriented choices, that's why.

It's not some persistent thing. The only thing that makes some tech cheaper is either getting more science buddies or moving on up in terms of tools or location, and most of that hasn't really been relevant yet. Maybe if you guys hire Peter or start on that NY connection canon went for, or the crazy moonbase people were going on about (points for style.)
Would a Moon Base give a different tech advantage to say... getting the NY connection with?
I.e. Moon Base= 2 "extra" tech slots
NY Connection= 3 "extra" tech slots


Also... what are the limits to what we can invent?
I mean, would we be able to create energy weapons for the military/Shield? I mean, Stark in comics made Particle Torpedoes...
What about Orbital Defence Platforms?
Orbital Shipyards and actual defence fleets to protect against alien invasion?
Groundside Orbital Defence Cannons?
 
Interlude - Obadiah
(Speculation ahoy!)

Interlude - Obadiah

You weren't sure when things had gone sour; when a relative peace had turned into this cold and distant void, this terrible nothingness. You'd never really liked the boy, of course - he was vain, self-important, and egocentric like his father, but with added unpredictability and a startling lack of foresight. But at the same time, you'd assumed that the guarded agreement between you would last, even if there was no love lost.

You moved the knight forward on the board, then sideways a step - in reality, it seemed more like that step had been backwards - if not for one thing. Far from continuing the game you'd been playing, it seemed as if the boy had forgotten it altogether, and started a new one. His head was in the clouds, caught up in plans and dreams that you'd long thought he'd abandoned. Perhaps - perhaps there was a chance.

"I have reconsidered our arrangement," you said slowly, frowning at the board as your competitor's slim fingers picked up a pawn to move it. "I do not want you to continue. I don't know that the solution you offered me is - required anymore."

She didn't answer, her face a mask as she stared at you.

"Are you even listening to me?" You demanded. "I need time. Time to make sure of some things, of what I want." You gestured at the board, scowling. "The game has changed. I can't predict the moves anymore, and that means trouble. But at the same time, there's no guarantee that when he chooses his steps, they'll be bad ones. I have already seen signs that he might have had - an epiphany. I have to wait it out."

The lady sighed, shaking her head slowly. "Ah, Mr. Stane… You seem to be under a misapprehension about what I do, and more importantly, why."

"I know enough," you answered bluntly. "Three months ago, you told me that it would all be over soon. You told me it would be quick and clean! Instead you posture, and you dawdle, and make everything harder than it needs to be. I have problems to deal with, people to handle, and this is still hanging over my head." You scowled. "I am beginning to doubt how serious you are about delivering."

"Really?" She chuckled, leaning back in her chair languidly. "If you do not know whether you want someone dead or not, why did you come to me in the first place? Why hesitate now, after you have gone so far already? Guilt?"

You scowled, refusing to think about the things that haunted your nightmares, the terrible sights that played behind your eyes, every time you thought you were safe. "You don't need to know the reason. It's not something I will discuss with assassins," you said sharply. "I've told you that before, and I will say it again - you are just hired to do a job."

"Hired?" She shook her head. "Ah, silly man. You did not hire me. The money is merely to weed out the undeserving, the destitute; the true price of my work is much, much steeper." She cocked her head to the side curiously. "You may have reconsidered your decision, of course - but some things cannot be retracted, some things must come to pass. I am not the one you made a deal with, Stane. That would be my boss, who thoroughly savors every kill."

You closed your eyes for a moment, taking a deep breath. "Is that so? Consider our contract void, then. You will not get the rest of your money unless you deliver me the target's head before he returns from his little exile, and complicates everything further," you stated. "Is that clear?"

She merely laughed as she stood. "Descending to mere threats now, Obadiah? I think not. You came to me, little man… and you will reap the price. The price of pain." She turned slowly, sighing. "Rethink your decisions, next time, or the price will be steeper still. Good night."

It was a silent minute later, as you sat alone in the dark, that you slammed your hand down onto the board, flinging chess pieces everywhere. Only a white knight remained upright.
 
Kaioo said:
Would a Moon Base give a different tech advantage to say... getting the NY connection with?
I.e. Moon Base= 2 "extra" tech slots
NY Connection= 3 "extra" tech slots
More than likely the other way around, given the inherent difference between building a scyscraper or a moon base.
Also... what are the limits to what we can invent?
Limits? Since when does Stark do those?
I mean, would we be able to create energy weapons for the military/Shield? I mean, Stark in comics made Particle Torpedoes...
What about Orbital Defence Platforms?
Orbital Shipyards and actual defence fleets to protect against alien invasion?
Groundside Orbital Defence Cannons?
If you really, really want to do that stuff - I won't stop you. Convince people, and focus on it with write-ins. :p
 
Back
Top