Followers 0

# Call of Duty: Black Ops 2 (In the future)

## 74 posts in this topic

Exactly how fast do you think that a 300 tonne walker would go?

No idea, but it'll sure it may have faster acceleration and consume less energy.

I'm not saying they'll replace wheels, but it's not something belonging just to movies and games.

When did I say speed is main advantage?

---------- Post added at 07:54 PM ---------- Previous post was at 07:51 PM ----------

BTW, main advantage is that it could take much heavier load that any wheeled vehicle. Theoretically of course.

##### Share on other sites

...

Yeah, exactly, they weight 100 tons. And they drive 5 km/h...

...

Use common sense. Earth gravity is good for light sport cars, but for greater weight it's a problem. It can be solved only by making it more tough => heavier => more pressure on wheels => more tough => heavier => ... very heavy & slow in the end.

...

Actually that friend I was talking about had a professor on some subject that works on some walkers. He was testing some walker bigger than hippo in some desert and that walker run 140 km/h! And he told me this story 5 years ago.

You're only really talking about top speed this whole post.

I really think this whole super-heavy walker idea is a total fantasy. To alleviate ground pressure, you need enormous feet. You still need to suspend whatever load the walker is supporting, but only here, the suspension has to be much studier, because as a walker walks, its weight shifts around. In order to take advantage of gravity, you have to fall somewhat, which means you have to climb again. This means you need the engine power to press a 300 tonne load upwards. Wheels only need to roll.

##### Share on other sites

Isn't it interesting how quick can walker be?

In order to take advantage of gravity, you have to fall somewhat, which means you have to climb again. This means you need the engine power to press a 300 tonne load upwards.

Not exactly whole load. Only one leg at time needs to climb. The feet/suspension is challenge of course but possible in future IMO.

It may sounds like a fantasy, but it has some advantages over wheels.

I don't know nothing technical about it though (just some discussions on beer).

BTW: Example of terrain where walker can probably perform better than 4x4 off-road is rocky terrain (i mean huge rocks, wheel size).

Edited by batto

##### Share on other sites
Isn't it interesting how quick can walker be?

Not exactly whole load. Only one leg at time needs to climb. The feet/suspension is challenge of course but possible in future IMO.

It may sounds like a fantasy, but it has some advantages over wheels.

I don't know nothing technical about it though (just some discussions on beer).

last discussions on beer i had involved was asking my mate "i would...would you?" and why not

##### Share on other sites
Isn't it interesting how quick can walker be?

It is, indeed.

##### Share on other sites

Yes, as usual with CoD franchise, it looks a lot like the Czech children story of how Dog and Cat baked a cake ("let's mash all the cool stuff we like together and add more cool explosions", squared).

For the sake of discussion of feasibility of walkers, though (which is only going to add more pointless clicks to this thread, though :)), the ones there don't seem "300 tonne" you mentioned. Ff you look here, comparing with the SUV in the background, it's about the size of a modern smaller wheeled APC. Say something like 10-20 tons. Even though that, the point of contact with ground does seem ridiculously small for such weight (let somebody else calculate the ground pressure if interested).

Other cons: its legs seem articulated only in one axis - much bigger turning radius. It's too high and big - presents an easy target. The joints would be a pretty weak point in combat. No ERA on the thing? And why is it APC shaped if it doesn't need any space for crew? Just look at the UGV in Arma 3 screenshots - they are actually much more realistic design than this box-on-legs.

While walkers do have quite a few advantages (rough terrain), scaling them up to such size is strange. Just because of the ground pressure of the thing. That's why the german supertank Ratte planned for tracks more than 2/3rds its width (IIRC).

##### Share on other sites
I really think this whole super-heavy walker idea is a total fantasy. To alleviate ground pressure, you need enormous feet. You still need to suspend whatever load the walker is supporting, but only here, the suspension has to be much studier, because as a walker walks, its weight shifts around. In order to take advantage of gravity, you have to fall somewhat, which means you have to climb again. This means you need the engine power to press a 300 tonne load upwards. Wheels only need to roll.

I think the whole idea of walkers is sci-fi. Cool, but improbable.

