Unconventional / Theoretical Weapon Systems & Potential Applications - General

They look overly fragile compared to a Tank. And also it doesn't look very practical. And it wouldn't go as fast as a tank, for balance issue.

[QUOTE=acds;16858990]-It's taller, so it's a lot easier to hit. -A tank can be immobilized be taking out its tracks, but it will still be functional, while a mech with a destroyed leg will fall over (and damage itself too most probably). -A tank can have more armour since it can carry more, and while the tank can be compeltely covered, the mech will always have a weakspot on the legs. -A tank is faster than a mech.[/QUOTE] I disagree that a tank can have more armour, I don't see any reason why a tank could carry any more than a mech. You could armour the legs extensively, something you can't do with many parts of tank tracks, so I don't see why it would be a weak point. You assume that the mech is in terrain that a tank can move over, clearly tanks are going to be better in areas they can quickly navigate, but mechs could conceivably go places tanks cannot. [editline]05:49PM[/editline] [QUOTE=Feuver;16859021]They look overly fragile compared to a Tank. And also it doesn't look very practical. And it wouldn't go as fast as a tank, for balance issue.[/QUOTE] Just because they look fragile in star wars doesn't mean they would be if made in real life, I don't see how something 'looking' impractical makes any sense. Again just because they move slow in sci-fi doesn't mean they have to in real life, the control systems behind them could keep balance perfectly even at high speeds.

[QUOTE=Madman_Andre;16754529]Cloaking. :ninja:[/QUOTE] If I ever get the chance, I'm going to steal some cloaking/invisibility technology, make my way into the white house, and slowly drive Obama insane. I'll hide his stuff, trip him at random times, stand at the end of a corridor and disappear when he starts in my direction... oh, and blow in his ear during speeches. :v:

[QUOTE=DaveP;16858997]It has big stubby appendages that it relies on for movement All you'd need is a steel cable and two jeeps and you could immobilise it See: Star Wars[/QUOTE] Not if it is going over terrain impassable by jeeps... It'd be a bit stupid to have an undefended walker roaming around a desert or something.

Just glue a sticky bomb on the feet of the mech. Game over.

[QUOTE=Feuver;16859175]Just glue a sticky bomb on the feet of the mech. Game over.[/QUOTE] Sticky bomb on the tank, they would have the same amount of armour, game over too.

[QUOTE=Feuver;16859175]Just glue a sticky bomb on the feet of the mech. Game over.[/QUOTE] Didn't the British have some sort of anti-tank sticky nade back in WW2? [editline]12:56PM[/editline] [QUOTE=40kplayer;16769644]It'd be fun to have a weapon that could launch magma in a stream like a fire hose at people.[/QUOTE] nostalgia time [img]http://swg.gamona.de/images/FF/lava_cannon.jpg[/img]

Microwave gun. Cook people AND your fod at the same time.

A big part of the future of warfair will be robotic systems, we'll see lots of things like robotically enhanced vehicles that can do things like shoot down missiles or rockets fired at them automatically, or robotic artillery that can fire at locations automatically when sent info from commanders. Robotic flying drones already exist, but we'll see fully automatic ones, where commanders will give locations for them to scout and they'll go and identify enemy positions and points of interest automatically. Hell, it might end up being something like playing a rts game for those at the top.

Bengay on your balls, Instant flawless victory.

Oh and anything from starcraft 2 terran shit. Those starcraft idea people have crazy ideas.

Time release capsules that dissolve in water filled with a shit load of magnesium or some other material that reacts violently with water. Toss was in your canteen, instant grenade! Especially is they made canteens that self fragmented specifically for this purpose.

[QUOTE=urbanmonkey;16860977]Time release capsules that dissolve in water filled with a shit load of magnesium or some other material that reacts violently with water. Toss was in your canteen, instant grenade! Especially is they made canteens that self fragmented specifically for this purpose.[/QUOTE] You'd want caesium or francium, magnesium would just bubble slightly after a couple of hours.

The T-28 Super Heavy Tank. [img]http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3096/2861838588_3362fa8c1d.jpg[/img] Too bad it was never put into production.

[QUOTE=Hivemind;16859152]Not if it is going over terrain impassable by jeeps... It'd be a bit stupid to have an undefended walker roaming around a desert or something.[/QUOTE] Although on a side note, I'd hate to be the poor bastard trying to drive a jeep up to a mech in open desert. Of course, if you survived that, depending on what size mech we're talking about, it may just drag the jeeps along for a ride or tear the cable out/off the jeep. I'd imagine mechs might be good for asymmetrical warfare, where the enhanced mobility and better line of sight are more useful than heavy armor, plus big stompy things are fucking intimidating. Possibly useful as rocket launching platforms as well, since a mech could stand up to fire over a small building or something, then crouch back down behind it.

[QUOTE=Mr. Someguy;16862556]The T-28 Super Heavy Tank. [img]http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3096/2861838588_3362fa8c1d.jpg[/img] Too bad it was never put into production.[/QUOTE] I remember that from BF1942: The Secret Weapons of World War II. It was awesome. Also, I kinda see mechs being a low-slung affair with multiple legs that can be deployed in rough terrain for heavy support.

As for the possibility of mechs there's only one major problem as far as technology goes. We don't have a good power source, you can't exactly have them be nuclear powered for obvious reasons...

[QUOTE=lefundoof;16859383]Oh and anything from starcraft 2 terran shit. Those starcraft idea people have crazy ideas.[/QUOTE] Starcraft 2 siege tank + the missile packs for AA = FLAWLESS VICTORY! That or we just drop massive bombs of capsicum. Anyone naked will be on the floor screaming while they writhe in severe pain.

