>Vagina plate

>Vagina plate
So is this where the female armor debate ended?

  1. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    dios mio

  2. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    the CQC in the tv adaptation is shit it was way better in the book
    the ship to ship stuff is more decent

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      Most of the art based on the books isn't much better. I mean look at this, her vagina is the ONLY thing protected.

      Ideally female armor should involve a skirt of IIIa soft Kevlar to extend to the mid-thigh thus protecting the femoral artery. But getting shot in the snatch is not fatal if it's treated.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        >I mean look at this, her vagina is the ONLY thing protected.
        Well, I mean, that's the only important part.

        They're still fuckable even when missing arms, legs, heads, whatever, but without a vagina, what's the use of having a woman around?

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          Anal, oral, boobies.
          A true hunter uses all parts of the beast my dude.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            Now you're just asking for somebody to post that famous image of a Russian ass lying in a field. (Seriously, though, imagine being that bro, fr. 8 billion people on this planet, and that happens to be your fate...)

            • 1 month ago
              Anonymous

              Sex with the living is better than sex with the dead. Don't ask me how I know this.
              And what if we invade a country where all the chicks are frigid uggos? We need to conserve our mobile pussy supply.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            >Anal

            Degenerate.

            • 1 month ago
              Anonymous

              That's what your mum called me when I asked for her arse. She still let me tho.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                >asked
                beta

            • 1 month ago
              Anonymous

              Anal is the chad move. Only chads fuck their women in the ass

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        In emergency care, genital injuries are classed as life threatening. Literally on the same tier as your femoral getting sliced. Most people that suffer debilitating genital injuries either kill themselves or live with uncurable depression for the rest of their lives

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          Getting your femoral artery sliced = dead.
          Hospitals class you as dead from massive blood loss.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            your comment does not change the fact that genital trauma is triaged as the highest level of casualty care.

            • 1 month ago
              Anonymous

              Your comment does not change the fact that no woman has died from getting shot in the snatch ergo the requirement for a heavy plate over the vagina is non-existent.

              A IIIa kevlar skirt is not just sufficient, it's superior, because it also protects the femoral arteries which actually do require protection.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                it's about getting your fucking genitals mangled and being unusable for life you god damn retard. I literally explained it to you in the clearest and most consise way possible and you still managed to completely disregard combat casualty care SOPs because you want to fantasize about women in armor skirts like a cumbrain chud.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                >it's about getting your fucking genitals mangled and being unusable for life you god damn retard.
                Yeah getting your arms and legs blown off sucks too. Getting your hands caught in machinery sucks. Getting your spine shot out leving your paralized from the waste down and incapable of every enjoying sex again also sucks.

                Just getting injured in general sucks, and it happens a lot in war.

                Get shot in the head, heart, liver, pancreas, throat or major artery on the other hand doesn't injure you, it kills you. Which is why those are the parts that need protection, not your fucking fingers and toes.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                >I have no experience or understanding of any military medical corps and will disregard the experience behind why their SOPs are what they are because I want to self insert as a cute 2d girl with an armored skirt like in my favorite anime

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                >I will derail any and all reasonable discussion

                NTA, but you're arguing your own lil retard brain against literal military doctrine, so I dunno what point you're trying to make here

                >while treating PrepHole like fucking discord by making multiple posts every fucking time.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                >I dunno what point you're trying to make here
                Maybe you should actually fucking read the point? Just try it just once.

                The point isn't to be 100% in line with doctrine, the point is to improve doctrine.

                >says the moron making multiple posts himself
                and I'm not

                In emergency care, genital injuries are classed as life threatening. Literally on the same tier as your femoral getting sliced. Most people that suffer debilitating genital injuries either kill themselves or live with uncurable depression for the rest of their lives

                , fuckwit

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                this is true

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                NTA, but you're arguing your own lil retard brain against literal military doctrine, so I dunno what point you're trying to make here

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                >I dunno what point you're trying to make here
                Maybe you should actually fucking read the point? Just try it just once.

                The point isn't to be 100% in line with doctrine, the point is to improve doctrine.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                >you don't understand. my waifu NEEDS a IIIA skirt!

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                Which isn't actually an argument against IIIa skirts.

                [...]
                >says the moron making multiple posts himself
                and I'm not [...], fuckwit

                https://i.imgur.com/upCHEUY.png

                this is true

                Bullshit you're not. The number of IPs ITT hasn't gone up.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                this will be my last post to you because I 100% pegged you correctly as an anime loving discord chud. if the number of IPs hasn't gone up and I replied to that anon under a minute, it means we both previously posted in this fucking thread. Jesus fist fucking christ why are all tranime fags so irredeemably retarded and degenerate

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                >this will be my last post to you
                Oh thank fuck for that.
                You're also a fucking newfag because you don't recognize Tarrant-chan, the genderbent Christchurch Mosque shooter. Not an anime character you absolute retard.

                the guy you are arguing with is correct, you are a defective sperm, and the only thing impressive about is how wrong you are.

                You are the guy I'm arguing with, you took the time to type out both messages while resetting your router then posted them at once which is why there was a delay. YOU'RE new. I'm not.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                >The number of IPs ITT hasn't gone up
                >it's totally fucking impossible that two anons on a 250-post thread are posting where they've previously posted before
                your brain cell must get lonely from time to time

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                >This is the last (you) from me
                nek minnut
                >(you)

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                >just maybe, maybe it might be another anon...?
                >nah

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      That looks fucking terrible.