Weapon technology, or technology in general, is mostly driven by necessity. In urban warfare, walkers are irrelevant since there are roads everywhere, and if there's rubble, most modern battle tanks can get across that already. On non-tarmac ground, the weight would probably mean that they would sink into the ground - after all, that was already an issue with the Tiger tank in WWII.

What bothers me about all the CoD games is the whole "realism" bollocks. If they could just see it as a mindless shooter game with some realistic background like "existing weapons" and stuff, that would all be fine, but they're always claiming ultra-realism, which seriously bothers me, because I am pretty sure that wounds in real life do not heal by sucking your thumb long enough, or that you can drive a snow mobile, jump over an abyss and keep shooting with your automatic pistol while reloading with one hand. Come on, CoD fans, at least admit that jumping with a .50 cal is not going to work and you are not going to headshot anybody while you do that. The whole "realism" is just a load of dung. It's about as realistic as Quake was.

##### Share on other sites

Walkers:

can cross terrain that canÂ´t be crossed by normal vehicels

Needs stable terrain. That is because of the walkers weight distribution. The whole weight is standing on one feet while it walks. Muddy terrain is a big nono for walkers, they would sink in and fall over.

Complicated maintenance

Very complicated to manufacture, everything has to be balanced

Unsuitable for war. Even the slightest damage has the potential to destroy the whole machine.

The only place where walkers make sense is in Star wars.

EDIT: OMG that IGN article is disgusting

EDIT: OMG the comments are even more stupid....

##### Share on other sites
Needs stable terrain. That is because of the walkers weight distribution. The whole weight is standing on one feet while it walks. Muddy terrain is a big nono for walkers, they would sink in and fall over.

We're talking about 4 or more leg walkers. Maybe. Maybe not with appropriate feets. Walkers have better manoeuvrability. Some AI control can choose where to step.

Complicated maintenance

Irrelevant until proven true. Did you know that maintanance of F-35 will take 1 month because of one design decision (can't remember which, something with engine placing)?

Very complicated to manufacture, everything has to be balanced

Sure, F-35 is very simple... Irrelevant. 50 years ago someone probably said same about something that's used today.

Unsuitable for war. Even the slightest damage has the potential to destroy the whole machine.

Irrelevant until proven true. Destroying one leg of 6-leg walker will not destroy whole machine as destroying one belt of tank will not destroy it. They could be used as heavy transport while guarded. In emergency it could get down to protect cargo.

Small walkers could have better manoeuvrability and could climb & jump to places where vehicles can't go.

Because something isn't in ARMA and it's in other movies & games doesn't immediately mean it's sci-fi fantasy.

Edited by batto

##### Share on other sites

Sorry but no. Walker is the most impractical military concept you can come up with. Just shoot a single leg off and all your massive weapon platform is disabled. Not mentioning that walkers there are HUGE.

In the past century military did everything to make tanks as small as possible. Look at those giant targets they were in WW1. And look at how low tanks are today.

Being unnoticed wins the war, not having 50 guns on one platform. That walker would do jack shit to a single sneaky soldier with a Javelin (and by sneaky I mean sitting 2 kms away, drinking pepsi, aiming at a HUGEASS target there)

Because something isn't in ARMA and it's in other movies & games doesn't immediately mean it's fantasy.

But it's fantasy. Nobody is going to build a huge, barely rotating, slowass platform (especially a 6 legged one) which will cost tens of millions per piece which can easily be taken out by a pair of \$80k rockets.

It's the same reason why spaceships don't have sails despite being called a ship - it's called laws of physics.

Edited by metalcraze

##### Share on other sites
But it's fantasy. Nobody is going to build a huge, barely rotating, slowass platform (especially a 6 legged one) which will cost tens of millions per piece which can easily be taken out by a pair of \$80k rockets.

That's oversimplified. It will not be taken out, it'll just be disabled. Same will happen if you take down wheel of huge transport vehicle. And small walkers could also have good use. And it'll rotate better that any wheeled vehicle of same size. And btw, it's possible it could walk even with 5 legs if necessary (and more than 6 legs is OK too).

