Draxus Posted June 13, 2011 Report Share Posted June 13, 2011 (edited) Realistically smaller vehicles like MT's and helos would be the AC's demise. AC's would go the way of the battleship in that smaller vehicles would cost effectually beat you. That is if they did realistic damage. Edited June 13, 2011 by Duronix Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harakiri Tiger Posted June 13, 2011 Report Share Posted June 13, 2011 I think Exorcet meant the helicopter that ferries an AC in more than the helis that attacked the AC. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Liarbird Posted June 13, 2011 Report Share Posted June 13, 2011 could be fuel constraints, or the fact that dust fucks up servos. Carrying in a mecha and activating it on the battlefield actually lowers maintenance costs on the machine itself. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shirtless Crackhead Posted June 13, 2011 Report Share Posted June 13, 2011 AC's don't work in real life, why? http://i.imgur.com/tLGcv.jpg ^ This will penetrate 14.5 inches of rolled homogeneous steel, no land mobile platform such as an AC, which would invariably rely on hydraulics and such for driving the body, along with other sensitive things like fuel tanks, etc.. etc.. would be anywhere near well protected enough from any number of weapons systems. Also... http://i.imgur.com/JhE3r.jpg ^ This would have more range and generally be out of reach of most weapons available to a ground based platform, and 105mm HEAP's would destroy anything like an AC. Even if they developed harder or used thicker armor, it wouldn't be hard to simply beef up the ordnance enough to smash it. AC's are too big, too slow to be worth the money they'd cost. Trying to put mechs into a real world combat scenario is plagued with problems, what's why nobody really looks to that as an option. I want IED's (EFP's to be specific) in ACV, just to put that point forward. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Liarbird Posted June 13, 2011 Report Share Posted June 13, 2011 AC's don't work in real life, why? ^ This will penetrate 14.5 inches of rolled homogeneous steel, no land mobile platform such as an AC, which would invariably rely on hydraulics and such for driving the body, along with other sensitive things like fuel tanks, etc.. etc.. would be anywhere near well protected enough from any number of weapons systems. Also... ^ This would have more range and generally be out of reach of most weapons available to a ground based platform, and 105mm HEAP's would destroy anything like an AC. Even if they developed harder or used thicker armor, it wouldn't be hard to simply beef up the ordnance enough to smash it. AC's are too big, too slow to be worth the money they'd cost. Trying to put mechs into a real world combat scenario is plagued with problems, what's why nobody really looks to that as an option. I want IED's (EFP's to be specific) in ACV, just to put that point forward. Oh there's a myriad of problems. such as the Square Cube law, and other nice things. Mecha are also really goddamned maintenance intensive, more so than any aircraft, and if one falls? well, that pilot will end up hurt badly or dead, just from the machine falling forward or backward. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harakiri Tiger Posted June 13, 2011 Report Share Posted June 13, 2011 FROM SOFTWARE uses fairies in the cockpit to keep the pilot alive in bad situations like that. They got the idea when they saw Link capture one in a bottle and whenever he dies the fairies insta-revive him. The technology of the future. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Griffon Posted June 13, 2011 Report Share Posted June 13, 2011 Nobody was tying to call ACs realistic, just trying to see how FROM may try to fit a little realism into the story. Any story involving giant robots will inherently be unrealistic and we all know that (I hope), but that doesn't mean they cant try and alleviate that a bit and we can't discuss their efforts to do so. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Exorcet Posted June 13, 2011 Report Share Posted June 13, 2011 Sending an Apache at an AC is stupid, but remember AC's are not the main fighters in Armored Core, it's MT's that are the main units in warfare, and an Apache vs a MT makes much more sense. We control AC's and that is why it's easy to forget that AC's are only for serious missions the companies can't afford to fail. Though I admit the power gap between AC's and MT's is ridiculous, and should be smaller. Apaches would murder AC's. I'm just saying that it's 443ou35u5ou3oyo53ou34 years in the future, but Apaches still exist apparently. At least in AC3 they made up planes and stuff, and they looked fairly plausible most of the time. I do agree that the gap between AC and MT should shrink. Also smaller isn't always better. The "battleship effect" doesn't necessarily work with fighters. 