      Why are torpedoes being launched forwards suddenly being dragged back as if in atmosphere

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        They're not. The ship firing them is accelerating because it's engine is on.

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          Brainlets that don't understand relative motion shouldn't talk about space warfare
          You will only struggle.
          Not that I'm defending this awful show.

          different anon but its still dumb because that launcher has to push a probably half ton torpedo out and past the ship when they could just drop the fucker off the side and use like a quarter of the force

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            >drop the fucker off the side
            hard to do when accelerating at several G's

            • 1 month ago
              Anonymous

              i doubt it's harder then pushing it in the direction of said Gs. Hell You could even robo arm it in a rotary launcher if you have it on the side so it drops free and clear

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                Things do not "drop" in space. They accelerate when a force acts on them in the direction the force is acting on them.

                the acceleration of that would seriously fuck you up

                Spinning in place is not accelerating.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                they werent spinning in place the crew did a sudden 30m radius circle in like a second thats abrupt sudden acceleration that would fuck you up.

                in the book the rocinante's military crash couches are gimballed which would mitigate it somehow but with the gaming chairs they use in the show that would be rough.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                No they didn't. All they did was light the ohms burners on opposite sides of the ship to change it's orientation. The ship continued to move at constant velocity in the direction it was travelling in before the maneuver. It's acceleration was zero.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                they went from massive forward acceleration to massive sideways acceleration going in a ~30m circle in a second

                this is another design flaw IMO of atleast the show rocinante, it's COM is portrayed around it's geometrical center and yet the flight and command deck are on the forward tip of the spaceship which is where the crew is going to be during fights.
                this is
                >the crew compartment with the least hull and bulkheads between it and the direction where the enemy is presumed to be so it's the least protected from enemy munitions and shrapnel
                >the furthest compartment away from the ship's COM so if it needs to do a hard spin this compartment gets

                assuming ~1 sec railgun spin ~30m from the COM it's a ~188m circumference spin in 1 second. that's a 1178 m/sec^2 acceleration spin, more then 117G spin which is more than enough to kill anyone. even with their fancy acceleration medicine and crash couches , i think in the book and even the show they say anything over 10 is barely survivable and only for a brief time.

                its just one of the numerous inaccuracies of the show, another one is that scene where they show the earth mars war with earth's railgun missiles taking out martian nuke launchers. on their screens the missiles are shown reaching mars in seconds when mars is ~2AU or ~16 lightminutes away. or the 'slingshotting' scene where alex slingshots around the moons of jupiter to avoid the MCRN, the kinds of slingshots he does would take weeks/months in real time but are portrayed like he did it in a couple of hours.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                No but you see the ships and railguns and stuff are really fast/powerful.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                thats my point its so powerful your brain gets splattered accelerating at 107 G/s if you're inside them

                the books later get to magic-level scifi with laconian ships having full immersion crash couches that can handle even more acceleration but nowhere near 100+G

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                Even though the second two Hyperion series books were shit compared to the greatness of Hyperion and Fall of Hyperion, I did like how they got over the extreme acceleration issue by having the acceleration turn people into paste, and then having the AI symbiot rebuild them molecule by molecule.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                so they die each time the ship accelerates too much and a clone of them is built?
                might as well do the altered carbon thing and transmit the consciousness/personality information of people to the destination and download them into a meat puppet on the other end.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                Yes, but the clone building symbiote is only given out by the Catholic Church, the gift of resurrection.

                It's supposedly derived from an exotic alien life from found by a saint. The story starts in the first book which is a retelling of the Canterbury Tales

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                i only watched the show tbh
                i tried an audiobook of the book but i didnt like the narrator

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                nvm i thought you mean AC

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                The soul canonically exists in Hyperion, if they were really dying Kasad's fifteen foot tall infinitely fast ex girlfriend made of swords would know.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                Fag can't even handle 100G acceleration, so what you run your car into a wall at 150+ and you just die? Why bother living.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                You got the nuke launchers scene COMPLETELY wrong. The stealth launch platforms aren't in orbit around Mars; they're in orbit around EARTH. They're a stealthy dagger hanging over the blue planet, martians' ultimate first strike capability. They're not the scifi equivalent of minutemen in a silo; they're the nuclear subs hanging out just off the coast, waiting for a signal.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                the martian launch platforms arent orbiting earth they are all over the system. in solar orbits between earth and mars

                at any point some are on earth's side of the system and some are on the side away from earth since the plafroms orbit slower than earth. which means their ranges from earth are between right next to earth (lightseconds away) to ~2.6 AU (mars + earth orbital distances from the sun)
                in

                you see the railguns fire, the platform on the right of pic related is ~2AU from earth which is 16.6 lightminutes and yet the interceptor shot from the railgun (im assuming its a hyper fast torpedo fired from that railgun to give it a big initial boost for to cut time to target)
                even if it shoots at 99% the speed of light it wouldnt go nearly as fast as it's shown in the show, those are superluminal,time traveling railgun shots in the show. and nothing in the show is even implied at being capable of anywhere near such speeds.

                also from the animation of the railgun shot hitting the platform 05:05 their relative velocity is portrayed as super slow. the fact that you even see the shrapnel bits hitting the platform from frame to frame means they're going way under sub 10km/sec relative to eachother and just the regular orbital velocity of that platform around the sun is ~25-30 km/s.

                the show portrays the railgun shots as both going over the speed of light in one scene and going so slow that you can see them from fram to frame without slowmotion in another scene (going literally slower than the orbital velocity of the platform,relative to it)

                expanse is nowhere near being a proper space scifi

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                >yet the interceptor shot from the railgun
                reaches it in seconds*

                and yea theres this bullshit

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                write the fanfic where this maneuver takes exactly as long as it should, anon
                isn't the slingshotter who goes through the warp gate depicted as being in the craft for months in the book?

