Give me one good reason why heavy objects are not the future

They look silly.

>>158123203

If we get the tech behind them working they actually could be.

>>158123203
>Give me one good reason why heavy objects are not the future of warfare.
They have the same amount of unobtanium as humanoid giant robots. They just have DIFFERENT kinds of cheats compared to say, Gundams.

Too heavy

What's the point of even fighting wars anymore if nothing is cool? Might as well just play rock paper scissors beforehand to decide how each side exchanges resources and territory.

>>158123203
A woman on the front line.

>>158123497
That is what diplomacy is.
War is when someone throws a hissy fit at the result.

>>158123203
Because it's fake anime bullshit someone pulled out of an LN author's asshole.

>>158123524
Women aren't more valuable than men. Maybe less capable though.

>>158123203
Did the show not show you all the glaring issues that tom cruise and his buddy single handedly take a fuck load of them down with.

>>158123350
Agree. I mean hoverboards is now possible. It's based from that western movie. Nervegear looks promising (the anime unfortunately also does...)

Power sources. Mountain vaporizing lazors need a lot of power. If you have that kind of power source in a small mobile tincan and dump the heat produced in alternate dimension, you can make anything from gundams to mahou shoujos.

>>158123203
They can't secure territory.

>>158123706
>I mean hoverboards is now possible
You'd better not mean that gay-ass no-handle segway shit.

>>158123203
Because they're defunct pieces of shits destroyed by Jackass and a foreign prince without almost any real military training. Only reason why they're used in that world either is because world leaders use them to keep the world in balance.

>>158123712
>dump the heat produced in alternate dimension
THIS
To make negligible heat for that much energy is bullshit effectiveness straight out of total fantasy.

File: HO_v12_303.jpg (321KB, 1191x1764px) Image search: [Google]

321KB, 1191x1764px

>>158123203
Because they're really just giant toys being used in glorified action figure battles. Which was all well and good until these two assholes started going around bullying harmless old men and little girls by breaking their fancy toys.

>>158123772
All the heat goes into the beam.

>>158123721
no not that normie bullshit. The one that actually floats. Slowly. Which you can't do any tricks with. And is a stupid alternative for walking. But hey, it's a progress.

>>158123713
LN says it alone can handle a wide area. Basically cover up a whole territory. Only counter is other Heavy Objects. And that one part MC did it alone.

If it's blown up you're fucked. If it gets captured you're double fucked.

>>158123203
Pilot loli elites does not exist yet

>>158123832
Thats not how it works.

>>158123497
If we reach such a technologically advanced stage why the fuck should we even have wars?

>>158124058
Heat redirection fields.

File: 3.jpg (116KB, 453x767px) Image search: [Google]

116KB, 453x767px

>>158123785
What the fuck do those shoulder things do.

>>158124062
Because we can.

File: HO_v06_09.jpg (514KB, 1092x1600px) Image search: [Google]

514KB, 1092x1600px

>>158124099
My best guess would be to protect against shrapnel.

>>158123840
>>158123721
Did you mean this?https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZwSwZ2Y0Ops It looks cool but involves some complex supercoductor bullshit, which you need to cool with liquid nitrogen, so it isn´t at all practical.

>>158123439
Not really, you can make Objects in real life, they just wouldn't be as awesome.

Also, most of the object would be either autonomous or remote piloted in real life.

>>158123647
>Women aren't more valuable than men
from a biological standpoint they are
as long as their is one man left he can impregnate all the women
if theres only one woman left things get messy

same reason soviets didn't go through with their super tank plans.

putting lots of eggs in one basket loses a lot of resources to one bomb.

>>158124062
To protect ourselves against parties motivated to find the means to destroy us before we find the means to destroy them to protect ourselves.

>>158124217
>their super tank plans
I thought the problem with those was that they'd constantly have to build special roads for them to get anywhere because they'd be so heavy they'd crush normal roads?

>>158123912
Or a spy bribe their way into the base and sabotage the object.
>>158124062
To dominate the other guy.

File: 1494648824384.jpg (43KB, 400x438px) Image search: [Google]

43KB, 400x438px

>>158124421
Plans, not planes.

>>158124372
well they did build one and it got stuck in the mud and then they scrapped it...

>>158124062
Because scarcity will always be a thing due to the limited amount of matter and energy in the universe. Meaning someone will always want what someone else and sometimes sharing isn't an option.

>>158123203
Nukes. The intro showed that one was able to demobilize an early object, just nuke it again afterwards.

Also, most its weapons are rather shortrange, projectiles and lasers get you only so far and even the artillery object would be outranged by missle cruisers. Again the example from the intro is silly, the object should have never gotten in range.

Even without the energy issue, they are too big and heavy in difficult terrain, reliant on communication to the outside for any meaningfull operation and are very limited without this supportl - its rather eady to just jam them or shot down the satellites.

And finally, Logistics are fucked up, which is the whole point of the show

>>158124180
>from a biological standpoint they are
Not with artificial wombs.

>>158124494
>limited amount of matter and energy
literally unfalsifiable and current cosmology sides with an infinite universe that is more-or-less the same throughout based on what we can observe from expansion and background radiation.

