Gundam
#1
Posté 11 mars 2010 - 12:13
#2
Posté 11 mars 2010 - 12:15
#3
Posté 11 mars 2010 - 12:16
In short, it would just bring down the realism level.
#4
Posté 11 mars 2010 - 12:16
Besides, spiky anime hair goes against every regulation in the book.
#5
Posté 11 mars 2010 - 12:17
#6
Posté 11 mars 2010 - 12:18
Best leave the big killer robots to the experts...
#7
Posté 11 mars 2010 - 12:20
#8
Posté 11 mars 2010 - 12:23
#9
Posté 11 mars 2010 - 12:27
Aerodynamics don't matter. However, structural integrity does. Having all of your mass in one compact location (like the main hull of most ships) is significantly stronger against weapons fire than having long extending limbs. Not to mention joints are always weak points which must have less armor to function.Dijohn17 wrote...
I thought aerodynamics didn't matter in space since there is really no resistance drag, and all that other crap
Also, a conventional starship has higher volume:surface area, meaning more room for power supplies, ammunition, and other systems inside the ship's hull, where it's protected.
Sorry, it's the engineer in me coming out. Always hated the idea of humanoid ships. Small-scale powered armor does make more sense, but huge flying humanoid mechs doesn't.
#10
Posté 11 mars 2010 - 12:29
#11
Posté 11 mars 2010 - 12:31
Jalisurr wrote...
Aerodynamics don't matter. However, structural integrity does. Having all of your mass in one compact location (like the main hull of most ships) is significantly stronger against weapons fire than having long extending limbs. Not to mention joints are always weak points which must have less armor to function.Dijohn17 wrote...
I thought aerodynamics didn't matter in space since there is really no resistance drag, and all that other crap
Also, a conventional starship has higher volume:surface area, meaning more room for power supplies, ammunition, and other systems inside the ship's hull, where it's protected.
Sorry, it's the engineer in me coming out. Always hated the idea of humanoid ships. Small-scale powered armor does make more sense, but huge flying humanoid mechs doesn't.
What about these joints and limbs?
#12
Posté 11 mars 2010 - 12:38
What about these joints and limbs?
The Sovereign is a beast completely in its own class. It's mentioned in the game Codex that it must have an immense Mass Effect drive core to pull off the twists and turns it does, and land to a planet's surface and lift off again. No other civilization in the ME universe can build anything like it.
#13
Posté 11 mars 2010 - 12:41
Lightice_av wrote...
The Sovereign is a beast completely in its own class. It's mentioned in the game Codex that it must have an immense Mass Effect drive core to pull off the twists and turns it does, and land to a planet's surface and lift off again. No other civilization in the ME universe can build anything like it.What about these joints and limbs?
Rabbit was reffering to the Jailsurrs points about limbs being structural weak points for machines with arms, or in this case, tentacles (at least they look more like tentacles).
Modifié par Turkeysock, 11 mars 2010 - 12:44 .
#14
Posté 11 mars 2010 - 12:43
Turkeysock wrote...
Lightice_av wrote...
The Sovereign is a beast completely in its own class. It's mentioned in the game Codex that it must have an immense Mass Effect drive core to pull off the twists and turns it does, and land to a planet's surface and lift off again. No other civilization in the ME universe can build anything like it.What about these joints and limbs?
Rabbit was reffering to the posters points about limbs being structural weak points for machines with arms, or in this case, tentacles (at least they look more like tentacles).
Well when it is destroyed what exactly comes flying off? The limbs
#15
Posté 11 mars 2010 - 12:46
They are still weak points. The only reason they are there is to look cool. Maybe he wouldnt have failed if he used a better ship design instead of a fish...Turkeysock wrote...
Lightice_av wrote...
The Sovereign is a beast completely in its own class. It's mentioned in the game Codex that it must have an immense Mass Effect drive core to pull off the twists and turns it does, and land to a planet's surface and lift off again. No other civilization in the ME universe can build anything like it.What about these joints and limbs?
Rabbit was reffering to the Jailsurrs points about limbs being structural weak points for machines with arms, or in this case, tentacles (at least they look more like tentacles).
#16
Posté 11 mars 2010 - 12:46
Dijohn17 wrote...
You know not complaining or anything, but you think with all the technology the Mass Effect universe has that they would've made a Gundam? I'm just doing this for my own fun but would'nt it be sweet to fight the Reapers with a Gundam? Maybe it is a good idea to keep the base...
