193 réponses à ce sujet

[Zulu_DFA]

Homey C-Dawg wrote...

What i find interesting is how in the future of ME, no one seems to record things on video anymore. Everyone is recording stuff these days.
If I was Shepard, I would've whipped out my cell phone or something and hit REC when I talked to Saren/Sovereign so I could've shown to the Turian counselor and been like "dismiss this claim, b*tch!".

The year 2185's Photoshop is so good, that it allows to fake anything, and on the flipside -- dismiss anything. I actually take the Council's immediate acceptance of Tali's "evidence" against Saren as just another example of their sporadic moronity.

[Serevir]

Haven't guns always been more advanced than personal armor? I mean last time I checked ever since we discovered the fine art of hurling projectiles at each other there was never a time where anyone could just walk into battle as bullets and crap bounced off of them.

[DuffyMJ]

This far in the future, there likely won't be ground infantry combat like this anymore... We will very likely be using remotely operated and/or autonomous unmanned ground vehicles.



... fun...

[Aesaar]

Prophet of Rage wrote...

WHERE MY GUNDAM AT, Y'ALL?

Not designed.  Tanks are better.

[ace1221]

Serevir wrote...

Haven't guns always been more advanced than personal armor? I mean last time I checked ever since we discovered the fine art of hurling projectiles at each other there was never a time where anyone could just walk into battle as bullets and crap bounced off of them.

Ned Kelly.

in other news, this argument is rather silly by nature. Everyone that is whining about how 'low tech' ME weapons and armour tech is should immediately go running and screaming towards the halo forums and wonder why we still use conventional guns in 500 years. (yes i am aware of MJOLNR and its awesomeness)

ME has anti-grav, personal gravity lightening fields, fold up guns, black hole generators, chain lightining guns, individual genetic modification, AI, terraforming, holograms, OMNI tools, magical medi-gel, instant galaxy wide comms and internet and mini nukes. need i go on?

[Zulu_DFA]

DuffyMJ wrote...

This far in the future, there likely won't be ground infantry combat like this anymore... We will very likely be using remotely operated and/or autonomous unmanned ground vehicles.

... fun...

No, it's not. It lacks the human element.

Besides, until there is an AI of the same capacity as the human brain, and it can be installed on a LOKI mech, there will be no way to remove the human element from actual combat. There will always be commandos for special operations and infantry grunts for holding hostile ground.
Drones are cool, but they are still equipment, like the stone axes.

Modifié par Zulu_DFA, 13 mars 2010 - 04:44 .

[Bron Avery]

thegreateski wrote...

*Ahem*

Wtf you talkin bout?

...Willis?

[DuffyMJ]

Zulu_DFA wrote...

DuffyMJ wrote...

This far in the future, there likely won't be ground infantry combat like this anymore... We will very likely be using remotely operated and/or autonomous unmanned ground vehicles.

... fun...

No, it's not. It lacks the human element.

Besides, until there is an AI of the same capacity as the human brain, and it can be installed on a LOKI mech, there will be no way to remove the human element from actual combat. There will always be commandos for special operations and infantry grunts for holding hostile ground.
Drones are cool, but they are still equipment, like the stone axes.

Predator Drones.  EOD. 

[Karstedt]

I really think this discussion is getting away from what is truly important. Swords really do have a place in any infantry style combat, and it's vital that we get some blades in ME3.

[Atmosfear3]

DuffyMJ wrote...

Zulu_DFA wrote...

DuffyMJ wrote...

This far in the future, there likely won't be ground infantry combat like this anymore... We will very likely be using remotely operated and/or autonomous unmanned ground vehicles.

... fun...

No, it's not. It lacks the human element.

Besides, until there is an AI of the same capacity as the human brain, and it can be installed on a LOKI mech, there will be no way to remove the human element from actual combat. There will always be commandos for special operations and infantry grunts for holding hostile ground.
Drones are cool, but they are still equipment, like the stone axes.

Predator Drones.  EOD. 