>>158123203
Modern warfare is more about small specialized groups and subversive actions, wars are fought over multiple fronts, over multiple countries.
You can't just throw a big bomb at a huge army and claim victory, you would need hundreds of those and get a fuckton of bad PR at home.
Which is also why nuclear weapons are ultimately useless unless you're planning on genocide and not war.

>>158124062
You really believe in an utopian world?

Seriously though, let's just call them what they are called in the West; Bolos.

But it still doesn't change what Objects are, a fantasy of being able to win a war despite lower levels of production. The belief that you can beat quantity with quality. This is what WW2 proved to be false. If you can't build quantity, you can't afford quality either.

And seriously,
>>158124164
>Not really, you can make Objects in real life, they just wouldn't be as awesome.
Say what? Everything that needed to make Objects work are unobtanium. The power source, the armour, the laser, even the pilot. If you can build an Object that works, you can already win the war the regular way for cheaper.

The author just went out of his way to not have force fields, which just meant he had to go to even more extremes and even less believable tech to get Objects working.

>>158124421
You're like a sitcom character.

We'll never have an uptopian world because more motivated people than I will start shit if it gets too boring. Besides, a species needs conflict to prevent stagnation, if it never has a challenge then one day something will show up better than it and crush it.

>>158124516
One nuke didn't stop it, it still had its main guns. Also the one in the intro is the very first object

>>158124062
Uneven distribution of resources, diplomatical failures, cultural, religious, ethnical differences. All kinds of shit that followed humanity for quite a while.

But since half the world is held by nuclear deterrence and trade, while the other half is small groups of literal (sand) niggers fighting over 1000's square kilometers of deserts, wars are majorly neglected by the millennials.

>>158124062
because giant robot ball jousting is fun!

>>158124079
No, it literally isn't how it works.
There was exactly one Object that did that.

>>158124550
>The author just went out of his way to not have force fields
There were two Objects that did that, even though one didn't actually do it

>>158124751
You forgot the drug wars which probably kills more people than ISIS.

>>158124550
> Everything that needed to make Objects work are unobtanium. The power source, the armour, the laser, even the pilot. If you can build an Object that works, you can already win the war the regular way for cheaper.

I know, that's why I said a real world object wouldn't be as awesome.
If anything it would be just a huge autonomous tank with a railgun.

>>158123203
Objects are predicated on the existence of the JPlevelMHD reactor. In-universe the JPlevelMHD reactor is basically magical power generator that is effectively a miniature sun. It could generate incredible amounts of energy. The question then is how to weaponize this energy.
The answer to that question is the Object. The Object exists for the sole purpose of taking the energy generated by the JPlevelMHD reactor and putting it in a form that can be directed against a target. Railguns, coilguns, lasers, and plasma cannons, are all examples of weapons that can scale up well the more energy you pump into them, which takes full advantage of the fact that you have so much energy to pump in.
Of course, the reactor is large and heavy. So to deliver it to the battlefield you need a powerful propulsion system and the finest protection available. Hence the levitation systems or leg systems, and the magical hand-crafted onion armor (never mind that machines can craft far more precisely than human hands can).
The Object is the product of the magical super reactor. Without the magical super reactor, there is no rationale for the Object.

>>158124975
You forgot one more important point.
The reactor can't be scaled down at all.
It's always a fuckhuge ball and there's nothing you can do to change that.

>>158124159
He probably does mean that.

Gyroscopically-stabilized quadcopters are more likely, though: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bfa9HrieUyQ

>>158124930
>If anything it would be just a huge autonomous tank with a railgun
Being huge is terribad.

>>158124975
>are all examples of weapons that can scale up well the more energy you pump into them, which takes full advantage of the fact that you have so much energy to pump in.
Maybe the railgun, but all the other ones are going to melt down quickly without proper cooling.

>>158124516

Missiles are almost worthless in HO world because anti-air lasers got that good.

Objects are nuke resistant not because of the armor but because they would shoot down hundreds of nukes launched at them.

Because as long as thermonuclear weapons are king you won't see much of anything else.
Sure, everyone is keeping up with the military RnD but none of these fancy jets or weapons are being used at any nuclear capable country.

If at any point in we develop a 100% effective ICBM counter then we can only hope that all nuclear capable countries are either at good terms or develop it at the same time or shit hits the fan.

>>158125109
The core idea of the Object isn't the invincible super tank, but a near perfect ICBM defense system.
The rest of the things is just there to defend that.

>make series about giant mecha death balls
>the most hype parts are actually about the mercenary loli getting into dogfights with the forgotten fighter planes

>>158125109

We are already getting there.

>>158123203
RAILGUNS are the future, or heavy impactors

File: HO_v09_193.jpg (303KB, 1120x1600px) Image search: [Google]

303KB, 1120x1600px

>>158125146
No, the best part is PUTANA HIGHBALL

>>158123203
If we ever get the mechwarrior-tier ultralightweight durable armor and compact power source technology, Objects are better than humanoid mechs, but so are plain old tanks scaled up a bit (just enough to be still deployable by airdrop, fitting through railroad tunnels, not crashing through roads into sewers etc)
Also sphere is retarded for ground forces, cone or pyramid is better.