If you kept the base, maybe you will be able to make your own Gundam... Reaper-style. Combine that with the millions of years-old mass driver that took out the "Derelict Reaper" and you've got yourself one big weapon against the Reaper fleet. Now they just need to introduce a giant sword floating around in space... Also, as Sovereign demonstrated in ME1, ramming is better than firing weapons.
#17
Posté 11 mars 2010 - 12:48
MassAffected wrote...
Turkeysock wrote...
Lightice_av wrote...
The Sovereign is a beast completely in its own class. It's mentioned in the game Codex that it must have an immense Mass Effect drive core to pull off the twists and turns it does, and land to a planet's surface and lift off again. No other civilization in the ME universe can build anything like it.What about these joints and limbs?
Rabbit was reffering to the posters points about limbs being structural weak points for machines with arms, or in this case, tentacles (at least they look more like tentacles).
Well when it is destroyed what exactly comes flying off? The limbsand one supposedly lands on poor Shepard.
It blew up... That is what happens when things blow up, peices go
everywhere, has nothing to do with the limbs/tentacles being a weak spot really>.>
#18
Posté 11 mars 2010 - 12:48
Jalisurr wrote...
Aerodynamics don't matter. However, structural integrity does. Having all of your mass in one compact location (like the main hull of most ships) is significantly stronger against weapons fire than having long extending limbs. Not to mention joints are always weak points which must have less armor to function.Dijohn17 wrote...
I thought aerodynamics didn't matter in space since there is really no resistance drag, and all that other crap
Also, a conventional starship has higher volume:surface area, meaning more room for power supplies, ammunition, and other systems inside the ship's hull, where it's protected.
Sorry, it's the engineer in me coming out. Always hated the idea of humanoid ships. Small-scale powered armor does make more sense, but huge flying humanoid mechs doesn't.
Yeah who in there right mind would make a giant space faring humanoid robot...
I mean besides the Reapers
#19
Posté 11 mars 2010 - 12:51
#20
Posté 11 mars 2010 - 12:54
That's true. And those are some hefty finger-tentacles, you must admit. Look at that Alliance cruiser up there. One finger-tentacle would be almost the same size.Turkeysock wrote...
MassAffected wrote...
Turkeysock wrote...
Lightice_av wrote...
The Sovereign is a beast completely in its own class. It's mentioned in the game Codex that it must have an immense Mass Effect drive core to pull off the twists and turns it does, and land to a planet's surface and lift off again. No other civilization in the ME universe can build anything like it.What about these joints and limbs?
Rabbit was reffering to the posters points about limbs being structural weak points for machines with arms, or in this case, tentacles (at least they look more like tentacles).
Well when it is destroyed what exactly comes flying off? The limbsand one supposedly lands on poor Shepard.
It blew up... That is what happens when things blow up, peices go
everywhere, has nothing to do with the limbs/tentacles being a weak spot really>.>
#21
Posté 11 mars 2010 - 01:01
#22
Posté 11 mars 2010 - 01:05
But personally, a humanoid machine like a mobile suit has a lot of advantages over track machines, in theory mind you. We right now do have the technology to actually construct one (just not at a price where it would be cost effective to convince governments/companies to actually build it). But if you think about it, it's nothing more then a giant version of a Loki mech, the only difference is that a human is piloting it (or possibly just a VI, or heck, a VI/Human combo would probably be more efficient).
But a mobile suit would offer advantages that track vehicles like tanks can't. We also must remember, that everything has it's advantages and disadvantages, so you can't just write things off without someone actually using one... That's why tank tech in the U.S., France, Russia and Britain was like 20 years behind the Germans at the outbreak of WWII.
But again, keep Mass Effect just Mass Effect. Adding in mobile suits and power armors would take away from the game.
#23
Posté 11 mars 2010 - 01:08
#24
Posté 11 mars 2010 - 01:09
I don't think that there should be any kind of mobile suits or power armor in the game, the first being from an anime and the latter being from the Fallout games.
Fallout didn't invent powered armour. Starship Troopers (the book) did, decades ago. And we already have powered armour in Mass Effect, even though it's subtly handled. Remember that one of the upgrades you could get in ME1 was powered joints that gave you greater melee damage?
#25
Posté 11 mars 2010 - 01:11
Just curious





Retour en haut






