Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

Landship

3 (30%)

Carrier

0 (0%)

Super Submarine

1 (10%)

Airship

6 (60%)

Total Members Voted: 10

[evilcherry]

Medium sized means medium sized in SRW, so its more Mazinkaiser rather than Combattler.

Huh. So it is. I always thought it was large (or maybe I'm getting it confused with the other Mazinkaisers).

That's why we need a pilot who's really good at dodging: So we can dodge at all.

I guess it makes sense.

I'm talking about OVA Mazinkaiser, not SRW one. SRW one is significantly larger.

[scapheap]

EDIT: Artillery mech, close-combat real mech, tank and missile spammer. Just need a super robot with a sword and we'd have hit most of the giant mecha archetypes, right?

We already have one. Mine.

[Unholy_Pariah]

EDIT: Artillery mech, close-combat real mech, tank and missile spammer. Just need a super robot with a sword and we'd have hit most of the giant mecha archetypes, right?

We already have one. Mine.

I think you were the close combat real mech.

[USEC_OFFICER]

I'm talking about OVA Mazinkaiser, not SRW one. SRW one is significantly larger.

...

I have no idea any more.

EDIT: Artillery mech, close-combat real mech, tank and missile spammer. Just need a super robot with a sword and we'd have hit most of the giant mecha archetypes, right?

We already have one. Mine.

I think you were the close combat real mech.

Indeed. Real robots dodge incoming attacks while super robots tank them. Which I guess makes Icarus a real robot.

[Unholy_Pariah]

EDIT: Artillery mech, close-combat real mech, tank and missile spammer. Just need a super robot with a sword and we'd have hit most of the giant mecha archetypes, right?

We already have one. Mine.

I think you were the close combat real mech.

Indeed. Real robots dodge incoming attacks while super robots tank them. Which I guess makes Icarus a real robot.

Unless Icarus tanks the shots using his plasma sheathe...

[USEC_OFFICER]

Unless Icarus tanks the shots using his plasma sheathe...

Real robots can have protective fields too. It's probably up to the GM as to what type robot you'll turn out to be, depending on how the sheathe and field manipulators work out stats-wise.

[Unholy_Pariah]

Unless Icarus tanks the shots using his plasma sheathe...

Real robots can have protective fields too. It's probably up to the GM as to what type robot you'll turn out to be, depending on how the sheathe and field manipulators work out stats-wise.

Evilcherry agreed to have my "HF-disruptor" function by passively reducing my mass up until i overcharged it which case id get a few turns of mass-less hyperspeed before losing all bonuses until it recharges.

I could probably become a super robot without altering my playstyle by tacking on some extra armor and changing my pilot perk to keeping Icarus functional even if it suffers catastrophic damage... but you know.. i like being the guy who deals the damage.

[10ebbor10]

On a side note, fun consequences of losing mass are:

-All your weapons loose mass too, therefore becoming just as effective as if they were made out of Styrofoam. Sharpened, and burning Styrofoam, but still Styrofoam.
-Knockback is multiplied heavily.
-If below a certain threshold*, Archimedean lift will cause your mech to float up into the atmosphere.
-Friction will wreck your mech. Also, make it almost impossible to move, as your kinetic energy becomes so low you can't even push air away.

*Ak, the density of air.

[Unholy_Pariah]

A.) All my weapons are energy based, also rule of cool.
B.) Weightless mech, not weightless plasma.
C.) Heavy knockback + thrusters = wheeee!
D.) Since when have giant robots ever made sense?

[10ebbor10]

A) Still, an energy blade without any kinetic energy backing it up is pretty pointless. Additionally, due to conservation of energy, any shots fired from the pistols during weightlessness would drop out of the air the moment they leave the field.
B) Exactly what I'm saying. Any weapon that hits you, or even when you hit things, will cause your mech to bounce away at very high speed. A bonus effect is that it'll do barely any damage. A side effect is that you'll be thrown away at nearly the same speed the bullet was impacting you add.
C) Thanks to the fact that the exhaust from the thrusters also hasn't got any mass, you're not going anywhere. Also, thanks to Archimedean lift you'll be floating up into the higher atmosphere. And You'll hurt yourself heavily when coming down.
D) Never. Though mentioning manipulating the Higgs field was probably the trigger for this sudden attack of scientific accuracy.