100 Predators isn't worth 1 F-22. The thing is AC's just don't really do anything all that well. One role they might be good at [assuming they're not crazy expensive] is urban conflict, especially with their smaller size now, but they have pathetic range as always (now without even radar) and probably would only be effective against other AC's or tanks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shirtless Crackhead Posted June 13, 2011 Report Share Posted June 13, 2011 For most purposes though Predators > F-22's, we don't have that big of an air superiority issue as far as air power requirements go as much as we do CAS. Also in a couple of years new Predators will be able to network with a new type of Global Hawk that can track targets for the lowly Predators beyond it's optical range, and they'll be strong enough to carry full size ATA/ATG weaponry. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YUNG MASTERLESS GLENCOUR Posted June 13, 2011 Report Share Posted June 13, 2011 Yeah I'm with raor. I think saying the f22 is superior to the predator is a big misnomer, for lack of a better term. Predators fuck shit up and are way easier to use and deploy than f22s for most any purpose sans dogfights...which aren't really dogfights anymore. Sure, the f22 is superior if a predator and an f22 went at it head to head, but why in god's name would that ever happen? They fit different roles. An Apache would brutalize an AC. There was this mech game, way back...shit...it was really good but I can't remember the game. anyways, the mechs were the best battle platform in the game but there was no way they could win a war alone. Helicopters, tanks, all kinds of shit could roll them no sweat. The mechs were like only 10-15 feet or something in that game iirc, tho. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shirtless Crackhead Posted June 13, 2011 Report Share Posted June 13, 2011 Plus I'm pretty sure for the cost of 1 F-22 you could get a whole crew of Predators and equipment with like Stingers or something gnarly and swarm it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YUNG MASTERLESS GLENCOUR Posted June 13, 2011 Report Share Posted June 13, 2011 You can. Yeah. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shirtless Crackhead Posted June 13, 2011 Report Share Posted June 13, 2011 Zerg rush by Predator drone is how the State of Danger plans to win future wars. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Liarbird Posted June 13, 2011 Report Share Posted June 13, 2011 Yeah I'm with raor. I think saying the f22 is superior to the predator is a big misnomer, for lack of a better term. Predators fuck shit up and are way easier to use and deploy than f22s for most any purpose sans dogfights...which aren't really dogfights anymore. Sure, the f22 is superior if a predator and an f22 went at it head to head, but why in god's name would that ever happen? They fit different roles. An Apache would brutalize an AC. There was this mech game, way back...shit...it was really good but I can't remember the game. anyways, the mechs were the best battle platform in the game but there was no way they could win a war alone. Helicopters, tanks, all kinds of shit could roll them no sweat. The mechs were like only 10-15 feet or something in that game iirc, tho. Heavy Gear I believe was the game Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YUNG MASTERLESS GLENCOUR Posted June 13, 2011 Report Share Posted June 13, 2011 Yeah thats it! Good work dood. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shirtless Crackhead Posted June 13, 2011 Report Share Posted June 13, 2011 BAE is working on an unmanned tank, called the Black Knight. These too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Griffon Posted June 13, 2011 Report Share Posted June 13, 2011 (edited) To help get this back on-topic a bit... This week 4Gamer have a piece on the details behind area acquisition and how that culminates in effectively an AC face-off as well as some information on the game’s back story. Much like the 1997 original, humanity has suffered a global catastrophe, though this time brought about by environmental forces. With wars erupting across the globe as resources become precious and suitably rare. The interesting twist though is that the AC’s actually pre-date this devastation and are dug up from deep underground, in a manner not too dissimilar to the events in Panzer World Galient. Separately, there are now new character types known as “migrants” that travel between areas of the world to trade resources (including weapons). Whether these will act as mobile shops is not clear as yet though. EDIT: Also a few new screens, nothing too much though, aside from quite possibly one of the first good looks at a LW. Edited June 13, 2011 by Griffon Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lenin Posted June 13, 2011 Author Report Share Posted June 13, 2011 I'd really rather not have to do some WoW style grinding in my AC games. I'd also rather not have to wait for the mexicans to show up with the rifle I want. