hobgoblin
Dec 9 2007, 06:47 PM
Stahlseele
Dec 9 2007, 07:25 PM
looks as if the weapons would cost more than the actual drone body.
and if that things not spinning around fast enough, it will be a sitting duck, especially in urban fighting.
and look at how frail that things looks!
a good burst from an machine gun should be sufficient to take that thing out.
a grenade will probably easyly topple it over and if it were to hit upon a mine that thing will probably fly almost as far as it can shoot i'd think.
heck, an unarmed man could probably take care of that thing if he can stay out of the firing arc of that thing.
hobgoblin
Dec 9 2007, 07:33 PM
yes, but even with that, the cost of putting it back into action is the cost of the spare parts.
and if its totaled, noone will cry and complain. its only a machine after all...
and its only the beginning, they will refine and improve upon them given time...
Stahlseele
Dec 9 2007, 07:35 PM
heck, take one of those smaller tanks and make it so you can remote controll those . . if you want to be sure nobody else will take it over put the instructions into the tanks computer and let it loose . . kinda:"go there, make dead untill you run out of ammo" and then go in and get it back . .
Kyoto Kid
Dec 9 2007, 09:27 PM
...hehhehheh...
[edt] found the full poster version - the other was a desktop screen
Guns & Robots
Stahlseele
Dec 9 2007, 10:14 PM
guns kill people exactly the same as forks are making people fat . .
hobgoblin
Dec 9 2007, 10:25 PM
lets not start a gun debate...
if its one thing this forum dont need its necromancing that topic
Kyoto Kid
Dec 9 2007, 10:52 PM
...no intention to, just wanted to inject a little humor.
Narse
Dec 10 2007, 05:19 AM
QUOTE (hobgoblin) |
lets not start a gun debate...
if its one thing this forum dont need its necromancing that topic |
But I think it is imperative that we answer this most vital of questions!
Which is the better round .40S&W or .45ACP?
kzt
Dec 10 2007, 06:12 AM
We just need to get rid of those obsolete 11.47 mm bullets and go with round numbers, like 9 mm and 10 mm.
Actually, given the abstraction in SR the extent the developer and writers go to to try to produce differences between guns is silly. There just isn't any differences that makes sense in SR terms between damage of a .45, a .40, a 10 mm or a 9 mm. They all generally suck at dropping people right now without a head shot and they all can kill you dead with a good hit and they all have low odds of producing a fatal wound with one hit. And they are all better than .25s at both stopping and killing people.
Ed_209a
Dec 10 2007, 02:07 PM
QUOTE (Narse @ Dec 10 2007, 12:19 AM) |
But I think it is imperative that we answer this most vital of questions!
Which is the better round .40S&W or .45ACP? |
5.7mm FTW
It's good enough for Sam Fisher, that's good enough for me.

</Cracksmoking>
Anything larger than .380ACP works for me. This is because I would practice practice practice before I trusted my life to any gun. A 9mm to the CNS stops a fight better than a .500S&W Mag to the leg any day.
Stahlseele
Dec 10 2007, 03:10 PM
.50 BMG
Kyoto Kid
Dec 10 2007, 03:34 PM
...nerf rounds.
Caine Hazen
Dec 10 2007, 03:51 PM
Wait, that thing has 2 guns on it.. that breaks the rules... I wanna replace my current dobie with that!!
WAH WAH!!!

CHEATER!!!
Moon-Hawk
Dec 10 2007, 04:45 PM
QUOTE (Stahlseele) |
and if that things not spinning around fast enough, it will be a sitting duck, especially in urban fighting. and look at how frail that things looks! a good burst from an machine gun should be sufficient to take that thing out. a grenade will probably easyly topple it over and if it were to hit upon a mine that thing will probably fly almost as far as it can shoot i'd think. heck, an unarmed man could probably take care of that thing if he can stay out of the firing arc of that thing. |
Um, these things you say are all true of a human soldier as well. But hopefully at least some organizations would consider these to be more expendable.
Kerris
Dec 10 2007, 06:12 PM
QUOTE (Caine Hazen) |
Wait, that thing has 2 guns on it.. that breaks the rules... I wanna replace my current dobie with that!!
WAH WAH!!! CHEATER!!! |
Yeah, there's no way that thing has 6 body.
