Back to the main page

Mailing List Logs for ShadowRN

Message no. 1
From: The Deb Decker <RJR96326@****.UTULSA.EDU>
Subject: Controling Power Armor
Date: Sun, 5 Dec 1993 18:01:22 -0600
I don't thing you need a rigger, or even a datajack, to use it; the controls
could be built to be easily manipulated normally, ala Ripley's Walking
Forklift or the armored suits of the Knight Sabres in Bubble Gum Crisis.
Of course, neural interface is probably smoother and more efficient, but
hardly required.

J Roberson
Message no. 2
From: "C. Paul Douglas" <granite@********.CLARK.NET>
Subject: Re: Controling Power Armor
Date: Mon, 6 Dec 1993 15:45:02 -0500
On Sun, 5 Dec 1993, The Deb Decker wrote:

> I don't thing you need a rigger, or even a datajack, to use it; the controls
.... neural interface is probably smoother and more efficient, but
> hardly required.
>
personally i would not allow anyone in one of my games to run a powered
assault armour type outfit that wasn't a rigger...however larger mechs on
the order of something small from battle tech would not need to be run by
a rigger [imho] the controls could be easier automated so that a steering
wheel [as an example] could direct the mech .....has anyone seen exo-squad???
---------------------------------GRANITE
Message no. 3
From: Seth Buntain <enthar@*******.EECS.NWU.EDU>
Subject: Re: Controling Power Armor
Date: Mon, 6 Dec 1993 17:33:19 -0600
>
> I don't thing you need a rigger, or even a datajack, to use it; the controls
> could be built to be easily manipulated normally, ala Ripley's Walking
> Forklift or the armored suits of the Knight Sabres in Bubble Gum Crisis.
> Of course, neural interface is probably smoother and more efficient, but
> hardly required.
>
> J Roberson
>

You are of course correct. You dont _need_ to have a rigger control it, but
it is far faster. Just like you dont need a rigger to drive a car, but you
want one, to get the control pool.

Putting pressure activated pads on the inside of the limbs would give a rather
stiff and slow movement, but would generate movement. Initiative would have a
significant penelty, like -1d6. (Note, wired reflexes would give their normal
bonuses, because you would be pressing the plates faster, but you wouldnt move
nearly as smoothly as a rigger controlled suit, which might give some
penelties to the combat pool as well)

Speaking of which, perhaps it would make more sense to replace the combat pool
in an armor suit with the Riggers control pool, and non riggers would
therefore have no combat pool in a suit at all. And a penelty to initiative.
So... no one except a rigger would bother with a suit, just get the cyber.

--
Seth Buntain | (Space available for nifty quote)
Enthar the Eternal, Andrew the Awesome |
(V 1.01) GE d -p+ c++ l u e+(*) m(++) s/- !n h- f+ g- w+ t+(++) r+(++) !y
"It's a damn poor man who can't spell a wyrd in more than one way!"
-Thomas Jefferson
My opinions, comments and even facts are all mine.
Message no. 4
From: The Deb Decker <RJR96326@****.UTULSA.EDU>
Subject: Re: Controling Power Armor
Date: Mon, 6 Dec 1993 21:39:24 -0600
>personally i would not allow anyone in one of my games to run a powered
>assault armour type outfit that wasn't a rigger...however larger mechs on
>the order of something small from battle tech would not need to be run by
>a rigger [imho] the controls could be easier automated so that a steering
>wheel [as an example] could direct the mech .....has anyone seen exo-squad???

On the contrary, I think kinesthetically actuated power armor (e.g. you move
you arm, which is probably within the armor arm, and the armor arm moves
appropriately) is much easier to control without neural interface because
you are essentially just moving normally. However, Robotech-style battle
mecha, in which the user sits in a cockpit, would require more than a
steering wheel to accurately control and execute all the maneuvers available
to an anthropomorphic body, making neural interface imminently more
practical for such "giant robots".


J Roberson
Message no. 5
From: Richard Pieri <ratinox@***.NEU.EDU>
Subject: Re: Controling Power Armor
Date: Mon, 6 Dec 1993 22:50:08 EST
>>>>> On Mon, 6 Dec 1993 21:39:24 -0600 (CST), RJR96326@****.utulsa.edu
>>>>> said:

RJR96326> On the contrary, I think kinesthetically actuated power armor
RJR96326> (e.g. you move you arm, which is probably within the armor arm,
RJR96326> and the armor arm moves appropriately) is much easier to control
RJR96326> without neural interface because you are essentially just moving
RJR96326> normally.

It would be easier, although you'd take a reduction to Quickness and
Reaction due to milisecond delays in the armor's reaction times. That would
be the reasonable tradeoff against a rigged version and requiring a
piloting skill.

--
Rat <ratinox@***.neu.edu> Northeastern's Stainless Steel Rat
PGP 2.x Public Key Block available upon request
GAT d@ -p+ c++ !l u+ e+(*) m-(+) s n---(+) h-- f !g(+) w+ t- r+ y+
||| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |||
... and I didn't even need pants! --Dilbert [Scott Adams]
Message no. 6
From: "C. Paul Douglas" <granite@********.CLARK.NET>
Subject: Re: Controling Power Armor
Date: Tue, 7 Dec 1993 15:47:33 -0500
> Speaking of which, perhaps it would make more sense to replace the combat pool
> in an armor suit with the Riggers control pool, and non riggers would
> therefore have no combat pool in a suit at all. And a penelty to initiative.
> So... no one except a rigger would bother with a suit, just get the cyber.
>
good point here. i like this idea. and i don't know many runners that are
going to want to go stroling down the street with out their combat pool
much less on a run
----------------------GRANITE
Message no. 7
From: "C. Paul Douglas" <granite@********.CLARK.NET>
Subject: Re: Controling Power Armor
Date: Tue, 7 Dec 1993 15:55:35 -0500
On Mon, 6 Dec 1993, The Deb Decker wrote:

I think kinesthetically actuated power armor (e.g. you move
> you arm, which is probably within the armor arm, and the armor arm moves
> appropriately) is much easier to control without neural interface because
> you are essentially just moving normally.

I don't agree on this particular point at all - it would be quite
impossible to move "normally" especially since in order to make movements
you essentially have to press buttons or "simply" flex muscles [in the
case of a body stocking something akin to the old power glove for
nintendo{which by the way didn't work very well..imho}] well let us
simply say there would be some major initiative modifiers. besides the
possiblity of inccorect buttons being pushed accidentally and you go
careening off balance - a nervouse twitch could be turned into something
quite painful.
the size of the powered armor would have to be significantly larger as
well to accomidate the physical switches involved. plus the feedback of
information would be more than a little difficult to comprehend much less
react to. i personally think this kind of thing should remain in the
hands of a rigger

... require more than a
> steering wheel to accurately control and execute all the maneuvers available
> to an anthropomorphic body, making neural interface imminently more
> practical for such "giant robots".
>
wel i said a steering wheel i was over simplifying to make the point of
controls would be more easily incorporated in something larger [a lot
more space to work with for one thing] closer to the kind of non-rigger
controls needed would be something of cross between an f-16 and a
helicoptor - and i wasn't thinking on some change into something else
autobot wanna-be either
-------------------------------GRANITE

Further Reading

If you enjoyed reading about Controling Power Armor, you may also be interested in:

Disclaimer

These messages were posted a long time ago on a mailing list far, far away. The copyright to their contents probably lies with the original authors of the individual messages, but since they were published in an electronic forum that anyone could subscribe to, and the logs were available to subscribers and most likely non-subscribers as well, it's felt that re-publishing them here is a kind of public service.

Thwap!