ever any talk about MECH's? [Archive]

tmartinez72

2003-05-07, 07:08 PM

Here's how I think the scenario will play out.

Take a mech to an enemy base. You're the biggest baddest dude there killing everything. No one leaves the base. You ground forces try to breech the base.

Enter enemy mech *dun dun duuun!*. They duke it out. People IN the base see how much fun they are having, enter more mechs. Now add more...a little more.. Oh..need another enemy mech to take out the assulting ground forces *squish squish*

wait wait wait! Are we still playing PS?

d0rian

2003-05-07, 09:26 PM

excusme camping carl.

i dont think anyone was wrong.

i just stated my opinion: AP rounds that bounce of flesh is UNREALISTIC if we are going to bring whats realist and whats not.

matuse you where the one you said that the bullits where futuristic and where made of liquid. like they are using damn squirt guns in the future.

i've been in the military and i will tell you that i think soldier would rather be riding in hyperrealistic mechs than squirting paint guns of armor chewing goo. :doh:

but hey the mech thing was JUST a question. it is a FUTURE WAR.
but hey they dont have NUKES. go figure i guess they all signed a non proliferation treaty before engaging in genocide space war.

hamma, you are 'in' with the developers right?
what does PS have in store other than a fancy halo rip off?
isnt there any thing you can hint on that takes advantage of the benefits of this game over halo other than the "large world" trait?

something?

it is like any arugment for new features is blasted as "unbalanced" or "unrealistic"

and any argument to change a feature is considerd "unbalanced or "unrealistic"

and any argument to add a feature is considered

can you guess?

"unbalanced" or "unrealistc"

and can someone explain the meaning of this emote?
:hitit:

Matuse

2003-05-07, 11:10 PM

matuse you where the one you said that the bullits where futuristic and where made of liquid. like they are using damn squirt guns in the future.

That is in fact NOT what I said. Please don't misquote me.

i've been in the military and i will tell you that i think soldier would rather be riding in hyperrealistic mechs than squirting paint guns of armor chewing goo.

I'm thinking that a soldier would rather use the most effective weapon and stay alive rather than be "cool" while occupying a grave.

Doppler

2003-05-07, 11:37 PM

Here's an idea how bout we not rehash another thread, I'm all for healthy debate but I hate redundancy. The current rubric uses a tried and true formulas, infantry, mechanized and airpower. Throwing out whatever realism concerns you have I suspect the dev's whould be loath to add another branch on the unit tree as they will have to balance a whole new set of units not only against each other but against everything else.

Having said that personaly, haveing been in the military I'm sure you understand the two watchwords of armored tech, redundancy and dependability. Legs whould be inferior to other locomotion systems because they are a single point of failure. Blow of a leg Mech topples one way or another, no way to move most likely facing up at the sky, tank driver laughs and rolls over you.

SpongeBob

2003-05-08, 12:36 AM

Originally posted by staz
What about motorcycles..YEH! Motorcycles with training wheels and rocket launchers!
Yeah baby yeah! hogs of war! that would be awsome!
but then it would have to be judge dredd type motocycles, to make it cooler

Warborn

2003-05-08, 12:40 AM

Mechs wouldn't be automatically overpowered, just like how tanks are currently not overpowered. A tank can slaughter a dozen infantry or MAXs, but the battlefield isn't full of tanks, right?

As for Mechs, I think the concept behind Mechs is cool, but what's the point of them beyond that? Would they just be like tanks, but more or less powerful? I don't see the niche that a Mech would fill. If they're just a tank that walks and has more firepower, then nobody will ever use tanks. If they're a tank that walks and has less firepower, not many people will use Mechs (some would simply because Mechs are neato).

You can't just add stuff to the game that has a redundant function. There has to be more to it -- something that it can do in battle that makes it better in some situations than other vehicles. Figure that part out and you'll have the basis for a pro-Mech argument.

BUGGER

2003-05-08, 01:08 AM

Originally posted by tmartinez72
Take a mech to an enemy base. You're the biggest baddest dude there killing everything. No one leaves the base. You ground forces try to breech the base. There it is said, Mechs are overpowered. Do you send a tank into the courtyard and expect the tank to live, no cause theres 50 guys shooting at it. if you send a mech in do you expect it to live, yes caues its got barrels oll over the damn thing and massis of armor all over itself, no 50 guys can take it out. Now amagin 20 mechs. If you wanted you can take every soldier with a mech cert and just rade a whole continent and take it withing 30 minutes.