[Unholy_Pariah]

I have or can come up with counter arguments to all your arguments but tge fact of the matter is none of us really know exactly what disrupting the higgs field would do.

I mean seriously, it apparently would revert mass into potential energy but for all we know it could convert all matter within the field into pure energy and explode in our face, we just wont know until we try it.

[GreatWyrmGold]

On a side note, fun consequences of losing mass are:

-All your weapons loose mass too, therefore becoming just as effective as if they were made out of Styrofoam. Sharpened, and burning Styrofoam, but still Styrofoam.

So, like adamantine?

A) Still, an energy blade without any kinetic energy backing it up is pretty pointless. Additionally, due to conservation of energy, any shots fired from the pistols during weightlessness would drop out of the air the moment they leave the field.

1. Wrong. A lightsaber is a lightsaber, no matter how light. When you're burning material out of the way, density doesn't matter.
s. You are making assumptions; when you manipulate density, you're screwing with physics on a pretty fundamental level. Heck, since lower density at the same volume requires a loss of mass, your weapon already violates conservation of energy!

C) Thanks to the fact that the exhaust from the thrusters also hasn't got any mass, you're not going anywhere. Also, thanks to Archimedean lift you'll be floating up into the higher atmosphere. And You'll hurt yourself heavily when coming down.

1. He's going exactly as far as he would without the change in density.
2. Not if he fires thrusters downward!
3. Unless your field projects several hundred/thousand feet upward, and is turned off once they reach that point, they would have nothing to worry about. Still might not, depending on mech design.

I mean seriously, it apparently would revert mass into potential energy but for all we know it could convert all matter within the field into pure energy and explode in our face, we just wont know until we try it.

...
Anyone got a particle accelerator handy?

[10ebbor10]

On a side note, fun consequences of losing mass are:

-All your weapons loose mass too, therefore becoming just as effective as if they were made out of Styrofoam. Sharpened, and burning Styrofoam, but still Styrofoam.

So, like adamantine?

Adamantine is so sharp that it can cut individual atoms. The plasma saber isn't.

A) Still, an energy blade without any kinetic energy backing it up is pretty pointless. Additionally, due to conservation of energy, any shots fired from the pistols during weightlessness would drop out of the air the moment they leave the field.

1. Wrong. A lightsaber is a lightsaber, no matter how light. When you're burning material out of the way, density doesn't matter.
s. You are making assumptions; when you manipulate density, you're screwing with physics on a pretty fundamental level. Heck, since lower density at the same volume requires a loss of mass, your weapon already violates conservation of energy!

1. Still wrong. Your Lightsaber is quite pointless if a simple gust of wind can send it flying in your face. Remember, an object with nearly no mass is very easy to move, even if you're using a magnetical field to contain it. In fact, because you're probably containing it by rotating the plasma and attracting it with magnets from the middle, the entire thing would function as a gyroscope. Thereby, preventing the mech from making any sensible movement, as the gyroscopical forces would counteract any movement.
2. The weapon works by disturbing the Higgs field somehow. (Which is, theoretically impossible). This means that it effectively creates a field within objects have less mass, and a field outside where it does. There's nothing there to suggest that suggest an additional breakage of physics, therefore I'm referring to default rules

C) Thanks to the fact that the exhaust from the thrusters also hasn't got any mass, you're not going anywhere. Also, thanks to Archimedean lift you'll be floating up into the higher atmosphere. And You'll hurt yourself heavily when coming down.

1. He's going exactly as far as he would without the change in density.
2. Not if he fires thrusters downward!
3. Unless your field projects several hundred/thousand feet upward, and is turned off once they reach that point, they would have nothing to worry about. Still might not, depending on mech design.

I don't think you understood what I said.
1. The bubble of air surrounding him has a lower density than the rest of the air. Hence it floats upwards. Speed depends on the original mass of the craft.
2. Doesn't matter in what direction it happens to occur. Action = Reaction, and when the original action has no kinetic energy (m=0), neither does the cou nterreaction.
3. I'm assuming the field is centered around the mech(would be pretty pointless otherwise), also, it's not my field.

