The Workshops

8bitCosmonaut

Convenient Store Commando
Expert
Veteran
Registered
Elon who?
#10
There is no point hiding your work on the incognito site, its a work of art in my opinion, and should be shown off to everyone.

I've got a challenge for you, build an MG42 replica that have a working feed tray and barrel changer!
Damn, I wish I'll get armor like this when I join the army!
1562143893595.png
 

8bitCosmonaut

Convenient Store Commando
Expert
Veteran
Registered
Elon who?
#20
While humans need to reach a humane 18 years of age and requires years of training to effectively fight on the battlefield. A bipedal machine soldier can be mass produced and fully programmed (trained) to fight within hours.

And those things can be built like walking armored carriers, which makes them highly resistant against small arms fire. The only way of effectively destroying one is to use either high caliber weaponry or explosives.
 

Horus Lupercal

Mother of the of F**k - Piece of D**ks
Professor
Expert
Registered
Elon who?
Performance Tuner
#21
In all honesty, the whole thing would be shit.
The learning curve for fighting machines compared to humans would be ridiculous. Most weapons would be useless.
To kill a machine, you have to break it beyond functionality. Most weapons we have are designed to make holes, not destroy a target completely. Putting a hole anywhere in a human will generally put it out of action, where as unless you hit something incredibly important on a machine then it won't make a difference.

You can't demoralise a machine, can't convince it not to fight.
'It can’t be bargained with. It can’t be reasoned with. It doesn’t feel pity, or remorse, or fear. And it absolutely will not stop, ever, until you are dead'


A soldier's worst nightmare?
I wouldn't say that as such. As an enemy that couldn't be stopped, yes. But on even terms, if we had means of bringing them down as easy as we could anything else, then all things considered I'd rather fight Terminators than African child soldiers. They're just as mind wiped, but I'd sleep a lot easier after one rather than the other
 

8bitCosmonaut

Convenient Store Commando
Expert
Veteran
Registered
Elon who?
#22
You can't demoralise a machine, can't convince it not to fight.
'It can’t be bargained with. It can’t be reasoned with. It doesn’t feel pity, or remorse, or fear. And it absolutely will not stop, ever, until you are dead'
The ultimate soldier.

But what about sectors other than ground troops? navy? air force? space?
 

Horus Lupercal

Mother of the of F**k - Piece of D**ks
Professor
Expert
Registered
Elon who?
Performance Tuner
#23
You'd have to re-think everything if you fought machines. Tactically, they'd outmatch squishy humans, and strategically as well, because they'd all be connected, what one knows, all knows so it'd be difficult to deceive or confuse them.

You'd have to go after the supply and resource. Humans can survive for long time frames away from resupply, and depending on the force in question, could live off the land and only need 'lethal aid' rather than food/water.

Machines would suffer from the same problems as a millennial with an iPhone. Must be within WiFi range, and needs plugging in every 18 hours. Use small SF teams and precision strike assets to nail the control centres, charging stations, power supply networks, and you'll bring down. ECM, incliment weather, which wouldn't effect human soldiers at all, would cause havoc to externally controlled robotics
 

Horus Lupercal

Mother of the of F**k - Piece of D**ks
Professor
Expert
Registered
Elon who?
Performance Tuner
#24
The ultimate soldier.

But what about sectors other than ground troops? navy? air force? space?
The navy wouldn't be too affected, as basically a human crewed ship is still a 70,000ton machine.

The Air Force would be so fucked though, as the pilot is the weakpoint in a modern combat fighter. Machines can think faster, see further, has more situational awareness in a dogfight and will never black out under high g combat maneuvers. An robotically controlled air superiority fighter, designed specifically for the purpose, would run circles around an F-22 Raptor, purely because the Raptor is designed at the limit of human frailties.

Same with Space. Space is utterly anathema to life. Robots would experience no more discomfort on the moon than they would in the Saraha. Or Central London. We haven't even started thinking about how to fight in space yet, all the robot would have to do is push you over in your EVA suit and the fall would break something critical and you die. Or punch the visor. And sit back and laugh as you decompress and freeze in vacuum.
Imagine a T-800 onboard the ISS. All he'd need to do is make a hole on the wall and watch the crew get blown out into orbit.
 

8bitCosmonaut

Convenient Store Commando
Expert
Veteran
Registered
Elon who?
#25
You'd have to go after the supply and resource. Humans can survive for long time frames away from resupply, and depending on the force in question, could live off the land and only need 'lethal aid' rather than food/water.
Live off the land? What if the machines use salted earth tactics? Where they render an entire piece of land uninhabitable?

Machines would suffer from the same problems as a millennial with an iPhone. Must be within WiFi range, and needs plugging in every 18 hours. Use small SF teams and precision strike assets to nail the control centres, charging stations, power supply networks, and you'll bring down. ECM, incliment weather, which wouldn't effect human soldiers at all, would cause havoc to externally controlled robotics
But with the super intelligence of AI, what if they figured out the way to make portable nuclear power sources? What if they programmed their ground troops to be capable of independent decision making? I mean yeah they would be scrambled once they've lost contact with the main hive mind, but they would quickly designate a new leader within the squad and create their own smaller hivemind so they can continue fighting.