Try doing that with an qual amount of tanks.

Mechs=god

�io

2003-05-08, 01:58 AM

Originally posted by Hamma
Mechs were talked about in the very early days of PS development.

It was scrapped

Thank the gaming gods!

Moclov1

2003-05-08, 03:09 AM

Ya mech's would not only be the thing everyone wants to have because they look supersweet but they would ruin the mechanics of the game. The idea is good but it just wouldn't fit good. I like lessershades idea.I'd really like to see a 2 man air vehicle get added to the game first though.. like a bomber or some sort of nasty gunship a bomber or a small gun ship with medium armor would be nice addition.

JonnyK

2003-05-08, 12:08 PM

Originally posted by staz
What about motorcycles..YEH! Motorcycles with training wheels and rocket launchers!

I do think they should have motorcycles, i mean, you saw how much fun they brought to the Grand theft auto universe, they would pwn in Planetside. it'd just be like a basilisk that goes 10 kph faster and only has one MG, or they could have the wraith bike too, just have it cost 3 certs instead of only 2 for the bike, it could slip into places easier, it's faster, and would show up less from driving cuz it's a bike. I think once they decide to put the time into getting the correct motorcycle physics into planetside then they'll pump out some cool bikes

Robot

2003-05-08, 12:35 PM

Originally posted by JonnyK
I think once they decide to put the time into getting the correct motorcycle physics into planetside then they'll pump out some cool bikes

I doubt it. Remember: The goal of this is to make a, "realistic" war game. Motorcycles aren't really very effective at traversing dangerous terrain like a four-wheel quad cycle is.

Happy lil Elf

2003-05-08, 12:39 PM

Make mechs cost 8 certs. Bam not everyone is taking them, solves that. And sure 10 mechs walk up to a base problem is 10 mechs can do nothing to the inside of a base. What do you think happens right now if 6 or 7 tanks roll up to a base? Everyone outside gets owned and then they respawn with AV weapons and go up top on the walls to take out the tanks.

Unrealistic? Yeah....hover tanks, warpgates, alien world perfectly suited to human beings, unlimited respawn...gee all sounds perfectly real to me. It's a game. Not only that it's a game based in the future. Realism is by far the dumbest argument against anything.

Best argument against mechs is that the maps just aren't designed for them. The maps would have to be bigger and more open, trees would have to be destroyable, roads wider and more level etc.

Wish they would come out with a Mechwarrior MMOFPS though, I'd drop PS like a crack whore on a corner for that :p

Robot

2003-05-08, 12:43 PM

Originally posted by Happy lil' Elf
Make mechs cost 8 certs. Bam not everyone is taking them, solves that.

It's still availible to people who want it. And ask anyone if they think their abilities and both gunning and driving are superior than if they got some random person to gun. Everyone would grab at it, rather than a two person tank.

Originally posted by Happy lil' Elf
Unrealistic? Yeah....hover tanks, warpgates, alien world perfectly suited to human beings, unlimited respawn...gee all sounds perfectly real to me. It's a game. Not only that it's a game based in the future. Realism is by far the dumbest argument against anything.

Then we might as well shoot lightning bolts out of our hands and grow to 9 feet in size. Yes, games shouldn't be, "realistic" but they should have a sense of, "realism."

Harps

2003-05-08, 01:18 PM

once again i dissagree with you d0rian mechs arnt made for this game and i would seriously think it would mess it up. About the bombers i used to think that it would be cool ... but that too i wont think it will go well considering u can have like 30 bombers go over bases and such .. Its not like bf1942 where there is limited amount of vehicles

Happy lil Elf

2003-05-08, 01:44 PM

You think tons of people are going to pay 8 certs for anything? Especially something that can't be used at all for one of the most important things in the game (base capping)? You're nuts. Of course it's still available, the point is by making it double any other cert in the game (hell make it 10 I don't care) you'd limit the number of them on the field.

A sense of realism...