>>158125272

Objects are that big and have that shape because of the reactors.

File: 1487032629210.png (278KB, 706x412px) Image search: [Google]

278KB, 706x412px

So, was this anime worth watching?

>>158125382
Exactly how heavy are the Objects supposed to be?
And do they install those faggy-ass pontoons to cross any tiny river, or are they always there?

>>158126142
You might find it boring if you're watching it solely for commander sexy.

File: bros.jpg (205KB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

205KB, 1280x720px

>>158126142
It was a good ride. The first couple of episodes are admittedly rough but it's generally a fun show with two of the best bros in anime.

>>158124975
Optimized fusion reactors could power up a fuckton weapins

File: 1455557950638.jpg (2MB, 4095x5933px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 4095x5933px

>>158126142
If you like buddy cop films, delicious girls, and very nice action scenes, sure.

It isn't if you're butthurt about this being adapted instead of more Index though. Because boy did they get up in arms about it.

>>158126295
Most of the butthurt was from the nips. As for /a/ Heavy Object has basically been integrated into Raildex threads.

File: Frolaytia Gym.webm (3MB, 800x450px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 800x450px

>>158126142
You tell me.

>>158125269
Such a top tier brown

File: heavy object weg.jpg (202KB, 1100x500px) Image search: [Google]

202KB, 1100x500px

>>158126142

>>158126199

Depends on propulsion type. Hime's HO is old so it needs floats. Most new ones don't.

>>158126360
Man she was built for sex, between her design and Shizuka Ito she can't make me harder.

>>158125139
>The core idea of the Object isn't the invincible super tank, but a near perfect ICBM defense system.
>The rest of the things is just there to defend that.
If it is perfect it wouldn't need any other defence.

My problem with Heavy Object is that it had TOO MANY asspulls. At some point the author added so many excessive alien tech that it stops being anything recognisable as a weapon.

And to add supersoldier pilots as well? At that point he really should stop pretending he wasn't writing about magic stuff.

>>158126494
Genetic modification was in the series from the get go.

>>158126494
>it stops being anything recognisable as a weapon
Almost like it's a monster, huh?

cause we know its all about Tanks VS Robots

File: 1479836643639.jpg (73KB, 600x500px) Image search: [Google]

73KB, 600x500px

>>158126655
Patrician opinion incoming:
squad of cunts in power armour > mecha

>>158126691
>squad of cunts in power armor piloting mecha
Fixed

>>158126718
Only if you put the mecha in tanks.

File: IMG_2459.jpg (82KB, 345x615px) Image search: [Google]

82KB, 345x615px

Where my /a/ces at

>>158126142
The characters are retarded, so is the plot, and you'd have to be 12 years old to find the jokes funny. Of course, a lot of anons eat this shit without trouble, so you'll probably love it

>>158126901
What anime do you like, my friend.

File: 9y.jpg (122KB, 963x718px) Image search: [Google]

122KB, 963x718px

This series is all about two crazy dudes (and occasionally a crazy loli) blowing shit up. I don't know why people get so autistic over muh realism and the details of the objects. Who gives a shit? If you've read any of his other works you should know Kamachi's technobabble always takes a backseat to the over the top fun shenanigans the characters get themselves into.

>>158123462
Don't be so Objective

>>158123203
The thing needs several kinds of magic to even exist. Magic energy source, magic materials engineering, magic missile shield.

And even if it could exist, it's been well proven that r-strategy beats K-strategy every time. Concentrating all of your resources into bigger, less expendable weapons always loses the economic war, which is what actually decides the course of history.

>>158126718
GW pls no
current edition is always worst edition but your current edition is the worst.

>>158125269
Putana goes to show that Objects aren't the most dangerous thing on the battlefield. Goddamn, they are the true bullshit super weapons in the age of Objects.

>>158127199
Why not just create a superior economy where you can create more balls than the enemy has explosives and missiles to take them out?

>>158127869
Then you'd be American.

>>158127869
Why not create a superior economy where you just make your single ball bigger and bigger?

There's a point of diminishing returns, and big balls shoot way past it.

>>158130458
Well yeah, why not?
By showing the enemy that you have a fuck-huge arsenal of huge balls that are superior to all their tanks and are even numerically superior to them, you ought to instill fear and dread in them.
Enemy nation has 50k tanks? And a ball is worth 100 tanks? Then just build 2k balls.

>>158130458
Except that's not the point.
The entire rationale for the Object is that the magic reactor provides a flat amount of energy and it can't be scaled down.

File: mariydi .jpg (933KB, 1056x1953px) Image search: [Google]

933KB, 1056x1953px

>>158126844
Ace Pilot Loli: The Mass Murderer when?

File: 1493433032743.jpg (95KB, 882x994px) Image search: [Google]

95KB, 882x994px

>>158126844
>>158130646
>Mariydi's volumes are the closest thing we'll ever get to an ace combat series

>>158130641
Well, yeah. If you break physics over your knee, you can use the pieces to construct any justification you like.

