Giant. Death. Robot.

[OzzyKP]

There is so much anger and bitterness on these forums. Are you sure you guys are fans of the Civ franchise, or are you just fans of nostalgia and everything being better in the past?

Just wait till you come across the real curmudgeons who never made it past Civ2.

[Hauldren Collider]

Civ IV was the first civ I extensively played. Frankly, I welcome changes to the game. If I wanted to play the same game, I'd just play Civ IV.

[MikeH]

Exactly.

People can still play CivII if that's what they really want.

[SpencerH]

There is so much anger and bitterness on these forums. Are you sure you guys are fans of the Civ franchise, or are you just fans of nostalgia and everything being better in the past?

We're polytubbies. It comes naturally to us. If you think there is "much anger and bitterness on these forums" now, just wait till the game is actually released.

[Japher]

I've been teasing Perfection about this since his post cited... awesome

[Hauptman]

The current crop of technicians and scientists grew up as I did. With Robotech and Battletech. So of course a large number of people will be/are working on making those supercool battlemechs from thier childhood become actual and real. The advantages are numerous (even a two leger) ranging from the idea of overcoming such things as tanktraps, mines, and river crossings.

The speed of technology is uncanny. Just because you may think it's impracticle to make a two legged machine now doent mean there wont be a huge breakthrough in the next couple years. I mean even before computers the world went from bi-planes to jets in 6 years. 100 years from now i expect all militaries to be equiped with powered armoure infantry (ala space marines in starcraft) and legged armored vehicles (BATTLETECH!!!).

[Al B. Sure!]

The current crop of technicians and scientists grew up as I did. With Robotech and Battletech. So of course a large number of people will be/are working on making those supercool battlemechs from thier childhood become actual and real. The advantages are numerous (even a two leger) ranging from the idea of overcoming such things as tanktraps, mines, and river crossings.

The speed of technology is uncanny. Just because you may think it's impracticle to make a two legged machine now doent mean there wont be a huge breakthrough in the next couple years. I mean even before computers the world went from bi-planes to jets in 6 years. 100 years from now i expect all militaries to be equiped with powered armoure infantry (ala space marines in starcraft) and legged armored vehicles (BATTLETECH!!!).

What is this bi-planes to jets in 6 years nonsense?

The Me 262 became militarily operational in 1944. In 1938, Britain had Hurricanes, Germany had Me 109's, and the US had P-40's. What 6 years? Although yeah, the speed of aeronautical advancement from the Wright Flyer to the Me 262 was extremely quick (first flight: 1903; first flight of Me 262: 1942)

I agree with you about powered armor infantry. That is definitely possible even within the next 20 years and is already in preliminary development. It'll probably be the next stage of the Future Warrior Program.



I still don't see giant bipedal Mechs ever happening though. I don't see the point of them relative to tanks and aircraft. What military situation could you foresee that would require giant walkers that tanks and/or aircraft couldn't do better?

[Al B. Sure!]

This one looks very dumb but hey, it's source is the US Army. Supposed to be ~2030 expectations.

Aided by “smart drugs,” enhanced with prosthetics, and protected by a lightweight suit of armor, this soldier of the future possesses near super-human capabilities and weapons that would make even Iron Man jealous. He’s suited up in an “exoskeleton” – essentially a Storm Trooper-esque external shell – that allows him to carry heavy loads. Electronics integrated in his outfit allow for simultaneous language translation, automatic identification of potential foes, and video-game-like targeting. If the soldier is tired, overworked, or injured, neural and physiological sensors automatically send an alert to headquarters.

Smart drugs Oh well.

[Hauptman]

Yeh the bi-plane bit is minor exageration. Every airforce had bi-planes in active service at the start of the war however. The bismark was disabled by bi-planes, and so on. By the end of the war the major powers had or were working on jets. Thats a huge leap in such a short time.

Aircraft is limited by weight. Tanks (and other 'wheeled' vehicles) are limited by surface. Granted tanks are more adaptable than wheels, but are still limited to fairly smooth surfaces with good ground pressure. Rough hilly terrain (90% of afganistan) is off limits. Where as legged transport is not. It's also a matter of manueverability. Tracks lend to a straight only form of mobilty. Making a tight turn requires almost coming to a stop. Granted they have gotten better over the years, they are still limited. However you, because of your legs, can make quick changes of direction with little reduction of momentum. You are able to weeve between obstacles at a full clip. Tracked vehicles would be slowed to a crawl trying to navigate through heavy woods lets say, or stay on a road.