So you have no trouble swallowing the other holes in the logic and physics of the game and plot, but a Mech is just waaay too out there? I don't have any problem over-looking the holes in the game, because it's fun, but then I'm also not going to cry unrealistic just because I don't want something in the game.

If you'll note, I also said I'm against them in game, which means I'm on your side, dumbass. I could have been clearer but I never really argued for them either, just poked holes in bad arguments. I just feel if you're going to argue against something you should probably use halfway decent arguments.

I wonder how they would affect FPS considering polycount and size of the polygons.

simba

2003-05-08, 02:08 PM

Originally posted by d0rian
un realisic....
thats funny i got flammed at a previous thread when i said that
AP rounds that bounch of flesh was unrealistc and that the game was not a simulation.

this is a SCI FI game since when does it have to be realistic.

like falling from outer space in a cube is realistc or turning invisible is realistic.

back of the line bubba.
here...i will give you my
"smiley says to suck his wanker" emote:
:groovy:
un realistic isnt the case here, the case is that they will prolly b overpowered BIG.
This is a MMOFPS game and nothing else, its very realistic.
And btw, how long have u been following this game?
I would guess not to long since this isnt a halo rip off, its more of a tribe ripoff.

happy elf, I certainly think ppl is going to pay 8 cert points 4 using mechs, if its twice that good, and I dont think ppl who doesent have mechs would start feeling the game became booring everytime they met one couse they would get so owned.

Robot

2003-05-08, 02:16 PM

Originally posted by Happy lil' Elf
You think tons of people are going to pay 8 certs for anything? Especially something that can't be used at all for one of the most important things in the game (base capping)? You're nuts. Of course it's still available, the point is by making it double any other cert in the game (hell make it 10 I don't care) you'd limit the number of them on the field.

It doesn't matter if it's a high certification, the fact is, it would be overpowering simply because it would be a one person tank that has more mobility and control than a two-person tank. That's unbalancing.

Originally posted by Happy lil' Elf
So you have no trouble swallowing the other holes in the logic and physics of the game and plot, but a Mech is just waaay too out there? I don't have any problem over-looking the holes in the game, because it's fun, but then I'm also not going to cry unrealistic just because I don't want something in the game.

You were saying that being, "realistic" was dumb, to which I replied that being realistic is dumb, but there should be a sense of realism. I wasn't debating that mechs are possible.

Originally posted by Happy lil' Elf
If you'll note, I also said I'm against them in game, which means I'm on your side, dumbass. I could have been clearer but I never really argued for them either, just poked holes in bad arguments. I just feel if you're going to argue against something you should probably use halfway decent arguments.

And I'm refuting these arguments with other arguments, because I'm against mechs, which means I should re-inforce all arguments against them. There really isn't any debate here, is there?

Happy lil Elf

2003-05-08, 02:52 PM

Mechs are anything but manuverable compared to tanks, unless you're talking a 20 ton mech in which case yeah they're fast, can't turn at all while cruising...and have a machine gun. You also fail to consider that they don't necesarily have to be single manned. In fact d0rian (as much as I hate to point out anything said by the flaiming retard) talks in his second post about making them two manned. Pilot and gunner. We aren't talking about porting a Daishi directly into the game. We talking about big walking robots with guns which can mean tons of different things.

Realsim, or rather a sense thereof:
You're still not getting it. Did you ever play any of the mechwarrior games? They all did a great job of creating a sense of realism. A sense of realism is not the issue. With or without mechs Planetside would be just as believable, or unbelievable depending on how you look at it I suppose.

which means I should re-inforce all arguments against them

You're saying you're simply reinforcing all arguments against Mechs beacuse you don't believe they should be in? That's illogical. If you're arguing against 2+2=5 and someone else makes the argument 2+2 does not equal 5 because if it did the planets would align and summon a world eating demon. Extreme example I know but you can't just reinforce faulty arguments just because they happen to be from people who also believe your main point.

Robot

2003-05-08, 02:58 PM

Originally posted by Happy lil' Elf
Mechs are anything but manuverable compared to tanks, unless you're talking a 20 ton mech in which case yeah they're fast, can't turn at all while cruising...and have a machine gun. You also fail to consider that they don't necesarily have to be single manned. In fact d0rian (as much as I hate to point out anything said by the flaiming retard) talks in his second post about making them two manned. Pilot and gunner. We aren't talking about porting a Daishi directly into the game. We talking about big walking robots with guns which can mean tons of different things.