In the real world, though, physics don't and can't scale in that way, so you can't make an $85mil fighter jet that isn't vulnerable to a $1.5mil missile, even if you keep on pouring money into that single jet until it costs 8.5 trillion dollars.

>>158130833
So why wouldn't laser-based anti-air work?

>>158130883
Directed-EM beams specifically are hard to make work in atmosphere, but even if that weren't a problem it would almost always be much cheaper and easier to make an anti-aircraft laser than to make a laserproof aircraft.

Weapons technology is ahead of armor technology pretty much by definition. It's just easier to destroy than to protect.

>>158131035
>even if that weren't a problem it would almost always be much cheaper and easier to make an anti-aircraft laser than to make a laserproof aircraft
And you're starting to understand the Object as a concept. If nothing gets close, how can you damage it?

>>158131095
You just need to find a longer stick to hit it with.

File: The_Rookie_Concept_Art_halo3_odst.jpg (2MB, 1920x2159px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1920x2159px

>>158123203
>Still no ODSTs
They'd be perfect

>>158131191
This game was underrated. If we can somehow send Kamachi a copy I'm sure he'd implement itin his writing.

Give me a good reason to spend my military budget on a heavy object when 2 brats with a half assed plan can make it worthless

>>158131095
Because it's cheaper to make ten thousand anti-Object weapons than one Object, and if you only have one Object you lose immediately the second it falls.

The only ways to make the economics work are with either magic bullshit technology (which is explicitly the only way they can exist at all) or people just playing silly games instead of actually trying to win a fight (which is also explicitly what is happening).

Not only is the concept so stupid that it requires handwaving the engineering to even attempt, the series itself is a takedown of the concept. A couple of engineers cheaply defeat an entire nation's military spending because combat by champion is stupid.

>>158124372

They were so heavy they destroyed themselves, the hull couldn't stand the weight and split in half, a later model was destroyed by firing unto itself.

>>158131420

Legal way to get your hands on lolis as pilots.

File: 1483457574572.jpg (34KB, 250x250px) Image search: [Google]

34KB, 250x250px

>>158132998
The only best answer

Why not make stationary objects instead?

File: [NoobSubs] Heavy Object 01 (720p Blu-ray 8bit AAC).mp4_snapshot_02.44_[2017.06.04_18.20.20].jpg (635KB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

635KB, 1280x720px

Who doesn't want big guns and lasers?

>>158123203
Because the technobabble that makes them look reasonable compared to giant mechs to the look-at-me-being-a-scientist-because-I-drink-Dr.Pepper-and-wear-while-lab-coat crowd is based on nothing but fiction.

>one nuke melts Object half way
>lets stop there and get totally annihilated instead of dropping another one to finish the job
lel

>>158136019
They were probably taken aback losing all of their smug after thinking the nuke will erase it

File: NT_Index_v13_288-289.jpg (2MB, 2225x1600px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 2225x1600px

>>158131245
>next Kamachi series inspired by ODST and Titanfall

>>158136019
Using lel is so last year, anon.

File: 1489988013537.png (911KB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

911KB, 1280x720px

>>158136177
Get with the time gramps, that was years ago.

>>158123203
why would you make these instead of nukes/rockets? Just destroyed everything else. These pieces of shit are far to slow and immobile to be any serious threat.

>>158136177
Good, at least no one will say I just came in this summer.

>>158136252
Because these magical balls are immune to rockets and there's an unspoken rule in Heavy-Object-verse that you only can drop one nuke per Object which isn't enough to destroy one.

>>158125099
you ignore it and the country thats controlling it, sudently thats just a giant piece of scrap laying.
Nukes are 100% counter to this shit.

>>158136360
you just drop the nukes on the countries that control the object. Also whats stopping you from mounting same weapons object uses on satellites spaceships and do orbital bombartment, again 1000000% more mobile and 100000000% cheaper

>>158136252
Because the idea is to quickly end conflicts instead of fucking up the planet in the process.

>>158136382

All significant countries have many objects that can protect them from nuclear strike. Even thousands of warheads won't get through if a city is protected by few objects.

>>158136500
Doesnt work in reality, in reality every country just masses nukes

>>158136471

They don't have missiles capable of launching 50m reactors into space.

And orbital weapons actually happen in the novels. Multiple times.

>>158136360
No, these things can shoot nukes down, nukes never were an option to deal with them.
Besides, the entire point of these things is making war an option.

>>158136382
The "safe countries" are called that because there's a ton of these things guarding them.


>>158136471
That one is actually covered by a treaty.
The four roughly equally strong superpowers are in a deadlock and if you give any of them a reason to team up on a major scale, they'll jump on it, because it turns a 4-way into a 3-way.

File: BD Volume 6.jpg (301KB, 1117x1500px) Image search: [Google]

301KB, 1117x1500px

>>158136559
>in reality
That's why this isn't reality, anon.

>>158136547
ehm Massive nukes can hit 50miles away from the city and still complety destroy it

>>158136559

The point is nukes are worthless in HO world. A specialized laser object makes itself and everything around it 100% impervious to missile attacks.