I mean seriously, it apparently would revert mass into potential energy but for all we know it could convert all matter within the field into pure energy and explode in our face, we just wont know until we try it.

It temporally suspends the Higgs field somehow. How is not a question. I'm just working by assuming a certain premise is true, and then illustrating what problems would occur, and what secondary powers would be needed.

[GreatWyrmGold]

On a side note, fun consequences of losing mass are:

-All your weapons loose mass too, therefore becoming just as effective as if they were made out of Styrofoam. Sharpened, and burning Styrofoam, but still Styrofoam.

So, like adamantine?

Adamantine is so sharp that it can cut individual atoms. The plasma saber isn't.

You're right, it just melts everything. Or vaporizes, more like.

A) Still, an energy blade without any kinetic energy backing it up is pretty pointless. Additionally, due to conservation of energy, any shots fired from the pistols during weightlessness would drop out of the air the moment they leave the field.

1. Wrong. A lightsaber is a lightsaber, no matter how light. When you're burning material out of the way, density doesn't matter.
s. You are making assumptions; when you manipulate density, you're screwing with physics on a pretty fundamental level. Heck, since lower density at the same volume requires a loss of mass, your weapon already violates conservation of energy!

1. Still wrong. Your Lightsaber is quite pointless if a simple gust of wind can send it flying in your face. Remember, an object with nearly no mass is very easy to move, even if you're using a magnetical field to contain it. In fact, because you're probably containing it by rotating the plasma and attracting it with magnets from the middle, the entire thing would function as a gyroscope. Thereby, preventing the mech from making any sensible movement, as the gyroscopical forces would counteract any movement.
2. The weapon works by disturbing the Higgs field somehow. (Which is, theoretically impossible). This means that it effectively creates a field within objects have less mass, and a field outside where it does. There's nothing there to suggest that suggest an additional breakage of physics, therefore I'm referring to default rules

1a. Don't gyroscopic forces depend on mass? Otherwise, spinning atoms would immobilize everything with their spinniness.
1b. That reduces accuracy, but not efficacy!
2a. Not being familiar with higher-level physics, isn't momentum basically a derived thing from mass and velocity? INHO, it would make just as much sense to say that the velocity stays the same as the momentum, so long as it stays constant.
2b. You admit that it's already impossible. Why are you bothering with those laws of physics?

C) Thanks to the fact that the exhaust from the thrusters also hasn't got any mass, you're not going anywhere. Also, thanks to Archimedean lift you'll be floating up into the higher atmosphere. And You'll hurt yourself heavily when coming down.

1. He's going exactly as far as he would without the change in density.
2. Not if he fires thrusters downward!
3. Unless your field projects several hundred/thousand feet upward, and is turned off once they reach that point, they would have nothing to worry about. Still might not, depending on mech design.

I don't think you understood what I said.
1. The bubble of air surrounding him has a lower density than the rest of the air. Hence it floats upwards. Speed depends on the original mass of the craft.
2. Doesn't matter in what direction it happens to occur. Action = Reaction, and when the original action has no kinetic energy (m=0), neither does the cou nterreaction.
3. I'm assuming the field is centered around the mech(would be pretty pointless otherwise), also, it's not my field.

1. Your point? Also, if it affects the air, then only the air would rise; the air would have lower density as well.
2. Wait, this reduces mass to zero? That screws everything up...
3. Definitely affects air, then. Anyways, if he keeps the lowered mass as he descends, his terminal velocity will be miniscule.

[10ebbor10]

On a side note, fun consequences of losing mass are:

-All your weapons loose mass too, therefore becoming just as effective as if they were made out of Styrofoam. Sharpened, and burning Styrofoam, but still Styrofoam.

So, like adamantine?

Adamantine is so sharp that it can cut individual atoms. The plasma saber isn't.

You're right, it just melts everything. Or vaporizes, more like.

Plasma isn't that hot. Probably fairly low density even without the field, in order to prevent it from frying the mech through irradiated heat.

A) Still, an energy blade without any kinetic energy backing it up is pretty pointless. Additionally, due to conservation of energy, any shots fired from the pistols during weightlessness would drop out of the air the moment they leave the field.

