Steve Jackson Games - Site Navigation
Home General Info Follow Us Search Illuminator Store Forums What's New Other Games Ogre GURPS Munchkin Our Games: Home

Go Back   Steve Jackson Games Forums > Roleplaying > Roleplaying in General

 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Prev Previous Post   Next Post Next
Old 11-10-2015, 12:24 AM   #6
Johnny1A.2
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Default Re: What areIssues of Transforming Robots or Robots that Combine into Bigger Mechs?

Quote:
Originally Posted by The Colonel View Post
There's also issues like the requirement for massive engineering redundancy in any single transforming vehicle as mechanical loads change between forms. This goes up by another exponent if you then assemble the vehicle into a load bearing part of something else.
Also, the most important part of most vehicles is the pilot - if you assemble five vehicles into one, you've got four guys sat their like drunken monkeys whilst the fifth does all the work.
In the case of Combatra from the old comic that I cited, IIRC the pilot was in the head, as is usual in humanoid mecha (though that, too, makes little logical sense in itself, the chest would be more logical), and when the mecha split up into five, the pilot flew the head-aircraft and AI systems few the other machines under the general direction of the pilot, but there was provision for living pilots if they were available.

As I noted, using that set of assumptions, I could imagine that the pilot might link the vehicles up physically when not in battle or just in transit from point A to point B, just to simplify operating the whole thing. But why does the assembly need to be humanoid?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Disliker of the mary sue View Post
Hm interesting, The only justification for human like giant robots I found I liked is that in systems like in pacfic rim where you control the robot with your body/mind, that it easier for the human mind to grasp the idea to walk like a human rather then having to learn an entirely different method of walking. But brain controlled machinery seems to be a thing that won't be a thing before at least tl 9 to above if it even a thing that is possible.
Oh, it's almost surely possible. Difficult to implement, but there's no reason to think it can't be done, and it might even eventually be useful.

But here's another subtle point about giant mecha that is often overlooked. The 'human shape controlled by a human brain' idea is often used as a justification, but physics says no. It's the square-cube law again, that same old rule that messes the giant ants from the 50s SF movies.

Any object, when you increase its size by a factor of 'x', but keep the shape the same, increases its area by a factor of x squared, but it's volume by a factor of x cubed. If you have a cubical box 1 foot on a side, its surface area is 6 square feet and its volume is 1 cubic foot.

If we double it to 2 feet on a side, now its surface area is 24 square feet, and its volume is eight cubic feet. If we go to 3 feet on a side, now the surface area is 54 square feet and the volume is 27 cubic feet. At 4 feet on a side, the area is 96 square feet and the volume is up to 64 cubic feet.

See how the ratio changes? We go from 6-1, to 24-8, to 54-27, to 96-64.

At 5 on a side, now the ratio is 150-125, a 6 on a side it's 216-216, at 7 it's 294-343...

What that means is that mass is going to rise way faster than linear size. A humanoid shape twice as tall masses 8 times as much, so it needs a power source 8 times as large to get the same basic performance. But its ratio of surface-area to volume is only a fraction of that difference, so it has a harder time getting rid of excess heat.*

Structural strength rises as the square of the area of a supporting member, but mass rises as the cube, so a leg twice as big as a normal man's is only 4 times stronger, but supports a mass 8 times as great. A leg 3 times the size of a normal human leg is 9 times as strong (for a given material) but now has to support 27 times the weight.

What all this means is that a human-shaped mecha 30 feet high, or 50 feet high, won't move like a human, even if it's shaped like one. A human brain trying to apply human-scale motive instincts to a machine 50 feet tall will get...weird...results, at best, because it's as if he suddenly weighs 578 times as much but is only 40 times as strong. Leverage will be different, response time will be different, too.

My arm is a tad over 2 feet long. If I swing it in a round circle, my fingertip describes a circle roughly 14 feet in circumference. Let's say I take 1 second to do that, which is easily done. That means my fingertip is moving at about 14 feet per second or roughly 10 miles/hour.

Now let's say I'm piloting a 50 foot humanoid mecha and execute that same maneuver. My mecha-arm is now almost 18 feet long, it describes a circle not quite 56 feet in circumference. So in that 1-second circle, my mecha-fingertip is moving at 38 miles/hour instead of ten. So the kinetic energy is out of scale with my human form, the reaction time is off, the leverage is different because my 'body' is relatively massive compared to my strength, etc.

A human would have to relearn every motion to operate a 50 foot mecha. Nothing would come easily or naturally, even if the shape was exactly proportional.

*Remember that excess heat from the power plant? The bigger the human-shaped mecha, the worse that issue becomes, because that energy has to be radiated from the surface of the mecha, but every time the size doubles, the area increases by 4 and the volume (and heat) by 8, so the surface temperature to get rid of that heat has rise and rise and rise...

Last edited by Johnny1A.2; 11-10-2015 at 12:31 AM.
Johnny1A.2 is offline   Reply With Quote
 

Tags
mechs, megazord, transformers


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Fnords are Off
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 06:28 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.