>>158123203
heavy objects seems like what would have happened if German decided to go with "bigger is better" slogan between WW1 and WW2

>>158136640
And the nuke needs to detonate to actually do something.

>>158136659
>A specialized laser object
any Object

>>158136640

Bullshit. You have no idea how nukes work. It's not a 100m tall wall of fire like in stupid movies.

>>158136589
>missiles
lmao
try space elevators and rail guns

>>158136772

They are using lasers actually.

File: this-scary-interactive-map-shows-what-happens-if-a-nuke-explodes-in-your-neighborhood.jpg (158KB, 1190x595px) Image search: [Google]

158KB, 1190x595px

>>158136706

>>158136815
So, how do you get the nuke there?

>>158136815
Did you actually read that?
It sets flammable stuff on fire.
It doesn't destroy anything in that radius.

>>158136930
destroy all buildings in 30+km radius

>>158136951
He's talking about the 50 mile radius.

>>158136986
thats some 40y old nuke stats, we have like 10times power now or more with stealth technology, shot from sattelite

>>158137024

I hope you arent suggesting to use thermonuclear devices in outer space ...

>>158136815
>>158137024

That's not how modern nukes work. Those gigantic Cold War nukes would be ridiculously easy to shoot down even without fantasy lasers.

Modern nuclear missiles use multiple smaller warheads.

>>158136815
The orange radius doesn't mean shit conventionally.
The grey radius does, that's essentially the 'effective range' of the bomb.

That said there's not a single tsar bomba that actually exists, it's just a design because it's retardedly expensive to make.

>>158137212
>Modern
More like late Cold War

At any rate, any of those nukes are shot down by the laser, so they really don't matter.

>>158137024
>that's some 40 year old nuke stats
40 years ago is when we stopped trying to make more powerful nukes because we realized at a certain point it becomes pointless and you're just adding to the cost, along with being too fucking big to carry.
The Tsar Bomba was basically a design of "if we really wanted to create the strongest bomb possible, how could we do it?" not something that would actually ever be made or used, since it's so damn expensive to put that kind of payload in a missile.

>>158137344
ye but then if its universe were the objects are made, you might as well make most powerful biggest nuke you can make and nuke the countries back to stoneage, cheaper to!

>>158137584
not if it gets shot down

>>158137277

The actually modern ones use even more even smaller warheads.

>>158132633
The square cube law strikes again!

The argument here is that real life doesn't work like that, but in the story there's magic so it works anyway.

Okay, guys, a wizard did it, this discussion is pointless.

>the objects basically nullify nukes

>but nukes tho xd

File: 1448188721647.jpg (478KB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

478KB, 1280x720px

It's because light objects are better than heavy objects. Even heavy object can't resist her.

>>158136591
>>158136659
The problem with that argument is that a nuke doesn't need to be fired from a missile in the first place, there are plenty of times where tanks/trucks/boats got close enough to objects that a single 1+MT nuke loaded into one of them could have been set off and would have at a very minimum completely disabled all of the Objects ability to prevent 10 more from being dropped on it. In reality the only way they could defend against nukes is to continually completely eradicate everything within about 20 miles of them, and even then someone could just lay nukes as mines under the ground and watch from space for when to detonate them.

The concept that an Object could survive a nuclear blast is also stupid, mainly because "surviving" one would still completely disable its propulsion, all of its weapons, and all of its ability to even see the outside world. The Object would turn into a deathtrap where the heat from the nuke in all likelihood would weld its door shut trapping the pilot to a slow, suffocating death.

>>158137709
realism only applies if you like it, right?

>>158124159
That requires metallic surface. Doesn't work on normal surface.

>>158125023
That looks more like it.

If objects were real, countries would develop the cheapest possible weapon that could scratch an object and deploy them en masse.
But I'd rather see two idiots blow them up using plastic explosives, a radio, and a bluff.

>>158136382
>>158136471
It gets lasered midway. Nukes are babby now in this age.

>>158137993

Laser CIWS works vs any physical object. It's just as effective against artillery shells.

>>158136815
Modern nukes are MIRV types now, anon. Still objects can shoot them down. Nukes are very expensive.

>>158137709
Yeah, once you get to the point where you're saying it's not just physically possible but also economically feasible to construct humongous invulnerable mobile battle stations, which don't require equally humongous supply chains to stay operational, you're so far into fantasy land that you can just go ahead and do whatever you want.

>>158138170
I said nothing about artillery shells, I literally mean Kamikazeing it.
there is no requirement for a nuclear weapon to be launched at all for it to detonate.
You could easily just put one in the back of a truck and have the thing sit waiting for the Object to get close enough and then press the detonate button

>>158138279

Pretty sure modern (as in from the 1960's) aircraft carriers would be so far into fantasy land for people in the 1700's.

>>158138138
>If objects were real, countries would develop the cheapest possible weapon that could scratch an object and deploy them en masse.
Oh look, it's another Object.

>>158137993
Objects has a fuckton of sensors and could sense a nuke from miles away either by land, sea or air.