1. Wrong. A lightsaber is a lightsaber, no matter how light. When you're burning material out of the way, density doesn't matter.
s. You are making assumptions; when you manipulate density, you're screwing with physics on a pretty fundamental level. Heck, since lower density at the same volume requires a loss of mass, your weapon already violates conservation of energy!

1. Still wrong. Your Lightsaber is quite pointless if a simple gust of wind can send it flying in your face. Remember, an object with nearly no mass is very easy to move, even if you're using a magnetical field to contain it. In fact, because you're probably containing it by rotating the plasma and attracting it with magnets from the middle, the entire thing would function as a gyroscope. Thereby, preventing the mech from making any sensible movement, as the gyroscopical forces would counteract any movement.
2. The weapon works by disturbing the Higgs field somehow. (Which is, theoretically impossible). This means that it effectively creates a field within objects have less mass, and a field outside where it does. There's nothing there to suggest that suggest an additional breakage of physics, therefore I'm referring to default rules

1a. Don't gyroscopic forces depend on mass? Otherwise, spinning atoms would immobilize everything with their spinniness.
1b. That reduces accuracy, but not efficacy!
2a. Not being familiar with higher-level physics, isn't momentum basically a derived thing from mass and velocity? INHO, it would make just as much sense to say that the velocity stays the same as the momentum, so long as it stays constant.
2b. You admit that it's already impossible. Why are you bothering with those laws of physics?

1a. They do. Forgot about that. (Silly people screwing around with physics)
1b. In the event that gyroscopic forces existed, they would massively overpower the nonexistent kinetic energy. However, now that they don't exist, I realize that neither does the centrifugal force (not that that one ever existed,  but anyway) as such, said plasma containment system would result in the plasma converging on the magnet, ie, the robot frying itself. (Alternate plasma containment systems require magnets outside the plasma field, and are therefore problematic)
2a. There's a very significant difference between velocity being constant, and momentum being constant. For example, when you shoot a giant mech with a high speed bullet, it will barely move. Momentum remained constant, velocity barely changed. If however, the mech had no mass, then we get into really complicated physics, which I don't quite understand. Anyway, the mech would fly away at a very high speed
2b. Because that's the entire point of this discussion. The Question I'm asking here is, what if this entire thing didn't run on Handwavium?

C) Thanks to the fact that the exhaust from the thrusters also hasn't got any mass, you're not going anywhere. Also, thanks to Archimedean lift you'll be floating up into the higher atmosphere. And You'll hurt yourself heavily when coming down.

1. He's going exactly as far as he would without the change in density.
2. Not if he fires thrusters downward!
3. Unless your field projects several hundred/thousand feet upward, and is turned off once they reach that point, they would have nothing to worry about. Still might not, depending on mech design.

I don't think you understood what I said.
1. The bubble of air surrounding him has a lower density than the rest of the air. Hence it floats upwards. Speed depends on the original mass of the craft.
2. Doesn't matter in what direction it happens to occur. Action = Reaction, and when the original action has no kinetic energy (m=0), neither does the cou nterreaction.
3. I'm assuming the field is centered around the mech(would be pretty pointless otherwise), also, it's not my field.

1. Your point? Also, if it affects the air, then only the air would rise; the air would have lower density as well.
2. Wait, this reduces mass to zero? That screws everything up...
3. Definitely affects air, then. Anyways, if he keeps the lowered mass as he descends, his terminal velocity will be miniscule.

[/quote]
1. The mech and the bubble of air both have a mass zero. Both would rise upwards. The bubble of air probably would undergo a lot of turbulence, and the rise wouldn't be very smooth, but you don't need a lot of energy efficiency when the mass of an object is zero.
2. Yup

mass-less

3. He doesn't. In fact, after the overdrive ends, it reverts to default, not the standard reduced mass.

On a side note, I just realized something. When that thing goes massless, it looses the centripetal force of gravity, will rapidly drift towards space because of the Earth's rotation. (And the even bigger problem, that it is no longer attracted to the sun, and will be flung out of that orbit too)

Anyway, this should probably the end of this pointless exercise in uselessness, before we derail the trait.