Effects of Mecha Mooks on warfare and society?

[jason taylor]

Originally Posted by Astromancer

But mecha mooks, would they be persons at all?

Depends on how much is programed into them. The mere fact that they are shaped like humans is irrelevant; a mannikin is also shaped like a human. They would probably be no more then tanks. After all one of the purposes of building Mecha's is to spare humans the trouble. If Mecha's are programed to an intelligence level equiv to humans that takes away some of the point and you should just make battlesuits.

Also there are disadvantages to intelligence in battle. Self-preservation instinct should be limited to the tactical consideration of a warbot's masters and a warbot capability of contracting PTSD has no advantages at all. Not to mention that intelligent warbots might mutiny.

[Kalzazz]

My off and on Space Opera Fantasy setting includes the Star Republic's 'Munchkin' Infantry Combat Robot

The Munchkin is a Cheap TL 10 Child Body Android stats wise, so its ST 10 and thus weaker than a many human soldiers, and give it HT 9 also (its cheap and breaks easy), but it can still wield many normal human weapons

The Star Republic also makes Munchkin sized armor and such to give them

[Fred Brackin]

Originally Posted by vicky_molokh

So . . . how would that plausibly change both warfare and civilian society, assuming that we take the concept for granted?

In a world where the people in charge do not posses the severely flawed intelligence of those who do not read the Evil Overlord List cheap robots would have to be _good_ for some thing at some level.

There';s no such thing as a weapons system so cheap you can afford to lose because you chose it.

If all these things are trusted to do is mop the floors (and not at nuclear power plants eeither) they won't have much impact on socieity.

So, what are they good for?

[fredtheobviouspseudonym]

I like the image of a mecha walking the dog.

This may be less imaginary than we think. The "Big Dog" 'droid prototype does a pretty good job walking on uneven terrain -- and IIRC that's the main problem with creating a combat robot. There are sensors galore that can pick out a human target from the weeds -- and all you have to do is hook up a functional CPU and suitable weapons' system and bang! you're on your way.

Now, of course, there would be considerable practical problems but they would, IMHO, be fixable. So -- if you had a dumb killer robot what would you do with it?

I wouldn't want, for example, certain Middle Eastern leaders to have them. They could be the ultimate Hessian, happy to mow down your disgruntled and riotous civilians without remorse, pity, or fear. No danger of any hidden disloyalty or rebel sympathy in your goon squads. They probably wouldn't work well on the battlefield but in the streets & alleys against unarmed civilians . . .

[kdtipa]

The impact of robotics like that is an interesting subject. And I hate to point to anime to begin my response, but Gundam Wing addresses this to some degree specifically with respect to using robots in wars. The series goes on to suggest that if robots replace soldiers we'll lose something. Wars will be entirely push button, and there won't be as much meaning. A human soldier dying means a lot more than a piece of equipment. So battles fought between pieces of equipment won't mean anything. And when the person pushing the button gets to the point where the robots reach human targets... the person pushing the button won't be there face to face with the opponents... their decision will not feel like it has any moral weight. They won't be forced to face the decision to take life in the same way. So the series suggests that we would actually become more cruel when other things do the fighting for us.

I think it's a fair possibility that the people in control of these robotic forces would lose sight of the importance of the decision to take life.

In addition, I think it's probable that we'd see a bit of what we see today. In World War I and II, the entire population of the countries involved were affected directly. Many had to do work to support the war effort. Everyone was involved enough to understand the weight of the fighting... to understand the meaning.

Now, we send troops all over the place to face danger, and I honestly don't know why certain decisions are made. Maybe there's good reason. Maybe there isn't. And the news media doesn't know any better. We (as Americans) aren't as involved, so the fighting doesn't mean as much to us. It's just a vague concept to us as individuals unless we join the military or at least have a close relative or friend in the military to give us a reason to care. I suspect that if all a country is doing is risking robots, the people would care even less. I think people would only care about their tax money funding it.

I don't know if any of that helped... but I do like thinking about this.

[Ulzgoroth]

It seems like the obvious thing to do with mecha mooks is take about every soldier you've got who can manage tactical thinking for more than one body and give them a fire team of mooks.

Originally Posted by Fred Brackin

In a world where the people in charge do not posses the severely flawed intelligence of those who do not read the Evil Overlord List cheap robots would have to be _good_ for some thing at some level.

