193 réponses à ce sujet

[thegreateski]

Oh. I get it.



You see mr. OP. No matter how much we may advance as a society . . . there are only a limited number of ways you can kill a person.



Currently bullets are the most effective method.



1000 years ago swords were the most effective way.



I expect to see chainsaw rocket launchers on the battlefields in the near future.

[Stephenc13]

The Exoskeleton would basically hold the armor itself, so the wearer shouldn't feel any physical effects

[jgordon11]

Stephenc13 wrote...

SandTrout wrote...

Stephenc13 wrote...
Those weapons are efficient and you obviously haven't been doing research. The weapons don't need changing, but maybe the functions have changed

Which weapons? The PA ones? If you read the ME Codex, it describes that the destructive particle beam from the collector gun uses "scales of magnitude" more energy than standard MA weapons. This is partly due to mass effect fields lowering the mass of the projectile to produce greater velocites durring the accelleration phase of fireing.
They have, they're called Hard-suits, and are what Shepard wears into combat.

First off, you didn't pay attention to my post when I wrote about the weapons.
and Hard suits with shields, but no significant physical protection?    (shields --> health = suck)

So you're saying that the armor is low tech b/c your health is low?  Stopping ridiculously fast projectiles isn't the easiest thing to do.

Also what about the body armor and weapons is low tech?

[SandTrout]

How many bullets can you take WITH a bullet proof vest on? depending on the round used, I'd bet not more that 1 (if that). Especially when dealing with very small, high-velocity rounds, at a point, the best your armor is going to do is slow the bullet down so that it hopefully won't kill you.



Your armor allows you to take a fair number of hits before you collapse. I'd say that pretty good.

[Stephenc13]

thegreateski wrote...

Oh. I get it.

You see mr. OP. No matter how much we may advance as a society . . . there are only a limited number of ways you can kill a person.

Currently bullets are the most effective method.

1000 years ago swords were the most effective way.

I expect to see chainsaw rocket launchers on the battlefields in the near future.

I'd see surgery scalpels (currently the most effective cutting instrument) put to use as weapons.

[Karstedt]

I want a dense carbon sword made of smooshed diamonds and nano tubes.

[Aesaar]

Stephenc13 wrote...

You guys arent seeing what i mean,
Modern days, we have dragon scale body armor, which greatly minimizes recoil and damage from the bullet... 100 years from now, that technology will be 100 times better.

Uhhh... what? What makes you think that?

Note: Dragon skin works fine against the 7.62x39mm rounds fired from an ak47. It's substantially less effective against 7.62x54mm AP rounds fired from an SVD, and completely useless against .50 BMG rounds.

It's safe to assume that tiny slugs fired at far higher speeds than either of those two would have greater armor penetration capability. Probably less stopping power, though (lower mass of round).

Mass accelerator guns? we already have rail guns, 100 years from now, the technology would better improve.

Point me to A) a railgun that can fire more than a few shots before the rails need replacement, and a handheld one. I'd also like to mention that the guns in ME are not railguns. Closer to gauss guns than anything else.

Technology doesn't progress as fast as you think, especially without large scale wars to drive it forward. You realise than infantry weapons have changed surprisingly little in the last hundred years, right? The biggest changes have been in fire control (computers revolutionised that). The M1911 .45 pistol is still in use by the US army (mostly replaced by the M9, though), and it entered service 99 years ago. The M2 .50 HMG was designed in 1918, and it's still in use as the cupola weapon of most American combat vehicles.

Considering ME guns don't even use magazines as we know them, I'd say they're far, far more advanced than anything we have today.


On a less related note, "infantry" in Star Trek would get their asses handed to them by Alliance marines.

Modifié par Aesaar, 11 mars 2010 - 07:11 .

[Stephenc13]

SandTrout wrote...

How many bullets can you take WITH a bullet proof vest on? depending on the round used, I'd bet not more that 1 (if that). Especially when dealing with very small, high-velocity rounds, at a point, the best your armor is going to do is slow the bullet down so that it hopefully won't kill you.

Your armor allows you to take a fair number of hits before you collapse. I'd say that pretty good.

The weapons don't even live up to their descriptions, the accelerated bullets would throw back a person unhumanly far (If an armor is designed to stop that kind of bullet), or even go through anyone hit by it

[Pauravi]

Stephenc13 wrote...

AdamBoozer wrote...

yes everything in mass effect is technically low tech. If any of you were smart and kept up with science today you would know most of this is already possible and bioware took these ideas from real science.