Then of course the biggest reason would be fording water obstacles. Tanks sink right to the bottom, as of such people have attempted snorkel systems or the odd floatation device because most rivers are often more than a meter deep. Now if you had legs, perhaps you could ford 3 or more meters with no added logistics. Removing the need of bridge building under fire.

There has been a huge R&R expenditure in all fields when it comes to mimiking natural modes of transportation. There is a submarine that mimiks a yellowfin tuna that can excede normal rotary power speeds for less energy expenditure, as well as beeing much more manueverable. (tried to find a pic but couldnt remeber the real name of it).

[Elok]

There are serious problems with bipeds as well.

*Bipedal movement, at least in humans, requires a complex series of motions to shift weight and avoid falling over. On a machine, that translates to a lot of separate parts that could break down or jam, and probably less efficient fuel usage.

*In order to have superior mobility over a tank, such a vehicle needs to have fairly long legs. The longer the legs, the higher its center of gravity and the easier it is to knock over. A misstep could leave a several-ton vehicle lying sideways on the ground, useless--and in terrain too rugged for a crane or other heavy equipment to reach, it's liable to sit and rust there.

*In order to actually move about rugged terrain, such a vehicle would need feet that could adapt to uneven surfaces, not just legs. The taller the vehicle, the larger the feet needed to stabilize it, and if it's going to be climbing mountains it needs articulated feet that can wrap around rocks to a degree, while still holding up the weight of a big-ass armored vehicle. More parts to break down, and a significant engineering problem to boot.

*In a tank, the massive weight of the vehicle is spread out over a wide surface, and even so they tend to demolish all but the toughest roads. With a biped, the weight is concentrated on two points (one, in midstride). If you're going to put a couple tons of weight on a small area (remember, bigger foot area means more difficulty in rugged terrain), you'll need to limit that vehicle to surfaces of, oh, ferrocrete. Put it in a sandy desert a tank could cross, it'll be up to its mid-thighs instantly. And then the sand will clog those bajillions of delicate parts.

[Al B. Sure!]

Thank you Elok for taking the time to break down what I knew intuitively but couldn't explain.

[onodera]

A crappy preview at IGN mentioned GDR as well.

[wodan11]

It's probably far more likely that we discover a way to manipulate gravity or utilize other-dimensional pockets (either of which would allow heavy machinery to "fly") than figure out walkers.

[DaShi]

There are serious problems with bipeds as well.

*Bipedal movement, at least in humans, requires a complex series of motions to shift weight and avoid falling over. On a machine, that translates to a lot of separate parts that could break down or jam, and probably less efficient fuel usage.

*In order to have superior mobility over a tank, such a vehicle needs to have fairly long legs. The longer the legs, the higher its center of gravity and the easier it is to knock over. A misstep could leave a several-ton vehicle lying sideways on the ground, useless--and in terrain too rugged for a crane or other heavy equipment to reach, it's liable to sit and rust there.

*In order to actually move about rugged terrain, such a vehicle would need feet that could adapt to uneven surfaces, not just legs. The taller the vehicle, the larger the feet needed to stabilize it, and if it's going to be climbing mountains it needs articulated feet that can wrap around rocks to a degree, while still holding up the weight of a big-ass armored vehicle. More parts to break down, and a significant engineering problem to boot.

*In a tank, the massive weight of the vehicle is spread out over a wide surface, and even so they tend to demolish all but the toughest roads. With a biped, the weight is concentrated on two points (one, in midstride). If you're going to put a couple tons of weight on a small area (remember, bigger foot area means more difficulty in rugged terrain), you'll need to limit that vehicle to surfaces of, oh, ferrocrete. Put it in a sandy desert a tank could cross, it'll be up to its mid-thighs instantly. And then the sand will clog those bajillions of delicate parts.

Plus all those walkers in Star Wars. What was the Empire thinking?

[Hauldren Collider]

This feature can probably be turned off.