Yeah, while mechs can be balanced, I guess it's up to the devs overall if something will go in or not, so debating the merit of it is pointless

Originally posted by Happy lil' Elf
Realsim, or rather a sense thereof:
You're still not getting it. Did you ever play any of the mechwarrior games? They all did a great job of creating a sense of realism. A sense of realism is not the issue. With or without mechs Planetside would be just as believable, or unbelievable depending on how you look at it I suppose.

Still, it doesn't seem to fit the world somehow. It's like how riding elephants wouldn't fit into the Mechwarrior universe.

Originally posted by Happy lil' Elf
If you're arguing against 2+2=5 and someone else makes the argument 2+2 does not equal 5 because if it did the planets would align and summon a world eating demon. Extreme example I know but you can't just reinforce faulty arguments just because they happen to be from people who also believe your main point.

None of these arguments are faulty. They have points that need to be smoothed out, yes, but they all work, just as the arguments for mechs do work.

FearTheAtlas

2003-05-08, 03:41 PM

I'll ask this simple question as my answer: Who cares?

tmartinez72

2003-05-08, 03:57 PM

Screw mechs. We need portable hangliders! For infils. They can jump off cliffs and swoop into enemy bases ninja style!

Tankboy!

2003-05-08, 08:17 PM

Just some minor info for ya, AP rounds would do less damage to a 'soft' target. reason being, they are designed to exert the larger portion of their kinetic energy into the armor itself. best way to do this is to have a super dense, hardened jacket on the round. The way this works in PS can be surmised like so: The light armors infantry wear are simply too thin and flexible to force the AP round to bury its remaining KE in the flesh of the target, the AP round simple passes right through the armor and the flesh. If you've got the resources, this is a fun way to learn about kinetic energy weapons- Fill a clear plastic jug with jello or something similar ( raw knox gelatin works great for this) and then take your trusty .45 caliber handgun and put a slug into the jug from 5 feet away. Now wipe the gelatin off your clothing and get out your second jug. Now take your trusty m16 variant and put a .223 jacketed round through the jug. Makes a neat line in and out of the jug. Now take your third jug, put a 1/4 inch steel plate in front of it and fire the .45 again, duck the ricochet and pick up your rifle. Shoot the plate and then take a look at the jug. messy.
Ballistic physics are just neat. ( sorry for the length, just not something you can explain clearly in a short space)

Oh, and mechs would be paste on the average PS battlefield, slap on enough armor to make small arms ineffective and you would be fast enough to avoid AV weapons, and vice versa. The support gunship idea has merit, make it a 3 person job with a pilot, gunner and weapons officer, and make it a bit of a pig to fly, between reaver and galaxy handling.

keam02

2003-05-08, 08:30 PM

about the invisible, the japanese are developing a way to make things, not people, invisible. Yes, I'm not lying, the most useful way would be like the bottom of an aircraft to see what is below you. Thats not to say that human invisibility is never going to happen. I like the believe in stuff like this anyways cause thats jsut me.

HS Warwolf

2003-05-09, 12:07 AM

:mad: About the subject of mechs. I'm a mech fanatic and I own just about every game that has come out for the series. I have a few points for u guys.
1.Mechs are not all powerful. I've seen 40 ton mechs cut to peices by a pack of 4-8 tanks, a pack of 5 bombers, or even a pack of 3 elementals. (think of Max's with missiles, machine guns, and Flamers)
2. Unless your thinking of putting all the classes of mechs 15-100 tons, then yes it would be unbalancing. If you just stick to the 15-45 ton classes, then it would be just the same as a pack of tanks attacking a a squad of infantry.
3. The people who pilot these monstrosities are the ELITE of the ELITE. your looking at probably 15 or more certification points to pilot one in terms of planetside. It's not like a rookie pilot could strap into a 50 ton mecha nd go blow crap up. He would have to be a pretty battle hardened and then he has to go through the wight classes. first light, and so on.
4. One mech couldn't single handedly take on an entire base by itself. You still need infantry, air support and maybe a tank platoon.
5. There are fundemental strategies to defeating a mech if ur an infanrtymen or a MAX dude. just run up to his legs and run around shooting at him while trying not to be stepped on.
6. and last, mechs do not carry around GOD weapons like a nuclear war head or a huge super laser. They just carry around the same basic weapons that the infantry and the tank divisions carry around only they carry them in bundles.
I'm probably forgetting something but oh well.