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                i dont remember how it is in the book i think there it wasnt such a big manuver as portrayed in the show and it did take much longer

                i just think it would be more interesting if such things were portrayed in a realistic way. good futuristic scifi is good because the things show in it are seen as a possible way for things to turn out in real life. a lot of near-future on-earth scifi does this well like most black mirror episodes i just want the same for near and far future stuff in orbit or deeper into the solar system.

                pic is a good example of a near future space scifi done right. its about a sino-US race for saturn in 2066. plenty of interesting intregue and action without invoking any magic tech, even the space maneuvers in the book are simulated on a real space maneuver simulation software and the position of each planet is correct for the dates in the book.

                idk about other but this sort of thing makes a story feel more grounded and greatly increases immersion which makes the plot work batter whatever the plot may be.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                Holy based.
                That book was great. Rare to see it recommended. You have good taste, anon.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                here's what i mean
                it's a distance of atleast 2 AU

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                moron you know i exactly what i meant. but fine let me reword it for your pedantic ass.
                >a rotary launcher with extendable pylons would be a far better way to clear the sides of the ship while under thrust attempting to yeet the fucker forwards into the path of thrust and have it jet off to the side and clear of the ship

                Kinda kino tbh

                Its BF3 metro of course it is. Who's ready for some full auto frag rounds and way way to many flashbangs

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                you're right these ships are mainly designed to fight while pointing and thrusting directly at the enemy (thats the direction the coaxial railgun is mounted and all the arcs of all 6 PDCs of the rocinante converge in it's direct front)

                a far more robust,lightweight and simple design would be for the torpedoes to either be shot sideways by mass drives (the way they are shot forward in the original design) of for them to just detach sideways clear of the ship. see the way drummer's ship fires torpedoes in

                they werent spinning in place the crew did a sudden 30m radius circle in like a second thats abrupt sudden acceleration that would fuck you up.

                in the book the rocinante's military crash couches are gimballed which would mitigate it somehow but with the gaming chairs they use in the show that would be rough.

                the earth and mars ships have dedicated launchers kinda to portray them as fancier and more sophisticated than the belters that just bolt torpedoes to the side but bolting torpedoes to the side is actually smarter

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                >nder thrust attempting to yeet the fucker forwards into the path of thrust
                No moron you don't know what I mean.
                You have to get penis shaped object from where it is now to the enemy's anus. You propose accelerating it at 90 degrees to the direction of enemy anus because you think accelerating it at 15 degrees tangential to the direction of enemy anus is doingitwrong.

                Because you don't understand basic newtonian mechanics.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                what the fuck are you talking about, the weapon does not have to point sideways it can still point in the direction of thrust. its just pushed out from the side of the craft instead of forward.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                the minute you push something away the ship will fly past it at several thousand meters per second, so long as the ship is accelerating

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                The ship isn't accelerating nearly that much, the crew would be mush at those gs, so would the ship

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                Point? What the fuck does point mean in this context.

                Lets be fucking clear on what you think is going on.
                1. The missile is released from it's restraints
                2. It "drops" 90 degrees from the direction of acceleration of the ship
                3. It somehow slows down to stationary
                4. It fires it's engine and accelerates in a straight line to target.

                What actually happens.
                1. The missile is released from it's constraints and thus continues to move in the same direction and the same speed it was going at which is insufficient to ever collide with it's target.
                2. The launching vessel gives it a boost in a direction which will not involve the acclerating launching vessel colliding with it.
                3. The missile accelerates in a direction to correct it's current course and velocity to one which will result in a collision.

                There is no drop, there is no point, there is merely masses, forces, velocities and accelerations.

                The optimal arrangement is the one that relies on as many of the available forces pushing the relevant masses on correct courses with the least amount of wasted energy as possible.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                The launcher propels the weapon directly forwards there is not angle with it's launch it's a fixed system. If it did it at like 10 degrees this wouldn't be an issue. You're still throwing something in front of you and accelerating into it while it is not.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                the guy you are arguing with is correct, you are a defective sperm, and the only thing impressive about is how wrong you are.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            It´s a cargo ship, anon. Don´t expect it optimized for space combat.

            Also, the torpedo engine can do that easy, it isn´t limited by G forces like the ship is.

            • 1 month ago
              Anonymous

              both ships are doing it along with most of the other ships in the show. In fact the only ships that do side launch them are converted freighters. As for the MCRN Tachi was a frigate the MCRN built its pretty hard to say it wasn't a purpose built warship.

            • 1 month ago
              Anonymous

              >it's a cargo ship
              I haven't read the books in a while but isn't the Roci a stolen Martian warship?

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                It´s a cargo ship, anon. Don´t expect it optimized for space combat.

                Also, the torpedo engine can do that easy, it isn´t limited by G forces like the ship is.

