Avatar of ASTA
  • Last Seen: 2 yrs ago
  • Old Guild Username: Lum
  • Joined: 12 yrs ago
  • Posts: 1172 (0.26 / day)
  • VMs: 0
  • Username history
    1. ASTA 12 yrs ago

Status

User has no status, yet

Bio

Do your ears work?

Most Recent Posts

LeeRoy said
And you're too annoying.You have done a sum total of nothing for this thread. And why you're still here is beyond me.Two months, two posts, a few dozen arguments, and nothing productive done.A claim to leave the website, and then not leaving the website. Why on earth are you here? To incite more arguments?


Would've been more than two posts had you not went all "AHH HURR DUURRR I'M GONNA POWA-PLEY MY ASS OFF."

Also, a few dozen arguments?

Nice exaggeration.
LeeRoy said
Of course it is Koka. Boerd is flustered because his ship is not the main focus of the roleplay and ASTA's pissing in the wind again to keep Boerd going.I just wonder when ASTA will realize that 2 months have passed and he's only posted twice.


You're too cute.
Green said
What LeeRoy said.


This just in: Being on the ground means you automatically lose to Erde.

This thread is--as I've said many times in the past--a comedy gold mine.
Lol.
?
Green said
Generally speaking.*High tiers? Holy shit, I thought you were talking about intermediate characters. I refer you to Erde, who could defeat any tank in a single post.


LeeRoy said
Oh god, Erde would cream a tank without slowing down.


ASTA said
That's assuming said tank is using a conventional main weapon and remains within the strict tactical parameters modern MBTs do.


ASTA said
If mechs (which are inferior war machines when compared to tanks) can remain competitive in a world of magical swordsmen and quasi-magical cyborgs, a small treaded vehicle can as well.


ASTA said
Anyway, both combatants are equal to one another because of the rules set forth by the creator of this roleplay, thus this fight depends on which character makes the best decisions with their movements and their immediate surroundings, whichever character makes the most efficient use of their offensive and defensive capabilities, and the limitations and boundaries set forth by the tier system itself.


ASTA said
You're assuming one futuristic armored vehicle can't come equipped with a multitude of supplementary abilities to add more variation to its own combat style.


ASTA said
But alas, we'll just further regress into the now-commonplace bullshit that is GM-ignored powerplaying, player-defended powerplaying, metagaming, excessive dick-waving and trash-talking...


ASTA said
But alas, we'll just further regress into the now-commonplace bullshit that is GM-ignored powerplaying, player-defended powerplaying, metagaming, excessive dick-waving and trash-talking...


ASTA said
But alas, we'll just further regress into the now-commonplace bullshit that is GM-ignored powerplaying, player-defended powerplaying, metagaming, excessive dick-waving and trash-talking...


ASTA said
But alas, we'll just further regress into the now-commonplace bullshit that is GM-ignored powerplaying, player-defended powerplaying, metagaming, excessive dick-waving and trash-talking...
Green said
There's the issue though. Arena combat is all about rushing headfirst into battle with one another, figuratively speaking. A tank is not designed for that at-all. If I wanted to, I could write down a SNIPER character who did all his battles from 2km away with his SUPERSTEALTHSUIT - But that'd be the complete opposite of what we're all here for.


I don't recall a vote being made on the reasons why people are in this thread, let alone into Arena roleplaying. Trust me, I'd recall it.

In any case, I'm not in this discussion to argue about the personal preferences of random people. I'm in this discussion to tell you how a tank could compete with high tier characters, and how stating said vehicle would automatically lose because of [insert random and weaksauce reason here] is folly at best and downright stupid at worst.
Green said
We're just saying that tanks are inferior arena combatants, because they are limited to driving around and shooting at stuff, whereas every-single-character-in-the-history-of-ever have a multitude of different ways to approach and decimate their enemies.


You're assuming one futuristic armored vehicle can't come equipped with a multitude of supplementary abilities to add more variation to its own combat style.

Green said
Just seeing if I understood the first part of that correctly; So, if the humanoid tank man walks headfirst towards the tank, he dies. Which inadvertadly means that if the tank drives headfirst towards humanoid tank man, it dies, because they're the same, except one of them has superior movement capabilities, and can jump, duck, and even punch.Arena fights are based around two people meeting each other headfirst in a clash of skill and power. Humanoid tank man and the tank would instantly kill eachother, unless human tank man ducked.Also, no one is saying that single characters are 1-hit wonders against tanks.