Nekota

2003-05-09, 12:19 AM

All I can say is good luck navigating your unwieldy Mech through the unmovable folliage that'll make your experience much like Gullivar's and the Lilpusions :D .

SpongeBob

2003-05-09, 12:53 AM

Originally posted by keam02
about the invisible, the japanese are developing a way to make things, not people, invisible. Yes, I'm not lying, the most useful way would be like the bottom of an aircraft to see what is below you. Thats not to say that human invisibility is never going to happen. I like the believe in stuff like this anyways cause thats jsut me.
Two words: Predator movies ;)

HS Warwolf

2003-05-09, 09:10 PM

I heard about that. Something with nano tech using the robots to make different colors to blend in wit the suroundings.
And back to what I said yesterday. If they add mechs there goin to have to add a few new features such as destructible trees, and stepping on poeple. They'd also have to add a feature letting the mechs destroy tanks and MAX's when you step on em like the infantry. What's the point in piloting something 2-3 stories tall when you can't even step on a 5-foot man.

HS Warwolf

2003-05-10, 03:16 PM

This is how I picture mechs in ps. An elite soldier climps up a ladder into his Raven light combat mech, packed with jamming electronics. He powers up the reactor. His mech comes to life. The pilot carfully steers his mech up into one of the large dropships hangerd in the base. he is carful not to step on any of the three tanks or any of the light infantry or MAX's he must share the space with. The dropship lifts off heading for one of the enemy's base. While waiting, he powers up the weapons. Suddenly, there is a hard thud. The dropship has landed. A huge door swings open and the infantry rush out. Then the MAX's. Then the tanks slowly roll out and finaly the raven walks out of the dropship. He starts running toward the base. Suddenly he fires his jump jets. He sails over the base walls. when he lands, he starts recieving machin gun fire from the infantry and laser fire from the tanks and turrets from the wall. The raven starts fireing his pulse lasers.(Basicly laser machin guns) A man below him disintegrates. He launches a salvo of 5 missiles at a tank. Suddenly, a large caliber munition strikes his leg. He tries to move but finds that he limps. He continues fireing. He steadily gains extensive damage over the course of 2 minutes. Finaly he relizes he can't win. he jumps out of the base. While in midair, he is struck with a large missile in the back. He bails out of the raven. As he is parachuting towards the ground, he sees his mech cruple at the ground and explode. When the pilot lands, he grabs his sidearm and runs toward the nearest mobile base to be refitted for ground combat. As he rushes back towards the battle, he sees other dropships unloading thier cargo. A few more mechs are unloaded along with Companies of Infantry and Max's. Close air support craft are shooting at the enemy tank devisions. Mines and motors are going off everywhere.:blowup: When the former mech pilot finds a good place, he lays down and takes out his sniper rifle. For almost an hour he picks off infantry and motor or machin gun nests.:sniper: When the battle is over, He hitches a ride on a buggy to the nearest air transport back to his base.

Nekota

2003-05-10, 03:28 PM

Well that sounds exciting if just one or two guys are running around in Mechs. Problem is... you won't be the only one and try being infantry with giant bots trying not to step on you or for that matter I'd be pissed if a damn mech stepped on my Sunderer killing me and my squad.

Flameseeker

2003-05-10, 05:20 PM

I like mechs as much as the next guy, but it's not possible. They are waaaaay too overpowered, and they're supposed to be. Not for PS, it wouldn't work.
PPCs, Long Toms, Thunderbolts, they are too advanced. These things have enormous ranges, and could step on INF AND tanks.
I have a mech game, that I seriously doubt anyone else here does, and in it, my 35 tonner destroyed a 100 ton tank WITHOUT damage, and a 70-90 ton heavy hover tank with heavy damage only because that tank was super fast.

PS technology is not nearly advanced enough for mechs. Nuclear fusion reactors? Myomer muscles? Ferro-Fibrous endo-steel armor plating? It's not feasible.