Stahlseele
Dec 10 2007, 06:25 PM
QUOTE (Moon-Hawk) |
QUOTE (Stahlseele @ Dec 9 2007, 02:25 PM) | and if that things not spinning around fast enough, it will be a sitting duck, especially in urban fighting. and look at how frail that things looks! a good burst from an machine gun should be sufficient to take that thing out. a grenade will probably easyly topple it over and if it were to hit upon a mine that thing will probably fly almost as far as it can shoot i'd think. heck, an unarmed man could probably take care of that thing if he can stay out of the firing arc of that thing. |
Um, these things you say are all true of a human soldier as well. But hopefully at least some organizations would consider these to be more expendable.
|
not quite. there's nothing better for urban fighting than a (super)human being.
also: guerilla wars and the such like terrorists will still use humans over machines any day . . 'cause a 500$ Rifle and some days of training with ammo for another 500$ maybe is way more cost efficient than getting one of those things . . 'cause you can get 50 people with that and 50 people are way better than one of those thingies with 2 fixed guns O.o
Ed_209a
Dec 10 2007, 07:28 PM
QUOTE (Stahlseele) |
also: guerrilla wars and the such like terrorists will still use humans over machines any day . . 'cause a 500$ Rifle and some days of training with ammo for another 500$ maybe is way more cost efficient than getting one of those things . . 'cause you can get 50 people with that and 50 people are way better than one of those thingies with 2 fixed guns O.o |
That works for terrorists and insurgencies because they don't have life insurance.
Every US serviceman has $300K of life insurance available to him/her. They pay less than 20 dollars a month for it. (or did in '04) You also pay a lot to train them.
Therefore, if losing 5, $50K warbots keeps 1 soldier from dying, you are still $50K ahead.
hobgoblin
Dec 10 2007, 07:34 PM
QUOTE (Ed_209a) |
QUOTE (Stahlseele @ Dec 10 2007, 01:25 PM) | also: guerrilla wars and the such like terrorists will still use humans over machines any day . . 'cause a 500$ Rifle and some days of training with ammo for another 500$ maybe is way more cost efficient than getting one of those things . . 'cause you can get 50 people with that and 50 people are way better than one of those thingies with 2 fixed guns O.o |
That works for terrorists and insurgencies because they don't have life insurance.
Every US serviceman has $300K of life insurance available to him/her. They pay less than 20 dollars a month for it. (or did in '04) You also pay a lot to train them.
Therefore, if losing 5, $50K warbots keeps 1 soldier from dying, you are still $50K ahead.
|
also, you can often salvage the remains of those old bots to get one or more of then back in working order. to some degree you can do that with soldiers to, but not over night in a dusty work shed
FriendoftheDork
Dec 10 2007, 07:38 PM
QUOTE (Ed_209a) |
QUOTE (Stahlseele @ Dec 10 2007, 01:25 PM) | also: guerrilla wars and the such like terrorists will still use humans over machines any day . . 'cause a 500$ Rifle and some days of training with ammo for another 500$ maybe is way more cost efficient than getting one of those things . . 'cause you can get 50 people with that and 50 people are way better than one of those thingies with 2 fixed guns O.o |
That works for terrorists and insurgencies because they don't have life insurance.
Every US serviceman has $300K of life insurance available to him/her. They pay less than 20 dollars a month for it. (or did in '04) You also pay a lot to train them.
Therefore, if losing 5, $50K warbots keeps 1 soldier from dying, you are still $50K ahead.
|
So what you're saying is that we should get terrorists, drug dealers and other criminals to do the work for us?
Wait, we're already doing that in Afghanistan
hobgoblin
Dec 10 2007, 07:38 PM
QUOTE (FriendoftheDork) |
QUOTE (Ed_209a @ Dec 10 2007, 08:28 PM) | QUOTE (Stahlseele @ Dec 10 2007, 01:25 PM) | also: guerrilla wars and the such like terrorists will still use humans over machines any day . . 'cause a 500$ Rifle and some days of training with ammo for another 500$ maybe is way more cost efficient than getting one of those things . . 'cause you can get 50 people with that and 50 people are way better than one of those thingies with 2 fixed guns O.o |
That works for terrorists and insurgencies because they don't have life insurance.
Every US serviceman has $300K of life insurance available to him/her. They pay less than 20 dollars a month for it. (or did in '04) You also pay a lot to train them.
Therefore, if losing 5, $50K warbots keeps 1 soldier from dying, you are still $50K ahead.
|
So what you're saying is that we should get terrorists, drug dealers and other criminals to do the work for us? Wait, we're already doing that in Afghanistan |
and what hell of a job they are doing
ludomastro
Dec 11 2007, 12:57 AM
I know, for a little more we can add a satellite link to these and then link them all together with a system called Skynet ....
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please
click here.