A sane tanker wouldn't drive heard-first into a risky situation unless it was absolutely needed. Somewhat related, but I wouldn't be surprised if tank crews felt a little invulnerable in their war machines, but I bet seasoned tank crews and not greenhorns know full-well that an MBT is far from invincible. In truth, if I had a character like this, I'd just hit the reverse while blasting away at your character until I won the fight (which falls into the Boring, But Practical Trope---which conflicts with the Rule of Cool trope of which I adore immensely).

Also, I don't see why you can't have a clash of skill and power using sophisticated technology like armored vehicles and whatnot. To me, this looks like an opinion or personal preference of a lone individual (or a small niche group of roleplayers of like-minded interest) trying to be passed off as the norm, the rule and an expectation, honestly.

LeeRoy said
Also tanks are slow at turning.




LeeRoy, that is an M4 Sherman.

From the 1940s.
I assumed the character in question was on equal footing with the tank. If it wasn't, this fight would have never occurred in the first place.

Anyway, both combatants are equal to one another because of the rules set forth by the creator of this roleplay, thus this fight depends on which character makes the best decisions with their movements and their immediate surroundings, whichever character makes the most efficient use of their offensive and defensive capabilities, and the limitations and boundaries set forth by the tier system itself. If you're new and improved rocket launcher soldier is still marching headfirst towards a tank, he dies. Badly.

If we want to get complicated (for no reason whatsoever), we could go and say tanks in this roleplay should be able to easily trounce lone infantrymen in open fields like they tend to do (very well) in real life. An anti-armor weapon like a recoil-less rifle or shoulder-fired missile launcher are weapons that give infantry a method of keeping relentless armor elements at bay (and maybe even destroy them). It doesn't immediately turn them into the best thing to use against tanks (due to the high armor value tanks possess and the bulkiness of rocket-launcher ammo), though this changes if the infantry is held up within an urban environment, or if they're dug in and supplemented by air power and/or by dedicated static anti-armor weapons like anti-tank guns and missile batteries.

Or we could say Ender's warship pastes all of the characters on the surface of a planet because most of you lot can't even fly.

At any rate, I think abiding by the RP's rules is the ideal option. Thus, wanking out single characters as being magical 1-hit wonders against anything with treads is really not the way to go.
Green said
How exactly is a tank going to be doing any dodging whatsoever? It can't duck, jump, and has to spend considerable time to turn it's chassis around if it intends to go anywhere but forward (and even then it's still going in a single direction) - anti-armor bazooka shots don't really travel slowly, so there's that. It could always shoot it down, sure. If the projectile was non-explosive in nature (like, say a Railgun), then that wouldn't work out very well either. Hiding from a projectile already shot towards it doesn't make much sense. I don't know what ERA is, please elaborate.


Standard reactive armor uses slabs of explosive sandwiched between two plates of metal. When a projectile impacts this unique armor, the explosive detonates, causing the plates to force apart, in turn damaging standard ammunition, kinetic-penetrator rods (the plates break the rods up, as they're rather brittle) and disrupts the metallic jet generated by a shaped-charge.

ERA is different. It's a type of armor that works like a giant capacitor, where an electromagnetic current is passed through two sheets of material separated by an insulator. When a round strikes the armor, a powerful current is driven into the projectile, either vaporizing it or turning it into a plasma. It's newly-developed stuff, so its true method of operation is classified as hell as far as I know.

http://appft1.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO1&Sect2=HITOFF&d=PG01&p=1&u=%2Fnetahtml%2FPTO%2Fsrchnum.html&r=1&f=G&l=50&s1=%2220060011057%22.PGNR.&OS=DN/20060011057&RS=DN/20060011057

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/3298279/Electric-armour-vaporises-anti-tank-grenades-and-shells.html

As for railguns, shooting that down is a matter of firing a potent particle beam at it or firing an intercepting projectile at it (like a shell or dart, which would knock the incoming round off course or break it up). This is dipping into hard physics (and thus we're treading into uncharted waters), but particle beams of sufficient power transfer direct thermal energy to the molecules a target is made up of---superheating it if you will. The shell would more or less explode. That or fry its guidance systems if it's a smart projectile and not a dumb one, due to the electronic interference and radiation generated by the beam's impact upon the metal projectile.

Hiding works if the enemy hasn't spotted you yet (or if they have, requiring your stealth capability is an option as well, such as using buildings for cover---especially if you're fighting at night). Sometimes the best way of dealing with damage is to simply not be seen.

As for the movement restrictions associated with treads, we could go with a hover tank, but those are just flat-out heresy. Everyone knows treads are superior.
© 2007-2026
BBCode Cheatsheet