HS Warwolf

2003-05-11, 12:07 AM

Well if they're going to have to clear all that copyrighted crap if they want to import mechs from Fasa and Microsoft like the Mad Cat or the Atlas. It'd be esier just to make new mechs and put the weapons that are available in planetside onto the mech. Mechs aren't that unrelaistic. Fusion reactors. WE HAVE EM IN THE US for crying out loud! The myomer muscles I can understand would be a little unrealistic. Lasers aren't unrealistic. In 2013 The Marines will be outfitting Hummers with lasers that can shoot down artillery shells. Don't believe me? reseach is Most of the technology on mechs though isn't that far fetched though. The gauss rifle is pretty mus\ch the same thing as the gauss gun except that the munition is a solid slug 200 times bigger.
One thing they should do, is come out with an editor like they have in Morrowind. There's guys coming out with new stuff all the time. A few days ago someone released an airship. Then the staff on ps wouldn't have to spend their precous greenbacks paying guys to come up with additions and charge us for them. They might make a few here and there, but most of em would be made by fans. People can make More wepons or vehicles. Then if the verteran mechwarriors really want them in ps (If they own it) they can make em and maybe release a few if they want to into the game community.

MilitantB0B

2003-05-11, 12:11 AM

Originally posted by {HS}Warwolf
Well if they're going to have to clear all that copyrighted crap if they want to import mechs from Fasa and Microsoft like the Mad Cat or the Atlas. It'd be esier just to make new mechs and put the weapons that are available in planetside onto the mech. Mechs aren't that unrelaistic. Fusion reactors. WE HAVE EM IN THE US for crying out loud! The myomer muscles I can understand would be a little unrealistic. Lasers aren't unrealistic. In 2013 The Marines will be outfitting Hummers with lasers that can shoot down artillery shells. Don't believe me? reseach is Most of the technology on mechs though isn't that far fetched though. The gauss rifle is pretty mus\ch the same thing as the gauss gun except that the munition is a solid slug 200 times bigger.
One thing they should do, is come out with an editor like they have in Morrowind. There's guys coming out with new stuff all the time. A few days ago someone released an airship. Then the staff on ps wouldn't have to spend their precous greenbacks paying guys to come up with additions and charge us for them. They might make a few here and there, but most of em would be made by fans. People can make More wepons or vehicles. Then if the verteran mechwarriors really want them in ps (If they own it) they can make em and maybe release a few if they want to into the game community.
I hate to disagree with you there but I must. I don't think we will ever have an effective MECH like thing in the US army. Why? Bi-pedal movement. Walking on 2 legs is very unstable, in fact, it is pretty much just controlled falling. Maybe a 4 legged walker (ala Star Wars) but in my opinion, never a 2 legged combat robot. I just don't see the benifets of a 2 legged robot. But, hey, maybe we will all get to see the day when they have lasers and giant fighting robots. :borg:

HS Warwolf

2003-05-11, 12:15 AM

One question though flame. What mech game do you have?

HS Warwolf

2003-05-11, 12:25 AM

I wasn't sayin that there'll be mechs in the army I was just saying that the technology that they used is not that far fetched. Oh ya sure mechs might be used in galactic armies in say oh 500-1000 years. Lasers, and other crap like that isn't unrealistic. Hey, 150 years ago flying was a concept that lunatics were thought to endorse and this year we'll be sending a flying drone to mars. Yes the concept of using mechs is pretty unrealistic in real life, but a lot of the stuff that we have around today was thought to be ludachris at one time. The point I was trying to make was that mechs may be unrealistic but if lots of people want em in the futore, they should make em.