There';s no such thing as a weapons system so cheap you can afford to lose because you chose it.

If all these things are trusted to do is mop the floors (and not at nuclear power plants eeither) they won't have much impact on socieity.

So, what are they good for?

There is such a thing as a weapon system so cheap you can afford to use a lot of it without trading away the other things you actually need, though.

As for society, they'd be dumb, but not the kind of dumb that leads to humans operating heavy machinery while drunk, skipping critical steps out of laziness or haste, and generally being reckless. They could probably displace a lot of unskilled labor if a bot is cheaper.

Originally Posted by fredtheobviouspseudonym

I wouldn't want, for example, certain Middle Eastern leaders to have them. They could be the ultimate Hessian, happy to mow down your disgruntled and riotous civilians without remorse, pity, or fear. No danger of any hidden disloyalty or rebel sympathy in your goon squads. They probably wouldn't work well on the battlefield but in the streets & alleys against unarmed civilians . . .

I'd suggest that streets and alleys are in many respects the most challenging battlefields, where lack of smarts is most likely to hurt you.

Mecha Mooks would still be good there, for their expendability and, depending on one's goals, the other traits you mention.

[Astromancer]

Originally Posted by ericthered

In the context of battle, killing enemy soldiers is not seen as evil. but I agree that there is a difference: slaughtering one is regrettable, while you are expected to offer surrender, terms, ect. to the other.

The question for me is whether its acceptable for two side to say "lets just settle our differences in ritualized robot warfare on the battle planet instead of all this posturing"

Ritual combat, which would greatly reduce civilian deaths and misery, is generally better than full scale warfare. Morally it is way better because, in most cases, only soldiers, who've consented to be there are there. The unwilling and the innocent are left out. However, getting anyone to abide by the outcome is tricky. Generally, if losing the war is only a loss of wealth/status that can be patched over later, ritual combat to replace war makes sense. If losing a war means disgrace, loss of political power with little chance of regaining it, and/or death (typical aspects of losing modern wars), then ritual combat would never be accepted. At least not if the other side has any chance of winning.

This crowd probably should read The Dictators Handbook. It's a lovely breath of cynical, and solidly backed by historical evidence, air.

[combatmedic]

Originally Posted by dcarson

If you want bad things, if cheap enough they squeeze the low end of the job market. Maybe lots of servants also.

In Machine Lord society, VUASO, that's not a bad thing at all. The droids form the lower classes.

[combatmedic]

Originally Posted by ericthered

I think we're dealing with semi-persons here: they have intelligence, but its considered inferior to human.

I'm not sure that the tech allows really small robots.

The most effective may not be humanoid though: miniature modern vehicles would be fairly effective.

Yes, inferior (in intelligence and creativity) persons. That's how the Machine Lords see droids, anyway.(A Quirk for the race, which implies most people just see machines) There's a certain element of paternalism at work in this.
I think Star Wars droids would be a good basis for the ML droids. But the Machine Lords aren't effin' idiots like the Trade Federation of the prequels; they would use their battle droids in a much smarter way. Droids can be pretty smart, but they lack full human creativity and free will. C3PO has a distinct personality, but he follows his protocol droid programming. He can’t just decide to be something else. R2D2 doesn't write poetry; he's an Astromech, so he fixes stuff.

[vicky_molokh]

Originally Posted by combatmedic

Yes, inferior (in intelligence and creativity) persons. That's how the Machine Lords see droids, anyway.(A Quirk for the race, which implies most people just see machines) There's a certain element of paternalism at work in this.

Makes me wonder about the spectrum between a working animal/pet and a simpleton peon.

Originally Posted by combatmedic

I think Star Wars droids would be a good basis for the ML droids. But the Machine Lords aren't effin' idiots like the Trade Federation of the prequels; they would use their battle droids in a much smarter way. Droids can be pretty smart, but they lack full human creativity and free will.

Specifically for VUASO, we should probably decide on just what range of minds robots can have. My initial proposal was NAI at DX 8 IQ 8 and max skill 12. But that's more because I had to start somewhere.

Originally Posted by combatmedic

C3PO has a distinct personality, but he follows his protocol droid programming. He can’t just decide to be something else. R2D2 doesn't write poetry; he's an Astromech, so he fixes stuff.

That's what he says. Just look at the stuff he does, and tell me this isn't a cover story.