But I admit that walker in last CoD pic looks lame.

Btw, war sucks. Everything can be taken out by few nukes. Transport walkers could be used during peace too.

Edited by batto

##### Share on other sites

You can do that with every machine. Helicopters, Planes, Tanks and Cars.

Nothing is indestructible and pointing out that an 80k\$ rocket can take out a target doesn't make the concept invalid.

##### Share on other sites

One can assume it would be relatively easier to replace a track or wheel, especially in the field, than a giant and mechanically complex leg.

##### Share on other sites
One can assume it would be relatively easier to replace a track or wheel, especially in the field, than a giant and mechanically complex leg.

You're comparing oranges & apples. They'll have same problem replacing giant track/wheel (even if it's less complex than leg).

It's the same reason why spaceships don't have sails despite being called a ship - it's called laws of physics.

Edited by batto

##### Share on other sites
You're comparing oranges & apples. They'll have same problem replacing giant track/wheel (even if it's less complex than leg).

Giant tracks and wheels?

A leg on a walker would be more complex and larger than a wheel or tank track, no? So how could you replace a worn out leg as (relatively) easy as a track? Tanks are maintenance intensive as it is but most maintenance can be done in the field, I dread to think what a walker would be like.

##### Share on other sites
Amazon pre-orders for Black Ops 2 are ten times ahead of the first Black Ops, even passing day one pre-orders for Modern Warfare 3.

http://pc.ign.com/articles/122/1224311p1.html

[Losing faith in humanity image requested]

##### Share on other sites

LOL, 1st comment says it all.

STOP BREEDING!

##### Share on other sites

Well, at least we have a new source of pre-employed adolescent population statistics. But seriously, this is hopefully my last bashful post on the subject, seeing as how I really don't care about it anymore.

##### Share on other sites

Im surprised that Activision doesn't just put a damn bumper sticker on the front door of every house in the States and in Europe...

I agree with the "STOP BREEDING!" comment.

##### Share on other sites
That's oversimplified. It will not be taken out, it'll just be disabled. Same will happen if you take down wheel of huge transport vehicle. And small walkers could also have good use. And it'll rotate better that any wheeled vehicle of same size. And btw, it's possible it could walk even with 5 legs if necessary (and more than 6 legs is OK too).

It will be taken out. It will just fall on its side and won't be able to do anything, damaging itself in the process.

You can do that with every machine. Helicopters, Planes, Tanks and Cars.

Nothing is indestructible and pointing out that an 80k\$ rocket can take out a target doesn't make the concept invalid.

Laws of physics and common sense make concept invalid. Walkers can't turn fast, walkers can't move fast, walkers are unstable (take out one leg and it falls down), walkers require much more powerful engines and more fuel to move them hugeass feet (meaning they will be beyond hot) and finally they are HUGE and thus noticeable kms away. It's a fantasy concept that can only look cool in hollywood movies but in reality it will never happen.

Whole advancement of military tech is based around vehicles being fast, manouverable and undetectable and walker "concept" represents the direct opposite of that.

##### Share on other sites

To quote:

"This [O'Neill holds up Ma'Tok, a staff weapon] is a weapon of terror. It's made to intimidate the enemy. This [holds up a P-90] is a weapon of war. It's made to kill the enemy."

##### Share on other sites
To quote:

"This [O'Neill holds up Ma'Tok, a staff weapon] is a weapon of terror. It's made to intimidate the enemy. This [holds up a P-90] is a weapon of war. It's made to kill the enemy."

I prefer:

"Never underestimate your audience. They're generally sensitive, intelligent people who respond positively to quality entertainment."

Preceeded by this:

TNy-ipksLUM

##### Share on other sites

Slightly off-topic: As I promised here are slides (in Czech unfortunately) with some photos of real BIG walker I was talking about: http://www.multiupload.nl/32AWBEY8EZ. As I also noted we usually talk about these things with glasses of beer in hands so 140 Km/h speed was just my imagination =). All I know is that it's probably used in MosteckÃ¡ uhelnÃ¡ (it hold coal belts probably).

This video of walker from Boston Dynamics is also cool

.