Kaikou

2003-05-11, 05:06 AM

Mechs are for Mechwarrior :p (good series of games btw)

BigDickMccoy

2003-05-11, 06:33 AM

I have been playing Battletech for 10 years. anyone who is anygood at that game will stomp any tank with a 50+ ton mech.
Mechs are dominant in Battletech cause NOTHING ELSE CAN COMPETE. They are to imbalanced for PS, it would become mechwarrior 4. Good Game but got real old real fast. I personally want to see a naval aspect added to the game and maybe some expansion on the aircraft side

HS Warwolf

2003-05-11, 12:09 PM

Ya naval warefare would be pretty badass. Take a huge battleship or carrier and bombard a base next to the coast. Then take a dropship off the deck and have it hover over the base while all the guys slide down the ropes. I can't seem to remember what it's called. It'd be nice to have scuba gear and then make an insertion off the coast like SEALs.:bouncy:

HS Warwolf

2003-05-11, 12:15 PM

Originally posted by MilitantB0B
I hate to disagree with you there but I must. I don't think we will ever have an effective MECH like thing in the US army. Why? Bi-pedal movement. Walking on 2 legs is very unstable, in fact, it is pretty much just controlled falling. :borg:
People walk around on two legs and you don't see people falling over left and right. You're right though, it's just controlled falling. But then again isn't it the same thing everytime you take a step? I'm not saying it might work, I just wanted to pouint out something.

ObnoxiousFrog

2003-05-11, 12:40 PM

I think that small-scale mechs would be nice. Nothing "shock and awe", but an anti-vehicular (150 mm cannon) and an anti-infantry (lots-o-12mm) would be nice. They would have improved mobility over tanks, but with slightly less armor.

Matuse

2003-05-11, 05:28 PM

I was just saying that the technology that they used is not that far fetched.

The technology may not be far fetched, but mechs are. They cannot exist, unless they are restricted to purely operating in outer space. Why? Weight. The following is taken from the Cyberpunk 2020 Maximum Metal handbook, which describes military technology for that RPG, one of the big things in this book is powered armor and the rules that follow it. Powered armor in that game are essentially Planetside MAXs.

Without question, the most profound misunderstanding about powered armor, and its near cousin, the giant robot, is the terrible difficulty of weight. While there have been games, cartoons, and movies about huge humanoid mechanisms, they must remain fiction. Why? Ground pressure. Simply put, the full weight of a humanoid device is going to be pressed down on two (or four) proportionally sized feet. A 900 pound powered armor stands only inches taller than a normal man (the following calculations are using 84-90"). One of its feet will have a surface area of about 60 inches (about 50% more than a man of the same size). Two such feet will thus have 120 inches between them. This works out to about 7.5 pounds per square inch of ground pressure. A normal human male will be about half that much. But, make that same powered armor or robot only twice as tall, about fourteen feet, and the thing will weigh about 7200 pounds, or over three and a half tons! Its feet will have about 240 square inches between them, exerting a ground pressure of 30 pounds per square inch.

Now, consider that a heavily loaded 18-wheel tractor-trailor rig is closer to 22 pounds per square inch. If our robot thing is now three times as tall, 21', the monstrosity will weight 12.1 tons, exerting a ground pressure of 67.5 pounds per square inch, or as much as three stacked 18-wheelers! The ground pressure exerted by appliances like refrigerators and waterbeds are much than the seven foot robot, because of their generous surface areas; but many old timers in 2020 can remember items like these falling through the floors of older houses. So, how do you build a 50' robot? Well, first you get 327,942 pounds of material (that's if you can make the material about 1/3rd the weight of steel), and stack it, man-shaped over the 428.6" surface area of its feet for a ground pressure of 765 pounds per square inch! Or, why not just stack up a mountain of 35 18-wheelers and see whether the bottom on can move at all (since it's very flat by now)

Camping Carl

2003-05-11, 05:45 PM

Well, it does depend on the material used. Maybe someday we'll be able to build mechs. But seeing as how they have no major advatages over tanks, I don't see why anyone would bother building them for combat purposes.

The MAX suits in PS are probably a lot closer to what may be used for troops in the future.

JonnyK

2003-05-11, 07:08 PM

I don't think they should have Mechs, like how you're thinking, but i think they should have things like what's in Star Wars, AT-AT's, they are basically like tanks that walk and are taller, but they're not FRIGGIN HUGE like mechs and they don't have godly power. They could put something like this in the game, it would be cool. There's a Starwars mod coming out for battlefield 1942 that has walking AT-AT's in the game, i don't see how it would be insanely hard for the PS devs to do this if some Modders can do it for a game that's not meant to have them at all

HS Warwolf

2003-05-11, 09:35 PM

Mechs might be used in the far future. I read that If we're gonna replace tanks with anything, it'll be with attack choppers. You never know though. Just because a mech is in a science fiction game, it doesn't mean it won't exist ever. The technology could be developed. In fact a lot of it already is. lasers, and gauss rifles are already developed. only on a smaller scale. about the only technology that I can think of that is used on mechs not already developed, is the myomer muscles that move the legs.