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YUNG MASTERLESS GLENCOUR Posted June 13, 2011 Report Share Posted June 13, 2011 hahaha dood I want to be a Migrant. I'm gonna transport goods via donkey. Coffee and guns. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Exorcet Posted June 13, 2011 Report Share Posted June 13, 2011 (edited) For most purposes though Predators > F-22's, we don't have that big of an air superiority issue as far as air power requirements go as much as we do CAS. Also in a couple of years new Predators will be able to network with a new type of Global Hawk that can track targets for the lowly Predators beyond it's optical range, and they'll be strong enough to carry full size ATA/ATG weaponry. Even with full size weapons, the Predator can't deliver them as well as a full size fighter. It's slower, clumsier, shorter ranged, and less able to defend itself. For most situations we're facing now, the Pred makes more sense to use, yes. But in a "major war" (WWII scale) the F-22 is vastly better, and not just in air to air, see below. Yeah I'm with raor. I think saying the f22 is superior to the predator is a big misnomer, for lack of a better term. Predators fuck shit up and are way easier to use and deploy than f22s for most any purpose sans dogfights...which aren't really dogfights anymore. Sure, the f22 is superior if a predator and an f22 went at it head to head, but why in god's name would that ever happen? They fit different roles. I wasn't referring to head to head between F-22 and drone. Imagine Cold War gone hot and you need to strike some Russian SA-10's to open up a gap for your bombers to level factories and air bases. Predators would probably be wiped out by SHORAD long before they neared the SA-10's while a single F-22 could potentially get in unseen, bomb a few of them, and get out. We're not even assuming that there's enemy fighters about. You also don't get that many Preds for a Raptor. $150,000,000 vs $5,000,000 = 30 Preds/F-22. AAA and MANPAD's are enough to take out the former, but are near useless on the latter. Preds have only two hardpoints each compared to the F-22's 8-12 internal and additional 4-6 external. Combine that with the F-22's much longer range sensors (and it too can datalink and get info from other weapons) and greater speed+range and it begins to look like the lone F-22 can cover a good bit of the territory that the 30 Predators could. Depending on the threats about, the F-22 might actually cover more. And on the Pred rush, they probably wouldn't even see the F-22. 30 Predators is more than the F-22 can carry in missiles (though gun is realistic vs Preds), but if the Preds are intercepting the F-22, they would never get a shot off. If the Preds were defending something, the F-22 would likely just ignore them at Mach 1.5. This is on topic because the word "AC" is in this post. Edited June 13, 2011 by Exorcet Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YUNG MASTERLESS GLENCOUR Posted June 13, 2011 Report Share Posted June 13, 2011 Yeah, see, that's all good and everything, but that's all hypotheticals. Raor and I were both referring to how things really are, right now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Exorcet Posted June 13, 2011 Report Share Posted June 13, 2011 Why would that invalidate anything? I was making the point that numbers aren't everything. My examples were hypothetical, but realistic. Weapons continue to become more and more pricey and harder to build in bulk, but no one is settling for yesterday's technology. The Predator fills its roll well, but it would never fill the roll of a F-22 no matter how inexpensive it may be. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YUNG MASTERLESS GLENCOUR Posted June 13, 2011 Report Share Posted June 13, 2011 (edited) EDIT: I erased my argument. If you don't agree, you don't agree. Let's get back to normal AC5 instead. Or at the very least, a game worth discussing, like Dark Souls. Edited June 13, 2011 by Penguin Deus Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shirtless Crackhead Posted June 13, 2011 Report Share Posted June 13, 2011 Cuz Predators w/ magnets. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
South Q Posted June 13, 2011 Report Share Posted June 13, 2011 Migrant? Oh joy! I can pretend to be that Merchant guy from Resident evil 4. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.