Not sure what your comment actually means but if I'm assuming properly, predator drones are not autonomous.  They actually have pilots behind their consoles at a remote base controlling them.

Anyways, back  to that statement about autonomous warfare, it will be a sad, sad day when wars no longer require human boots on the ground.  Can you imagine your land being taken over by some foreigner thats sitting comfortably in their home nation obliterating your country?

[DuffyMJ]

Atmosfear3 wrote...

DuffyMJ wrote...

Zulu_DFA wrote...

DuffyMJ wrote...

This far in the future, there likely won't be ground infantry combat like this anymore... We will very likely be using remotely operated and/or autonomous unmanned ground vehicles.

... fun...

No, it's not. It lacks the human element.

Besides, until there is an AI of the same capacity as the human brain, and it can be installed on a LOKI mech, there will be no way to remove the human element from actual combat. There will always be commandos for special operations and infantry grunts for holding hostile ground.
Drones are cool, but they are still equipment, like the stone axes.

Predator Drones.  EOD. 

Not sure what your comment actually means but if I'm assuming properly, predator drones are not autonomous.  They actually have pilots behind their consoles at a remote base controlling them.

Anyways, back  to that statement about autonomous warfare, it will be a sad, sad day when wars no longer require human boots on the ground.  Can you imagine your land being taken over by some foreigner thats sitting comfortably in their home nation obliterating your country?

Am I going crazy?  Is my mental stability in question?  Did I not word for word write "remotely operated and/or autonomous"?  It must just be me.

[valsitsor]

Pandaman102 wrote...

AdamBoozer wrote...
Can't find my tank system. But I know it's out there because

You'll have to forgive me for finding it excessively difficult to believe that anyone without a security (you, not your mom, won't make any assumptions about her) clearance is working for Raytheon.

And if your mom really is a Raytheon employee I can't stress enough to delete that line because people tend to get fired over showing government projects to people without security clearances; hell, it was only last month that old engineer got slapped with espionage charges because he had documents from his military projects molding away in his attic.

Edit: actually it was last year, time flies when you're busy being distracted by the economy.

 lol, as i was reading this forum ( and realizing how apparently pointless and boaring this topic is lol) i was like lol, this guy is ****ting me..... i would fire U and ur mom if it turned out to be ture lol

[Zulu_DFA]

DuffyMJ wrote...

Zulu_DFA wrote...

DuffyMJ wrote...

This far in the future, there likely won't be ground infantry combat like this anymore... We will very likely be using remotely operated and/or autonomous unmanned ground vehicles.

... fun...

No, it's not. It lacks the human element.

Besides, until there is an AI of the same capacity as the human brain, and it can be installed on a LOKI mech, there will be no way to remove the human element from actual combat. There will always be commandos for special operations and infantry grunts for holding hostile ground.
Drones are cool, but they are still equipment, like the stone axes.

Predator Drones.  EOD. 

Yeah, I know about Predator drones.

They work well... when the bad guys don't have air force.

[Stephenc13]

I'm not saying that they didn't do bad with technology in Mass Effect 1 or 2, but they sure as hell did better than Halo.



And Mass Effect is probably a good estimate if humanity didn't discover Prothean ruins on Mars that jump our technology many years ahead.

I appreciate that Bioware wants more scientific accuracy than some made up mumbo jumbo.

But check out the inside of the Normandy too, that, my friends, is low tech.

Bill Gates' house is way more advanced than that

[CC-Tron]

Those huge data pads look really low tech. They should be using their omni tools for all data storage.

[adam_grif]

Serevir wrote...

Haven't guns always been more advanced than personal armor? I mean last time I checked ever since we discovered the fine art of hurling projectiles at each other there was never a time where anyone could just walk into battle as bullets and crap bounced off of them.

The term "bulletproof" comes from the middle ages when armorers would shoot the armor they were selling to a prospective buyer with a gun to demonstrate that it was effective at stopping firearms. Later on with more advanced balistics, armor was rendered effectively worthless against firearms, but during the early days they could be defended against with a suit of armor quite handily.

[Zulu_DFA]

adam_grif wrote...