Also modern objects in Q&H's time are totally immune to nukes

>>158138289
Object is still alive after it detonates and you just wasted a ton of money on a nuke

>>158138413
so detonate it in a base or in a city

>>158138461
Good luck trying to sneak it into the city

Could an object survive a direct hit from an O'neill-type space colony, assuming the object is located in Sydney, and the colony is intentionally being accelerated towards the surface?

>>158138289
>but the object will shoot down anything that gets within attack range!
well what if we have the cruise missile or truck follow a course that keeps it out of the object's line of sight
>the object will detect it and shoot straight through the terrain to destroy it!
but I thought the premise of the novels was that two foot soldiers were able to take down an object by themselves
>SHUT UP IT WORKS BECAUSE IT'S COOL

>>158138373
Nuke immunity is bullshit though, even if you could construct something that would protect the person inside you would not be able to construct something that wouldn't roll over from the force, whose external weaponry, external sensors, external propulsion would all remain functional, its complete fantasy
Also >>158138461
You're essentially demanding that things be boiled down further than they actually can be in reality when the premise of the thread is why they should not exist in reality.

>>158138506
Probably not, but there aren't any.
Rich people literally built villas on the moon.

>>158138461
Nuclear weapons are a little difficult to smuggle, and I don't think you could easily find agents capable of that who are willing to die in the blast.

>>158138498
so basically magic powersource and weapons is realistic for you, but getting nuke in or near a city isnt, OK :)

File: Untitled-1.jpg (26KB, 620x465px) Image search: [Google]

26KB, 620x465px

>>158123957
we are slowly getting there

>>158138551
Nuclear explosions are just a bunch of rapidly expanding air and heat coupled with radiation. Modern Object technology allows shielding from both heat and radiation as well as it being aerodynamic

>>158138582
We are talking about magic weapons and magic engines and you think brainwashing some fuck is to hard?

>cost billions
>can be destroyed by tweedle-dee and tweedle-dum
superweapons are a meme

>>158123203
Is this any good? And is it an anime or a manga?

>>158138595
You can't get a nuke into a city without being found out

>>158138595
Alright genius, how would you get a thermonuclear device into the population center of an enemy nation?
Were you planning on using FedEx?
Were you going to hide it in your anus?
Were you planning on moving there and buying some fissionable material from the drugstore?
There's a reason real terrorists use fertilizer and stolen trucks.

>>158138551

Operation Crossroads.

>>158123497
>>158123540

>country nearby keeps flooding yours with undesirables
>find out their spies have made up most of your upper crust for years
>they've illegally put their troops across your border multiple times despite having a treaty of peace
>one of their troops shoots one of your citizens during this
>they are a far weaker country than yours and your generals are all very certain they could wipe out the enemy in less than a day with 0 casualties
>find out they've started human trafficking operations across your borders

Do you solve this diplomatically?

>>158138540
>two foot soldiers were able to take down an object by themselves
Yes, by sneaking into the maintenance base and triggering the self-destruct mechanism.

How is this outlandish, exactly?
It was clearly established that the military doesn't actually do any military things.

>>158138723
Yes it's good. It's an anime and a LN.

>>158138747
I use magic, since obviously the object uses it to power its engines and weapons that can shoot anything down 100km radius obviously

>>158138755
War is diplomacy.
Nobody is interested in war to extermination, it's a waste of resources for everyone involved.

>>158138723
The anime adapted 3 out of 13+1 volumes in a 24 episode format.

It's really good, though the best parts are past the anime

>>158138822
Objects doesn't use magic though

>>158138863
>the best parts are past the anime
it literally starts getting good in the very next book. I know that this is a tired meme, but that's how it is.

>>158138838
So we agree then the holocaust did not happen.

>>158138751
>45kT
>>158138675
>dem aerodynamic gun ports and treads/pontoons/floats that totally wouldn't just get blown off from mechanical force created by the explosion

>>158124062
It's like you don't even know humanity.

>>158138931
Why are you considering that to be a "war"?

File: Nuclear shaped charge.jpg (74KB, 342x400px) Image search: [Google]

74KB, 342x400px

>>158138675
>Nuclear explosions are just a bunch of rapidly expanding air and heat coupled with radiation

So use a nuclear shaped charge, a force equal to 10x the yield of a conventional device is delivered over a 15 degree arc while the collateral destruction is that of a device 1/10th the power.

This thing fires a beam of tungsten plasma at a significant fraction of the speed of light. By the time detonation is detected it's already too late.

Incidentally, if Ramiel ever appeared on Earth, I would propose this as the best way of kicking her (shapely) geometric ass.

>>158138986
You think nuclear bombs are about physical destruction, it's not. Nuclear bombs don't operate like asteroid impacts.

Which is why you see some buildings still standing near ground zero of Nagasaki

>>158139047
how is this significantly different from an Object's main cannon?
Except that you can only shoot this once and then you have to go get a new one

>>158138595
Object reactors uses futuristic fusion reactors, there's literally no magic in it.

It's like you're saying we're magicians to people in the 1600s because we can communciate realtime across the globe.

>>158138797
>>158138863

Ah, is it online with a decent translations for the LN then?

>>158139156
It's all on Baka-tsuki.