NeoTassadar

2003-05-11, 09:47 PM

For anyone that wants them, I'm sure the devs would be happy to make and sell game off the same engine that has them. Or maybe a mod. The rest of us will take what's already there.

SandTrout

2003-05-11, 09:50 PM

The AT-ATs were about as big as a small-medium mech, and they were overpowered. Please note that it only took 4-6(not going to count right now) of them to take out a well-intrenched army that was makeing liberal use of artilery and aircraft fire.

However, it was easaly visible that these near-invincible monstosities were not mobile(moveing at between 5-15 mph).

They also presented a very easy-to-spot profile that could be made out with the naked eye from a great distance.

--------------------------------------------------------------

Now lets talk about mechs in the Mechwarrior sense. These war machines are bi-pedal, which is highly unstable, especialy when the limbs weigh around 10-tons each(extreamly hard to move quickly and/or precicely). The only way that Humans maintain balance on our own 2 feet is because we have fluid in our ears that shifts around to alter our center a gravity, and we can move our limbs very quickly and precicely.

A mech has a higher center of gravity reletive to its hight because of the masive amounts of munitions and armor that are mounted around/near the cockpit/head. Add the necisarry lack of armor around the joints to allow for proper mobility in order to reach 60+ mph with legs.

You now have an artilery piece that can be knocked down on its back/front with 1 tank shell.

The only sollution to this problem is to use very light/weak armor in order to ease the balanceing procedures and acceleration. What you have now is a vehichle that can have its knee blown out and become compleatly useless by 1-3 tank shells from a tank that is still faster, more menuverable, and harder to hit than your massive coffin.

Even if you have very strong, light armor, why not put it on a tank to the tank can go faster and carry more firepower as well? and heck, why not put those jump-jets on the tank, since it's lighter anyways?

My point is that while mechs may be a cool concept for anime and cartoons, what they gain(which is realy jack-squat) is imediatly lost due to size and mass past a powered-armor(MAX or Exo-squad light mechs). They just simply are not useful. I wouldn't matter if they put Mechs in the game or not to me, they would be useless, unless they were made extreamly overpowered with no corispondeing changes to all of the technology(faster, stronger tanks, and stronger MAX units).

NeoTassadar

2003-05-11, 10:02 PM

Okay, easy (but long) solution. Make them take ~10 people to pilot at full potential. One guy pilots and the rest control one weapon each, gimballed and ~70% turret coverage. Give them insane armor and proportionate mech/soldier COFs. That way they have trouble hitting the smaller ones. Give them 48+ hour vehicle spawn times that applies to any that pilot it. Make the cert cost 10+ points. Apply cert requirements to gunners, as well. That should about balance it. They will rarely be seen, and then they will be no more formidible than 13-15 people.

SandTrout

2003-05-11, 10:24 PM

So you have a vehicle that is piloted by a full squad of people dedicated solely to piloting this mech(pretty much)?

I think I like it, but don't think it fits PS gameplay. Besides, its still easy to spot and easy to ambush.

NeoTassadar

2003-05-11, 10:31 PM

Which balances it.

HS Warwolf

2003-05-12, 07:38 PM

Maybe if they don't want to add full sized combat mechs they can add protomechs. Think of a MAX only beefed up to 1/3 to 1/2 the size of a light battlemech. They might be more REALISTIC because they walk on two legs but are as agile as a human sometimes.

shinken

2003-06-01, 01:49 AM

if you people ar going to talk about mecha, dont just talk about sissy mechwarior, anime mecha is by far way, way cooler (not to mention more powerful) than battletech mechs, they would be an inbalence in the game, unless you could only use them for defensive purposes (think Neon Genisis Evangelion type stuff, the umbilical cables limit their range, w/out the cable they have 5 minutes of power, except not 200 ft. tall and just about omnipotent):domotwak:
yeah neotassadar Unit 01 KA and goes very nicely w/ vanu color, purple and green,