[QUOTE=Mr. Someguy;16862556]The T-28 Super Heavy Tank. [img]http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3096/2861838588_3362fa8c1d.jpg[/img] Too bad it was never put into production.[/QUOTE] It was too expensive, artillery and aircraft would be able to destroy it (big ass target too) and it wouldn't be able to go into city setting because it broke bridges,ground, ect.

[QUOTE=XeniKuna;16867341]As for the possibility of mechs there's only one major problem as far as technology goes. We don't have a good power source, you can't exactly have them be nuclear powered for obvious reasons...[/QUOTE] If we could get fusion to a feasible point that might be handy, you could obliterate one and get a quick flash of plasma, not really any release of radiation. As it is the size of nuclear reactors alone is prohibitive. Release of nuclear materials from an armored reactor would probably be tough to achieve, but despite that I wouldn't want to pit one against a few sabots from a tank gun.

[QUOTE=Carnotite;16867987]If we could get fusion to a feasible point that might be handy, you could obliterate one and get a quick flash of plasma, not really any release of radiation. As it is the size of nuclear reactors alone is prohibitive. Release of nuclear materials from an armored reactor would probably be tough to achieve, but despite that I wouldn't want to pit one against a few sabots from a tank gun.[/QUOTE] A mech that is known to run on nuclear power. Well you'd be fucking scared to shoot it, because then you'd die from radiation.

[QUOTE=Awesomecaek;16755042]What about thinking how to make it that we will no longer need weapons huh? Weapons are made for killing people. I would like more to see new energy sources or spaceship travel possibilities. Yes, weapons are cool, but most of effort ever put into weapon development is in better case never used, or used for killing/[/QUOTE] As long as there is more than one person on Earth, someone will want someone else dead.

[QUOTE=Hivemind;16859080]I disagree that a tank can have more armour, I don't see any reason why a tank could carry any more than a mech. You could armour the legs extensively, something you can't do with many parts of tank tracks, so I don't see why it would be a weak point. You assume that the mech is in terrain that a tank can move over, clearly tanks are going to be better in areas they can quickly navigate, but mechs could conceivably go places tanks cannot. [editline]05:49PM[/editline] Just because they look fragile in star wars doesn't mean they would be if made in real life, I don't see how something 'looking' impractical makes any sense. Again just because they move slow in sci-fi doesn't mean they have to in real life, the control systems behind them could keep balance perfectly even at high speeds.[/QUOTE] Alright. Tanks have very wide treads. They have a square shape on the bottom. Mechs have (in typical designs) two fairly small feet. The more armor you put on a vehicle, the more pressure it exerts on the ground. This is a non-issue on most paved roads and typical dirt terrain, but in swampy or rocky terrain with uncertain footing, the mech will have a much harder time not sinking into the ground, if it has the same weight. This is why tanks are excellent all-terrain vehicles: They weigh a lot, but their weight is spread out, leaving the psi under the vehicle within reasonable margins. This also invalidates the biggest reason why mech fans think mechs are realistic: Their supposed all-terrain capabilities would not exist. In conclusion: You and your ideas are silly. In addition to this, you would need expensive sensors on the feet to prevent the mech from stepping on land mines or falling into simple disguised pits dug by the enemy. The high silhouette of any mech would also make it very vulnerable to enemy fire. The mech's pilot would need a very complicated mechanism to avoid motion sickness. Firing while moving would be ten times as difficult due to the irregularity of the mech's movement. Any futuristic power supply that would allow a mech to propel itself would be put to better use in a tank or aircraft. Mech's can't be easily stored, much less concealed. They would be prohibitively expensive. You can see them from very far away. They would be very unstable if they were to use any kind of large cannon. They would require highly specialized training and the world's best mechanics. A nuclear blast would knock it over even from non-lethal ranges. At close range a mech would be sent flying.

[QUOTE=Sector 7;16868846]Alright. Tanks have very wide treads. They have a square shape on the bottom. Mechs have (in typical designs) two fairly small feet. The more armor you put on a vehicle, the more pressure it exerts on the ground. This is a non-issue on most paved roads and typical dirt terrain, but in swampy or rocky terrain with uncertain footing, the mech will have a much harder time not sinking into the ground, if it has the same weight. This is why tanks are excellent all-terrain vehicles: They weigh a lot, but their weight is spread out, leaving the psi under the vehicle within reasonable margins. This also invalidates the biggest reason why mech fans think mechs are realistic: Their supposed all-terrain capabilities would not exist. In conclusion: You and your ideas are silly. In addition to this, you would need expensive sensors on the feet to prevent the mech from stepping on land mines or falling into simple disguised pits dug by the enemy. The high silhouette of any mech would also make it very vulnerable to enemy fire. The mech's pilot would need a very complicated mechanism to avoid motion sickness. Firing while moving would be ten times as difficult due to the irregularity of the mech's movement. Any futuristic power supply that would allow a mech to propel itself would be put to better use in a tank or aircraft. Mech's can't be easily stored, much less concealed. They would be prohibitively expensive. You can see them from very far away. They would be very unstable if they were to use any kind of large cannon. They would require highly specialized training and the world's best mechanics. A nuclear blast would knock it over even from non-lethal ranges. At close range a mech would be sent flying.[/QUOTE] Listen to this man, and remember that reality =/= mechwarrior.

If we ever figure out how to reliably mutate genes, human "supersoldiers" might actually be a possibility.