>>158139156
https://mega.nz/#F!7RdnFbpC!WX68VUFTwQjnle5xjGzcsw

Go check the Heavy Object folder. Volume 13 still isn't digitally scanned so there's no epub yet but the translation is up in BakaTsuki

>>158139110

Exactly, also nukes are shit tier the moment we can make antimatter weapons, only our limited technology to manufacture it and contain it so it can be weaponize it prevent us from doing so.

>>158138371
Or just 2 dudes with explosives

>>158138773
The only outlandish thing about it is that nobody ever tried it before.

I mean, "blow it up in the garage" is one of the first ways you would try to deal with a supposedly invincible weapons platform. You wouldn't skip straight to dropping a nuclear weapon on it, or immediately throw up your hands in defeat when that didn't work. The obvious vulnerability of a vehicle that's too durable to be destroyed on the battlefield is the infrastructure that keeps it operational.

>>158139266
You'd need a lot of disposable flesh and blood soldiers with how much of them would go blind with burning retinas.

>>158139307
>The only outlandish thing about it is that nobody ever tried it before.
Clearly people did try it and it didn't work, so they stopped trying. And then people started to get comfortable with their giant ball jousting tournaments, which is why nobody gives a fuck anymore.

>>158139242
The Iron Dome is a huge step. Though it can only block shitty rockets

>>158139065
You're an idiot
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_weapon_yield

>>158139087
>how is this significantly different from an Object's main cannon?

It's actually possible with current (80s, in fact) technology. The biggest tragedy is that Edward Teller is dead, he had some smashing ideas about using extremely specialised metal alloys to create a nuclear pumped laser.

>Except that you can only shoot this once and then you have to go get a new one
The cost per unit is actually pretty low, especially considering how much plutonium has accumulated since NNPT and START I/II. Hundreds of thousands could be built with current stockpiles. Fit it with a lightweight, low radar cross-section airframe (basically, a Tomahawk) and you've got a truly devastating weapon with low collateral damage and relatively low fallout, assuming you aim above the horizon.

Throw a Sloika in there instead of a conventional atomic weapon and you're well on your way to shooting holes in mountains.

>>158138369
Yeah, but so were nuclear submarines with guided torpedoes, MIRV ICBMs and cruise missiles, radar, satellite GPS, SAM batteries, and stealth bombers.

Objects are like dropping the Nimitz into 1776 and saying that the British would get their asses beat. Which is true, at least for the few weeks before they ran out of fuel and parts, but it's not really a fair assessment of technology, physics, or wartime economics.

There's no way to have the technology necessary to create an Object without having more than enough technology to destroy it... unless a wizard did it, in which case, fine, whatever.

>>158139392
>nuclear pumped laser.

*nuclear pumped X-ray laser, put a few together with a common focal point and you have the Death Star on single reactor ignition.

>>158126142
It's worth watching for the OP timing in the last episode alone.

>>158139393
>There's no way to have the technology necessary to create an Object without having more than enough technology to destroy it... unless a wizard did it, in which case, fine, whatever.

But somehow, we're stuck with nukes because no one can destroy it without each side suffering mutual destruction.

>>158139307
They tried it when Objects first showed up, but First-Generation objects had a real focus on Anti-personnel and murdered everyone who tried. After decades of that the armies just stopped trying and everyone began making Objects specialized for Object vs Object fights because no one would be suicidal enough to try to destroy an Object with explosives and a rifle.
Not their greatest plan.

>>158139110
The fucking telegraph would have been mysticism to people in the 1600s. Using Facetime on your smartphone may as well be sorcery to pre-industrial society, yes.

File: [NoobSubs] Heavy Object 06 (720p Blu-ray 8bit AAC).mp4_snapshot_01.51_[2017.03.11_13.16.56].jpg (378KB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

378KB, 1280x720px

The only Objects that should become real

>>158139393
>There's no way to have the technology necessary to create an Object without having more than enough technology to destroy it
The first nine or so were destroyed without having any Objects. Then again, they weren't really Objects.

>>158139523
Heavy Objects are gross, I want light objects.

>>158123203
>>158124516
>Nukes
This. More specifically, the lack of effective coolant. Even if you would be able to defend against the explosion, you have to deal with the radiation and heat.
And no amount of anti-air missiles would be able to destroy 2000 rockets simultaneously.

By the way, thermonuclear weaponry can seriously be considered IRL doomsday weapon. You don't need to bother with delivering this thing to the target: just build it in your territory.
In a case of emergency, you would be able to throw humanity to the stone age.

>>158139489
You wouldn't attack an Object head on, you'd use stealthy technology. A midget submarine constructed from composites and running on electric propulsion would be utterly undetectable until it shoots it depressed trajectory load at you and, with decoy warheads (essentially, large aluminumised mylar balloons) one device is getting through.

Pouring your resources into a single large target is rarely a good strategy.

>>158139362

Antimatter is a very large step up, 1 gram is the equivalent to 3 times the wield of Little Boy.

I am talking about wields so imagine a payload warhead that of a Kilo would be a 21480 kilotons, the main problems is containment and of course production, right now the cost are unfeasible to even try and of course storing half a kilo of Antimatter is a challenge.