                >Frigate
                100% Martian Warship

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        Brainlets that don't understand relative motion shouldn't talk about space warfare
        You will only struggle.
        Not that I'm defending this awful show.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        its not in atmosphere and nowhere is atmosphere implied its a fight in the belt

        the rocinante's torpedoes are launched forward by a mass driver and push away from the ship with side thrusters so that they dont hit the ship with their exhaust. their engines apperantly take time to start properly accelerating and keeping up with the ship and the torpedo launcher compensates for it by launching them forward fast enough

        i do think this is a design flaw in both ships, some of the belter warships are portrayed with torpedoes just bolted to their sides which is a much better design as this way they are clear of the parent ship the moment they launch as opposed to launching them forward in the direction of thrust.

        the guy making the original rocinante 3d model probably wasnt wasnt thinking about this stuff so they were stuck with forward launching torpedoes when they should have been launching sideways

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          >ILL TRY SPINNING, THAT"S A GOOD TRICK

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            in space spinning is legitimately a good idea, especially against lasers

            • 1 month ago
              Anonymous

              Enemy: FIRE EVERYTHING
              Anon: *spins*

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                It kind of makes sense the way the PDCs (CWIS equivalent) are set up, spinning ensures equal ammo usage across the PDCS and if one jams, which happens a couple times in the show, you're not left with an uncovered sector

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          why are there flames coming out of the back of the ciws guns?
          are they supposed to be tiny gatling recoilless rifles or some shit?

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            >tiny gatling recoilless rifles
            makes sense, given this is space
            nice catch

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            yes
            otherwise recoil would fuck up the accuracy

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          I just realized how much this ship looks like a kadeshi battle cruiser from homeworld 1

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            I think you mean Kushan

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        They had actual physicists working on the show to make the space combat 'real' sweetie, so unless you are willing to put up some credentials, sit the fuck down

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          That doesn't mean they couldn't still make mistakes. The way torpedoes have to launch forward while the ship is under thrust is one of the main simple mistakes in the show. Launch bays facing to the the side if they have to be used under thrust makes more sense and if they have to launch forward it would be only a small inconvenience at space combat distances to just stop thrust during launch and get back under power afterward.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            I'm struggling to understand this post.
            >Launch bays facing to the the side if they have to be used under thrust makes more sense
            in what way? you don't launch a missile sideways for much the same reason aircraft don't today, excepting some of the latest short-range missiles - g forces.
            >if they have to launch forward it would be only a small inconvenience at space combat distances to just stop thrust during launch and get back under power afterward
            still not a better idea than dropping it out of side-mounted weapons bays, which obviates the need to stop thrusting or for a launch system

            • 1 month ago
              Anonymous

              The missiles are firing to a target hours away anyway. They don't need to be launched against the force of acceleration of the ship in addition to their own inertia. The missiles are depicted in the show moving to the side anyway to get out of the way of the ship that's still behind them and accelerating so the difference between forward launching and side launching is negligible at the distances that are involved.

              the CQC in the tv adaptation is shit it was way better in the book
              the ship to ship stuff is more decent

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                >The missiles are depicted in the show moving to the side anyway to get out of the way of the ship that's still behind them and accelerating
                >diagram
                yeah, that's what I understood from the 1 or 2 battles I've seen, and it makes sense

                >the difference between forward launching and side launching is negligible
                a forward launch needs to "clear" the front of the ship before igniting the rocket motor, which is non-trivial if under high acceleration; probably the best way is a powerful electromagnetic launcher which would also impart a little additional velocity to the missile

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                It's not just non trivial, it's basically impossible if they don't adjust the engines down during launch because the missiles aren't accelerating at all until their engines come on. The amount of energy they get added by being launched forward vs to the side is almost nonexistant on the scale of space combat.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                it depends
                in the expanse the missile launcher is barely strong enough to overcome the spacecraft's forward acceleration, its only there to make launch possible while accelerating forward at maximum power.

                for non magic meme spacecraft like the epsteins in expanse you'll probably want some kind of railgun or coilgun to to launch the missile.
                giving it an extra 200m/s without wasting ant propellant is already a massive advantage

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                webm vidya looks cool, if a tad unpolished, what's it?

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                in the black
                it's in beta now

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                the readouts look breddy cool
                >tfw you remember the original Wing Commander

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                theyre all functional i think

            • 1 month ago
              Anonymous

              >you don't launch a missile sideways for much the same reason aircraft don't today
              except modern aircraft do launch the missile sideways. it's released from either a pylon or a bomb bay and then turns on it's rocket engine when it's clear of the launching plane.

              https://i.imgur.com/KPCiRUl.png

              The missiles are firing to a target hours away anyway. They don't need to be launched against the force of acceleration of the ship in addition to their own inertia. The missiles are depicted in the show moving to the side anyway to get out of the way of the ship that's still behind them and accelerating so the difference between forward launching and side launching is negligible at the distances that are involved.
              [...]

              launching forward requires a powerful mass driver to counteract the ship's acceleration going 10G forward. this is what yo see in

              the CQC in the tv adaptation is shit it was way better in the book
              the ship to ship stuff is more decent

              the mass driver shoots it forward, it's side thruesters move it clear of the ship's path and only then the torpedo's main engine ignites. if you launched the torpedoes sideways you wouldnt need a strong launcher to counteract 10G of potential acceleration. thats one less component to pay for,maintain. one less thing that can break and cause your missiles to slam back into your own ship when you want to launch them.