Exactly

Frankly, I don't think either of you know what you're talking about.

Naval weapons in ME are firing projectiles carrying six orders of magnitude more energy than our very best railguns.
Lasers are used, but they cannot match the energy density or efficiency of projectile weapons due to mass effect fields.  Personal weapons cannot achieve the same amount of advancement in muzzle energy because the Law of Conservation of Momentum (i.e. recoil) still applies, but it is still vastly improved, and the armor is advanced enough to stop those projectiles.  "Dragon Skin" wouldn't stand a chance.

[sepir]

It's all moot anyway. In 100 years we will all be ruled by dolphins.



Learn to swim, it will save your life.

[Lord Coake]

Ballistic weaponry is pretty much stalled where it is. All that can really be improved on is propellant, the materials the bullet is made of, and a few enhancements to the weapon itself in the area of modularity, targeting and weight. Rate of fire might go up, but military forces are adverse to every man being able to go full auto. Thats what squad support weapons are for.



Unless a huge breakthrough is made in both the life of power sources and their weight and size, infantry weaponry likely won't be changing much.



Yeah, weapons like the HK G11 push the bar up a bit more, but the improvements in that weapon system are all material science and are generally merely incremental at best. In 200 years that might change, but I wouldn't be surprised if it doesn't.



Most improvements will likely be in modularity, weight, and the striking power of the bullet. I know the US military is working on making everything from carbines to squad support weapons to sniper rifles use the same basic M-16 lower assembly, but diffferent, modular upper assembly, with all of them chambered for the 6.88mm round. That way, being able to shoot one will make a soldier able to shoot well with all four types, and bec able to switch between weapon types with the push of a few pins and clips, and switching out a single modular upper.



Taking that in, I can understand why Mass Effect still uses the weapons it does. They've just replaced chemical propellants with mass fields, and made all the weapons collapseable. The only real sci-fi thing there is the mass field bit. Easily in the realm of believability.

[Stephenc13]

Pauravi wrote...

Stephenc13 wrote...

AdamBoozer wrote...

yes everything in mass effect is technically low tech. If any of you were smart and kept up with science today you would know most of this is already possible and bioware took these ideas from real science.

Exactly

Frankly, I don't think either of you know what you're talking about.

Naval weapons in ME are firing projectiles carrying six orders of magnitude more energy than our very best railguns.
Lasers are used, but they cannot match the energy density or efficiency of projectile weapons due to mass effect fields.  Personal weapons cannot achieve the same amount of advancement in muzzle energy because the Law of Conservation of Momentum (i.e. recoil) still applies, but it is still vastly improved, and the armor is advanced enough to stop those projectiles.  "Dragon Skin" wouldn't stand a chance.

Think of cyber warfare though, it's never mentioned in the Mass Effect universe, technology improves every day

[CmdrFenix83]

ITT the OP wants blasters... and one lunatic wants to devolve back to the weapons of the middle ages.

[SandTrout]

Stephenc13 wrote...

SandTrout wrote...

How many bullets can you take WITH a bullet proof vest on? depending on the round used, I'd bet not more that 1 (if that). Especially when dealing with very small, high-velocity rounds, at a point, the best your armor is going to do is slow the bullet down so that it hopefully won't kill you.

Your armor allows you to take a fair number of hits before you collapse. I'd say that pretty good.

The weapons don't even live up to their descriptions, the accelerated bullets would throw back a person unhumanly far (If an armor is designed to stop that kind of bullet), or even go through anyone hit by it

So you agree that it's damn good armor then?

[Pauravi]

Stephenc13 wrote...

The weapons don't even live up to their descriptions, the accelerated bullets would throw back a person unhumanly far (If an armor is designed to stop that kind of bullet)

No, they wouldn't.
They explain that muzzle energies of the weapons cannot increase without limit because recoil is determined by the momentum imparted to the target (the Law of Conservation of Momentum still applies).  So what they do instead is make the rounds very small and light and ramp the velocities up immensely.  This increases kinetic energy while reducing the amount of momentum carried by the projectile.  This is realistic.  You cannot have weapons that cause the targets to go flying backwards while the shooter just stands there.

[jgordon11]

So gauss/coilguns (mass accelerators) arn't sci fi/futuristic enough?

[Aesaar]

Stephenc13 wrote...