Serevir wrote...



Haven't guns always been more advanced than personal armor? I mean last time I checked ever since we discovered the fine art of hurling projectiles at each other there was never a time where anyone could just walk into battle as bullets and crap bounced off of them.

The term "bulletproof" comes from the middle ages when armorers would shoot the armor they were selling to a prospective buyer with a gun to demonstrate that it was effective at stopping firearms. Later on with more advanced balistics, armor was rendered effectively worthless against firearms, but during the early days they could be defended against with a suit of armor quite handily.

"Bulletproof" is bulletproof. There are a lot of situations when body armor protects against bullets. It depends on the type of the firearm and its caliber, as well as distance and trajectory of the shot itself. Standard SWAT gear effectively protects against 9mm pistol shots even at point blank (although all ribs may be broken). Same goes for 5.56mm standard assault rifle bullets incoming from steep angles and/or long distances.

But a 7.62mm special armor-piercing bullet fired from a battle rifle, like M-14, at 400 meters or closer and at 80-90 degree angle may penetrate even light vehicle plating.



I think it's all in the Wiki somewhere...

[adam_grif]

Zulu_DFA wrote...

"Bulletproof" is bulletproof. There are a lot of situations when body armor protects against bullets. It depends on the type of the firearm and its caliber, as well as distance and trajectory of the shot itself. Standard SWAT gear effectively protects against 9mm pistol shots even at point blank (although all ribs may be broken). Same goes for 5.56mm standard assault rifle bullets incoming from steep angles and/or long distances.
But a 7.62mm special armor-piercing bullet fired from a battle rifle, like M-14, at 400 meters or closer and at 80-90 degree angle may penetrate even light vehicle plating.

I think it's all in the Wiki somewhere...

I'm aware of all that. What we're discussing is the relationship between offensive and defensive measures. The body armor given out to US Military personell will stop a 7.62 x 39 round if it hits it in the right place, but it doesn't stand up to any kind of sustained fire. If you survived two or three of them you would be considered extremely fortunate, and if you don't get hit in an ideal place (i.e. anywhere without a trauma plate backing it up), then you're out of the fight.

There are many things to consider, but offensive most assuredely oustrips defenses as a whole. Infantrymen don't operate independantly, and even a humvee mounts enough firepower to shred dozens of infantry regardless of armor. Even the fabled "dragon skin" armor can't stop a .50 cal mounted gun.

Modifié par adam_grif, 13 mars 2010 - 10:16 .

[Zulu_DFA]

adam_grif wrote...

I'm aware of all that. What we're discussing is the relationship between offensive and defensive measures. The body armor given out to US Military personell will stop a 7.62 x 39 round if it hits it in the right place, but it doesn't stand up to any kind of sustained fire. If you survived two or three of them you would be considered extremely fortunate, and if you don't get hit in an ideal place (i.e. anywhere without a trauma plate backing it up), then you're out of the fight.

There are many things to consider, but offensive most assuredely oustrips defenses as a whole. Infantrymen don't operate independantly, and even a humvee mounts enough firepower to shred dozens of infantry regardless of armor. Even the fabled "dragon skin" armor can't stop a .50 cal mounted gun.

That's affirmative, the relationship between offensive and defensive measures tends to be always in favor of the former. But as it applies to ME universe, we have to keep in mind that there is also gameplay issue. While IRL every soldier has only 1 hit point, so to say. Any wound that isn't "just a scratch" renders him ineffective... Which is no fun.

Anyway in the Codex it was stated, that "armor" = combat hardsuit, that employed diffirent systems to protect user agains different types of threats. The ceramic plating could by no means withstand a hit from a mass accelerator weapon. It was kinetic barriers' duty, which are a purely sci-fi thing. Yet, the principle they worked by could be compared to the active protection / reactive armor systems used on modern tanks.

But all that was messed up in ME2 in favor of cool-looking fashion show "outfits" of our badass squaddies and gameplay balance, that would make combat more "fluent". And that's why Mass Effect 2 looks pretty low-tech in the combat equipment area.