              the martians had a torpedo launcher instead of just bulting the torpedoes to the outside like the belters for several reasons
              >can perform all the maintenance from inside the ship
              >torpedoes are protected by the ship's armor from debris,micromereorites,whatever
              >stealth (these arent the amon-ra class but apparently they were fairly stealthy when not firing the main engine)
              but there's no reason why the opening where the torpedoes shoot out should be towards the front. the torpedoes should shoot out either towards the back or even better sideways to get some distance away from the ship.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                >it's released from either a pylon or a bomb bay and then turns on it's rocket engine when it's clear of the launching plane
                that is not launching sideways; ie, the direction of travel of the missile is the same as the aircraft

                >the torpedoes should shoot out either towards the back
                it will lose significant velocity "shooting out" that way; best if merely dropped
                >or even better sideways to get some distance away from the ship
                if the missile's direction of travel is a few degrees off that of the ship, again you lose velocity and subject the missile to unnecessary G

                It's not just non trivial, it's basically impossible if they don't adjust the engines down during launch because the missiles aren't accelerating at all until their engines come on. The amount of energy they get added by being launched forward vs to the side is almost nonexistant on the scale of space combat.

                >it's basically impossible if they don't adjust the engines down during launch because the missiles aren't accelerating at all until their engines come on
                they can use an electromagnetic launcher or even a tiny charge to eject it out the forward tube. that will give time for the missile's onboard rocket engines to fire.

                >The amount of energy they get added by being launched forward vs to the side is almost nonexistant on the scale of space combat
                yeah, maybe.

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          I can tell you've never been to college

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      Doing justice to what our best guess for what space warfare will look like is impossible.

      The softer sci-fi stuff, e.g., Star Wars is just WWII battles in space, but people still get autistic about it ("reeeee, why do the fighters make noise as they fly!").

      If you go harder sci-fi it gets less and less intuitive and fun to watch. No one wants to watch a Revelation Space Battle where ships spam drones against each other at relativistic speeds and the entire battle occurs at massive distances and is just a matter of whose drones and auto factories have better algorithms, even if this is more likely to be how it works.

      This looks fine in terms of that shit. The ship is probably accelerating relative to the torpedos. The bigger problem for me is how obvious the CGI is.

      I get that it's cheap, by 9/10 practical effects still look better. I swear CGI looked better decades ago. Partly this was just expectations, some old CGI I thought was great does look bad now, but partly I blame higher resolutions and frames. It's more obvious something is unnatural on 4k than a tube TV playing a VHS of LOTR. Directors also do longer direct takes of CGI now instead of quick shots with blue. The effect is bad though. CGI animals all look fake as shit. The old taxidermy puppets looked better. Also the use of pure CGI vs models mixed with CGI. Maybe it is budgets, but it seems like laziness.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        its not impossible, soft scifi like expanse barely try most of the time.

        >No one wants to watch a Revelation Space Battle where ships spam drones against each other at relativistic speeds and the entire battle occurs at massive distances
        you dont have to make it hyper futuristic.you can put plot constraints and set the story in the near future. make it warfare with technologies we have today except we can cheaply get it to orbit

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          >soft scifi like expanse
          I remember when the expanse was getting praised for putting the most effort into hard science space rules for a tv show.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            >multi-terawatt rocket engines on an 80m spacecraft
            >no radiators

            expanse isnt scifici its space fantasy, even if they handwave magic materials that can withstand the heat such engines would produce said engines and their radiators would glow with blackbody radiation.

            atleast in the books they dont go into much detail on the things which seem to come close to breaking known physics so you could imagine the ships do have powerful heat management systems.

            • 1 month ago
              Anonymous

              Yes, everything is space fantasy.
              At some point you're supposed to grow out of sci Fi.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        Despite putting no work into the combat scenes Star Trek, at least TNG, DS9, and Voyager actually do this better. Combat is all about finding out how the enemy tech works and developing novel breakthroughs. The part where shit gets through the shields and doesn't instantly kill everyone might be off, but the idea of it being mostly a duel of experimentation makes more sense.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        I think it is both that practical effects are better, and that they're reaching an uncanny valley in the 4K HD area. If you look at recent Marvel and DC movies (Endgame and WW2) they seem to be experiencing the same problems, so it's not just a money problem

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      I felt the battle between the Donager and the stealth ships in the 1st season, episode 4 I think, was far better than anything they've shown since.

      The whole 1st season still remains my favourite. It has something I can't name or put my finger on, but something that makes it pure kino

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        Yep.
        I feel the best part was the medic getting popped.
        No explosion, no big effects, just gone. Super high velocity not caring what's in the way. Liked the emergency sealant supplies in the room as well. Most shows completely forget things like damage control.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        the donnager fight with stealth ships was interesting because it was around a large station that provides cover
        most of the latest season fights are in open space with no points of reference other than the ring space fight

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          There was no space station in the Donnager fight. The first fight with a space station was the Rocinante vs. The 2 stealth ships with the breaching team breaking into the station afterwards.