Think of cyber warfare though, it's never mentioned in the Mass Effect universe, technology improves every day

 EDI specifically mentions she's responsible for SR2's cyberwarfare equipment.

[Stephenc13]

Pauravi wrote...

Stephenc13 wrote...

The weapons don't even live up to their descriptions, the accelerated bullets would throw back a person unhumanly far (If an armor is designed to stop that kind of bullet)

No, they wouldn't.
They explain that muzzle energies of the weapons cannot increase without limit because recoil is determined by the momentum imparted to the target (the Law of Conservation of Momentum still applies).  So what they do instead is make the rounds very small and light and ramp the velocities up immensely.  This increases kinetic energy while reducing the amount of momentum carried by the projectile.  This is realistic.  You cannot have weapons that cause the targets to go flying backwards while the shooter just stands there.

ex-o-skel-e-ton

[Stephenc13]

Aesaar wrote...

Stephenc13 wrote...

Think of cyber warfare though, it's never mentioned in the Mass Effect universe, technology improves every day

 EDI specifically mentions she's responsible for SR2's cyberwarfare equipment.

Does she effectively use it though? besides open a few doors here and there.

[Pauravi]

Stephenc13 wrote...

Pauravi wrote...

Frankly, I don't think either of you know what you're talking about.

Naval weapons in ME are firing projectiles carrying six orders of magnitude more energy than our very best railguns.
Lasers are used, but they cannot match the energy density or efficiency of projectile weapons due to mass effect fields.  Personal weapons cannot achieve the same amount of advancement in muzzle energy because the Law of Conservation of Momentum (i.e. recoil) still applies, but it is still vastly improved, and the armor is advanced enough to stop those projectiles.  "Dragon Skin" wouldn't stand a chance.

Think of cyber warfare though, it's never mentioned in the Mass Effect universe, technology improves every day

Like the kind EDI mentions that she can use to shut off other ships gravity, air, or mass effect cores?  Turn off their guns, targeting, and life support?

[jgordon11]

Stephenc13 wrote...

Pauravi wrote...

Stephenc13 wrote...

The weapons don't even live up to their descriptions, the accelerated bullets would throw back a person unhumanly far (If an armor is designed to stop that kind of bullet)

No, they wouldn't.
They explain that muzzle energies of the weapons cannot increase without limit because recoil is determined by the momentum imparted to the target (the Law of Conservation of Momentum still applies).  So what they do instead is make the rounds very small and light and ramp the velocities up immensely.  This increases kinetic energy while reducing the amount of momentum carried by the projectile.  This is realistic.  You cannot have weapons that cause the targets to go flying backwards while the shooter just stands there.

ex-o-skel-e-ton

Yeah, but the other guy has one too

[jgordon11]

Stephenc13 wrote...

Aesaar wrote...

Stephenc13 wrote...

Think of cyber warfare though, it's never mentioned in the Mass Effect universe, technology improves every day

 EDI specifically mentions she's responsible for SR2's cyberwarfare equipment.

Does she effectively use it though? besides open a few doors here and there.

Maybe they upgraded their cyber defenses like firewall with shields.

[Aesaar]

Stephenc13 wrote...

Does she effectively use it though? besides open a few doors here and there.

Not much else she can do with it during the game.  She might have screwed with the Collector cruiser's targeting, which might be why it missed the SR2 during the suicide mission.  We don't know.  You are correct it isn't mentioned much, but that doesn't mean it doesn't exist.

Modifié par Aesaar, 11 mars 2010 - 07:19 .

[Stephenc13]

I wouldn't be surprised if all warfare turned to cybernetic warfare in 100 years

[Stephenc13]

Pauravi wrote...

Stephenc13 wrote...

Pauravi wrote...

Frankly, I don't think either of you know what you're talking about.

Naval weapons in ME are firing projectiles carrying six orders of magnitude more energy than our very best railguns.
Lasers are used, but they cannot match the energy density or efficiency of projectile weapons due to mass effect fields.  Personal weapons cannot achieve the same amount of advancement in muzzle energy because the Law of Conservation of Momentum (i.e. recoil) still applies, but it is still vastly improved, and the armor is advanced enough to stop those projectiles.  "Dragon Skin" wouldn't stand a chance.

Think of cyber warfare though, it's never mentioned in the Mass Effect universe, technology improves every day

Like the kind EDI mentions that she can use to shut off other ships gravity, air, or mass effect cores?  Turn off their guns, targeting, and life support?

but she doesnt