>>158139618
>More specifically, the lack of effective coolant
Objects have enough coolants to cool a reactor core, as well as it's big guns that produces treamendous amounts of heat


>And no amount of anti-air missiles would be able to destroy 2000 rockets simultaneously.
Objects doesnt youse anti-air missiles, it uses anti-air LASERS which are of the speed of light

>>158138994
Because they were tried for it as a war crime.

>>158139687

To put it in perspective, CERN uses 200MW yet the energy generated from reacting all the antimatter it has ever produced would only power a lightbulb for a single second.

>>158139618
If you're producing and launching 2000 rockets, maybe an object would he cheaper?

>>158139766
It happened during a war.
It was not actually a war in itself.

>>158139721
The ability to deal with the heat produced from powering an Object is insignificant compared to the power of a nuclear weapon.

When the Tsar Bomba was detonated (50MT) it produced, for a fraction of a second, 10% of the energy of the freaking Sun. Teller-Ulam devices are essentially infinitely scaleable, you just keep adding stages. If your Object can handle a half-gigaton device (I can't overstate how freakishly easily a nuclear power with the will and motivation to build such a device could do so) then it could survive being hurled into the Sun.

>>158139868
it wouldnt, to produce a fucking object spend enough money to build 10000's of nukes
Newest fairly small us battleship Zumwalt class cost 4bilion per unit, these object would cost 100's of bilions per unit, while a nuke cost like 10-20milion per unit.

File: Inventories2017-2.jpg (289KB, 1239x739px) Image search: [Google]

289KB, 1239x739px

>>158139721
>Objects have enough coolants to cool a reactor core, as well as it's big guns that produces treamendous amounts of heat
If they have a magical coolant in addition to a magical energy source, then I rest my case.
>Objects doesnt youse anti-air missiles, it uses anti-air LASERS which are of the speed of light
It doesn't matter. My point is that this thing is unable to carry enough anti-missile weaponry to destroy thousands of rockets all at once.
>>158139868
Quite possible. But pic related.

>>158139721
>it uses anti-air LASERS which are of the speed of light

A laser powerful enough to take on a depressed-trajectory missile (uses active propulsion during what would normally be the ballistic phase for faster time-to-target at the cost of reduced range/throw weight) heading right for it simply isn't possible within the atmosphere because of blooming.

>>158139936
What do you think is the power source being used to power a fucking object? It uses the power of the stars.

How is cooling it insignificant?

>>158140001
>Quite possible. But pic related.

It's also important to bear in mind that even these crazy levels of stockpiles are far below the resources of the top 5 nuclear powers thanks to numerous disarmament treaties. A 10% reallocation in military spending by the US (easily justified by another nation attempting to build an Object) would yield hundreds of thousands of missiles with exponentially more warheads drawn from material stockpiles.

>>158140053
It's going to be far smaller than the power of a thermonuclear weapon. It's like stopping a baseball going 100mph compared to stopping a bullet with a catcher's mitt.

>>158124062
Because i, for one, love heavy artillery.

Recent technological developments really ruined sci-fi for me.
>no mechs etc
anything that big, can be destroyed by a cheaper, smaller weapon. you can have a bunch of autonomous weapons for half the price of a neat big tank.
>space shit
At that point EVERYTHING would be automated, no reason to even get out of your cryo-pod.
>bionics
Will likely be so expensive that you will only get it through corporations you work for, want a bionic heart and +50 lifespan? Spend it working as a salaryman for Weyland-Yutani
>liberalism
Personal rights will become easier to suppress, we are building a world where those in power will have every tool they need to turn us into property.

The future is going to suck, although for a brief moment in time we may enjoy fuckbots and sex dolphins.

>>158141078
>Will likely be so expensive that you will only get it through corporations you work for, want a bionic heart and +50 lifespan? Spend it working as a salaryman for Weyland-Yutani

It's not that terrible. An abiocor costs $100k-300k while the operation for a normal heart transplant runs into the millions:
http://www.transplants.org/faq/how-much-does-transplant-cost

It's actually no more expensive than kidney transplant, at worst. The big cost will always be the guy who puts it in you.

File: 1433518729722.jpg (131KB, 565x575px) Image search: [Google]

131KB, 565x575px

>>158127020

>>158123203
did you even watch the show

File: 1310757303399.jpg (187KB, 800x503px) Image search: [Google]

187KB, 800x503px

>>158139721
>Objects have enough coolants to cool a reactor core, as well as it's big guns that produces treamendous amounts of heat
Coolant works by transporting heat from the area you want to keep cool, to an area where it can be safely radiated.

If the surrounding environment is itself extremely hot, your radiator will not work very efficiently.

>>158141225
I might have chosen a bad example, what i was going for was trans/post-human implants to take you to the next level. While it might be barely affordable for a replacement now, just imagine what an upgrade would cost in the future.
And looking at current trends, i think people will have far less disposable income in the future, and rely on goods & services from the state or their employer. In Europe it's happening in what would seem like a beneficial way, but if the money should ever run out we would be in a situation where you need the perks from a job to be able to afford a descent into poverty.
It's a pretty scary trend, none of us want to be working for food instead of pay.