  3. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    I have on good authority from chicks who do martial arts that being punched in the cunt is some of the worst pain a woman can feel. I mean it makes sense, men wore codpieces to protect their balls in the age of iron and steel plate armor, so it stands to reason that if a statistically relevant amount of women were wearing armor too, vagina plates would have been a trend. Its just that women don't fight, so they never became a thing.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      Ask those chicks if they've ever knocked their funny bone. That's the same nerve that makes getting kicked in the balls so painful.

      There's no exposed nerve on a vagina, it's just a kick to the soft tissue. In the meantime men in full combat armor today do not wear ball armor.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        Yes they do. People often elect not to wear groin panels due to perceived unnecessary bulk, but they're mass issued and bongs had ballistic diapers for IEDs as well.

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          >blast-paintes.jpg

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          Those british groin armor are level IIIA too. I've dismantled and shot a few of them just to check

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            This is exciting news, I might actually be able to get a handle on my insecurity, which is fueled entirely by my constant fear of being shot in the dick.

  4. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Why is most mainstream sci-fi armor design so trash? It seems like everyone just goes with "plates over a bodysuit" and leaves it at that. There's rarely any experimentation with how exoskeletons could be used, no interesting takes on soft or flexible body armor that could arise from new materials technology. No attempt to even make it look like it could take a hit without crushing you from the energy transfer alone. When will le gritty stormtrooper or le stormtrooper with hexagons go away?

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      that's why i just have them mount fuck off panels to armatures i attach to their skeleton.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        Kinda kino tbh

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        >Center and left girl about to be shredded by grenade
        >right girl ducked due to friendly fire
        >girl in the back out of position
        >candy falling literally everywhere

        I both love and hate this image

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          >>girl in the back
          thispartysucksmyfeethurt.jpeg

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      That was what I liked about mass effects armor, vacuum sealed skinsuits with a stiffening liquid armor layer and energy shields over top. Then the sequels turned it into generic scifi hard plates, bleh.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      It's not just mainstream, I cannot find a single concept art of female armor that doesn't involve a unitard and a crotch plate. Often with little or no protection over vital organs, but with armored shoulders and other dumb stuff.

      Picrel, how is she supposed to pee and poop? Unitards are bad enough because you have to strip down to a bra to go to the toiler, but this would involve doffing an entire suit of skin tight armor.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        Obviously it's a still suit, you just piss and shit yourself and the suit will slowly absorb it, then serve it back to you later as a tasty snack.

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          And the machinery for that is located where exactly? The completely exposed center mass? Or the ludicrously armored shoulder blades?

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            Yes

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            what machinery do you need for a catheter?

            • 1 month ago
              Anonymous

              Suction pump to really drain those femaleballs

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        >Picrel, how is she supposed to pee and poop?
        A nice design feature would be to unhook a flap at the crotch for easy access. Military issues women funnels to piss through, the funnel allows use through the fly of trousers. Pooping seems to be a problem on those leotards as there is no ass clearance.

        Biologically women have a smaller bladder but they might be able to hold the dump like a man can.

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          A skirt does all of that but better.
          Tactical shits can be taken without taking your hand off your weapon or risking the poo hitting the pants.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        You don't actually need to poop in space due to no gravity.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        See that's what the vag plate is for, just remove it, go and bamm screw it back on. No need to take off the whole suit.

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          OR just wear a skirt and go commando. That way poopies are easy too.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        This is the ultimate in female soldier protection.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      honestly only one that i can remember breaking that trend is Crysis's nanosuit. Even that has a groin plate and uh bottom rib protector?

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        >bottom rib protector
        Basically a "shoot here" sign so the enemies know where your vital organs are.

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          So, theres armour on the stomach but not on the tits? Why isnt she just topless then, if the tits must be shown.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            Molle webbing isn't armor.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      Costume doesn't have the time to or budget for that

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      Armor is often shit because it doesn't get enough attention and gets turned over to art majors who are told to make it unique. They also want to make extras look the same and important characters standout. They rarely use helmets because they want you to see facial expressions and know who is who.

      The result is normally bad though. Attempts to make it look unique end up making it look nonsensical. They also have futuristic armor, but also want to have melee combat, so you get armored people somehow instantly killing each other with blade swipes, like in Dune.

      Maximilian's duel scene is a rare movie that does armor right, even if the great swords are anachronistic. You get the right feel of the weapons being heavy, the fighters getting tired quickly, the armor actually being fucking useful and protecting you from hits, but also the fact that no amount of armor is going to keep you safe from a dude teeing off on your dome with a four foot long piece of steel. It ends appropriately with a guy down and ready to be stabbed due to blunt force trauma and rotational forces on his head.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      it just has to look good enough on screen while being light and comfortable enough for actors to wear all day while doing action scenes

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      Because every movie and garden gnomeflix show hires from the same pool of like 5 different movie space suit designers who's shit all looks the same. Even SpaceX hired some movie gay Hispanic to design their flight suits (they're not real space suits unless they're made by the David Clark Company REEEEEEEEEEEE)

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        >David Clark Company
        Very satisfying to read about these guys.

  5. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Hard armor should extend from the bottom of the ribcage to the top of the neck.
    Soft armor should extend from the bottom of the ribcage to the mid thigh in semi-loose skirt.
    Soft armor leggins and armings(?) should cover the arms and legs.
    Panties/diapers optional.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      https://i.imgur.com/x1bqZNg.jpg

      Most of the art based on the books isn't much better. I mean look at this, her vagina is the ONLY thing protected.

      Ideally female armor should involve a skirt of IIIa soft Kevlar to extend to the mid-thigh thus protecting the femoral artery. But getting shot in the snatch is not fatal if it's treated.

      Retards we figured out how to have hard armor cover the midsection and pelvis without interrupting motion five hundred years ago.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        Figured it out for men, who are stronger but less flexible and don't have boobs.

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          >omg da boobs
          look at modern female armor or historic female armor dumb fuck
          you just curve the armor around the entire chest area, it's not hard
          modern multicurve plates work fine on tits up to like C cups which is going to include the vast majority of women who aren't fat

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          It shouldn't matter either way. The biggest limiting factor in modern armor is the weight of everything else you have to carry, not the weight of the armor itself.
          And once you introduce powered elements weight becomes almost a non issue, and there's no point to have huge exposed soft armor sections.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      this is a great design/image, what's it from?

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        internet

  6. 1 month ago
    Anonymous
    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      the acceleration of that would seriously fuck you up

  7. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Those are chastity belts, you non-scifi barbarians would not understand.

  8. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    It's to hide the smell

  9. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Reject modernity.
    Embrace tradition.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >Armor the stomach, not the chest
      >Assume they will never need to go to the bathroom.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        You're now a master of female armor design.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        >go to the bathroom
        But they can still apply makeup just fine? Females do not poop as you know.

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          Being prettier than the enemy demoralizes them.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            >Beautiful women are scary
            Fact

            • 1 month ago
              Anonymous

              It's probably good for friendly morale too. Looking good is feeling good etc.
              We skill need to get rid of vagina plates tho.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                Working with a pack of goblins wearing real armor is certainly less welcoming than a bunch of space-amazons with crotch-plates.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                They're both kinda terrible.
                There's nothing wrong with tactical tiddies. But shit kit design = shit soldiers.
                The reason I make these threads is because there was this big debate about female armor in vidya (mostly driven by gamergate nonsense) that was actually kind of making some good points, then it died in the arse at exactly the time when real world militaries started looking at body armor solutions for female soldiers.

                So it's not academic, but I look at which concept artists have come up with and it's terrible.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous
              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                >Left has no codpiece and femoral arteries protected only by cloth
                >No helmet on either
                Personally I have no problems with boobplate as the "weakness" of a saddle or inward curve of armor plate isn't much of a weakness. Plus a theoretical heroine might desire the aesthetic.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                The boobplate debate has been sorted IRL.
                Female soldiers want boobplate.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                A lot of armor designed for mounted combat skimped on protection for the inner thigh and crotch because you had a whole horse in the way. This lead to the myth that all plate armor was weak there and on the back of the leg.

                I always thought boob plate should be a decoration on the outside of a regular curriass, like a codpiece doesn't actually have your dick in it.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                The French knights didn't armor their legs at all, rather the chainmail barding for the horse would would be laid over the top of the man in the saddle.

                It shouldn't matter either way. The biggest limiting factor in modern armor is the weight of everything else you have to carry, not the weight of the armor itself.
                And once you introduce powered elements weight becomes almost a non issue, and there's no point to have huge exposed soft armor sections.

                Exoskeletons don't work.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                >Exoskeletons don't work
                There are functionally zero sci Fi settings without better than real life power generation at a small scale you stupid sperg.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                That's not the main issue of exoskeletons. The main issue is that you already have a skeleton. Real exoskeleton suits are problematic as fuck, difficult to implement, even harder to actually fit to an individual. Yes, they're also hot garbage because they lack "power," but the way you break your legs when you fall over wearing one is the bigger problem right now. They're a stupid fucking concept, and the real world is starting to see that. "Real" exoskeleton type shit doesn't in any way resemble the Sci-Fi shit, nor does it try to mimic the human body. It'd be fun to put on armor that makes me 7'6" and buff AF, but realistically doesn't a forklift make better sense for moving pallets?

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                >A society that rapes the laws of physics to death to deliver shipping containers can't master the mysteries of the human skeleton
                You're retarded. A mechanically assisted frame with sufficient power generation would increase theoretical armor capacity by an order of magnitude, and scale of armament by a similar degree.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                Right, but it's really not fucking worth doing when you have to make them bespoke for every individual.
                "Exosuits" or whatever you want to call them will probably be pretty amazing eventually, I just fully expect jetpack chinks to invade the US with captured Aussie armaments long before you actually see exosuits being used for anything a pallet jack doesn't already do.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                An exosuit is a suit designed to allow humans to exist outside of breathable atmosphere, like spacesuits.
                Exoskeletons are the basis of power armor which often function as exosuits but that's actually three different things.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                >This thing that would obviously be great but is totally unrealistic would be obviously great!
                Nobody argued that exosuits wouldn't be neat, they're just not actually a practical or realistic goal at this time, current examples are unfunny multi-million-dollar box movers.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                Have you not seen Lockheed's ONYX?
                It's pretty fucking amazing, you can walk a couple of miles without your knees hurting and only severely reduced mobility.

                The TALOS project is even more amazing!
                "Further research and development is needed before full-body exoskeletons will be feasible for infantry combat"

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                >Fictional sci Fi universes that remove the only real barrier to mechanical exoskeleton armor
                Retard.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                Yes yes, we know everything works fine in your space-themed fan fiction, don't see what that has to do with a discussion about real world powered exoskeletons which are useless trash and will be for decades to come.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                moron we're TALKING about fiction

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                >sufficient power generation
                This is the problem that make people who can't do math keep investing in exoskeletons. A standard 650 watt bench grinder, weighs maybe 20kg, and can be stopped by a teenage boy who's never seen the inside of a gym with one hand.
                Never mind trying to fit something like that to a human being and have them carry it around permanently, never mind a battery the size of a human being weighing half a tonne can only power it for an hour or so, solve both of those completely unsolvable problems and you've still got a useless piece of crap.

                Exoskeletons don't work.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                >This is the problem that make people who can't do math keep investing in exoskeletons
                Thank God we're talking about fiction retard!

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                >Thank God we're talking about fiction retard!
                Says who? I'm the OP, and I didn't.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                gays just want to talk about their little fantasy shows, like someone was seriously looking for a discussion about the realism of science fiction.

                Thread literally started with shitting on the show they won't stop fapping over.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                No some gay derailed a female armour thread with PrepHole shit is what happened.
                Science Fiction has always preceeded science fact btw. The famous examples being Arthur C Clarke inventing geostationary orbit for 2001: A space odyssey, and Tom Cruise inventing the multitouch UI later used by apple for iPhones in the film Minority Report.

                You can't build what you can't imagine.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                >Tom Cruise inventing the multitouch UI later used by apple for iPhones in the film Minority Report.

                Stupid bullshit myth. Literally came out over a decade after touchscreens started becoming commonplace in the United States. "Multi-touch UIs" predate the the Nintendo NES.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                What about the huge touchscreen computer deck thing in Tron?

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                Nope. The Apple engineers themselves confirmed that they developed the UI for the iPhone, which was subsequently stolen by whoever made whatever gay device that isn't a PC you're using, by watching Tom Cruise in minority report.

                The actual technology of the multitouch screen was invented by microsoft, who thought it was stupid, and that iPhones were dumb.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                You should do some research on this. I was hands on with a Xerox touchscreen hooked up to an OS/2 system back in about ~1987.

                If the Apple engies were "inspired" by Minority Report, it's because they were so inexperienced they weren't aware that what they were "imagining" had been "imagined" and actively developed for almost 30 years prior.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                I should specify, this was either an IR or Ultrasonic touchscreen, glass-faced, and yes, with multi-touch support.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                CERN was using capacitive multi-touch displays, actively using them, as early as 1972.

                The only thing those Apple Engineers got from Minority Report was the idea to do "gesture" control, which again had been in use for decades prior in one form or another.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                >The only thing those Apple Engineers got from Minority Report was the idea to do "gesture" control
                Literally, "The UI" EXACTLY as stated

                No some gay derailed a female armour thread with PrepHole shit is what happened.
                Science Fiction has always preceeded science fact btw. The famous examples being Arthur C Clarke inventing geostationary orbit for 2001: A space odyssey, and Tom Cruise inventing the multitouch UI later used by apple for iPhones in the film Minority Report.

                You can't build what you can't imagine.

                in this latest derailment of a thread about female body armor.

                You're right, the tech used by an iPhone touchscreen is the OLDEST FUNCTIONAL MULTI-TOUCH TECHNOLOGY, capacitive. Again, capacitive multi-touch displays predate the founding of Apple.

                Microsoft patented the technology used by Apple in the first iPhone in 2002.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                >Tom Cruise inventing the multitouch UI
                Nope.

                No some gay derailed a female armour thread with PrepHole shit is what happened.
                Science Fiction has always preceeded science fact btw. The famous examples being Arthur C Clarke inventing geostationary orbit for 2001: A space odyssey, and Tom Cruise inventing the multitouch UI later used by apple for iPhones in the film Minority Report.

                You can't build what you can't imagine.

                was plainly wrong. Tom Cruise didn't invent shit, the movie may have influenced early iOS versions but who cares? Multi-touch User Interfaces have been around since 1972.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                Holy fuck you're a fucking idiot.

                Tom Cruise, in a movie called Minority Report, released in 2002, mimed using a multitouch UI.
                Apple engineers using technology patented by Microsoft in that same year were inspired by watching Tom Cruise miming a multitouch UI that they literally invented the UI he was miming.

                These are not arguments or opinions, these are well documented facts.

                The ARGUMENT is that taking inspiration from Sci Fi has a long and fruitful history, and therefore looking at what sci fi has imagined can help us think about new ways to produce body armour today using available technology.

                ERGO, the fact that powered exoskeletons do not actually work means we cannot rely on them to do some of the types of armour sci fi has imagined, but there might still be something to learn.

                THAT'S THE FUCKING POINT BEING MADE you fucking idiot.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                I think you're incredibly confused about the whole Minority Report / Apple IOS thing, but that's okay, I think you just chose an example you didn't know enough about to defend properly.

                "They invented the UI he was miming" is a phrase devoid of meaning. They invented the UI he was miming? He was just doing gestures that one of the film's consultants had worked on for a decade prior as one of the earliest developers of practical VR applications. What about Minority Report is repeated in iOS? Please, try to tell me Apple invented Pinch-To-Zoom based on Minority Report, I could use the laugh.

                Fuck all that though, why don't you cite a single source?
                Go ahead, please. Show me. Good luck.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                Tell us all about how Apple invented hand-waving gesture control, something that's been available commercially since before Minority Report was made, and has been available to normal consumers since 2010.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                https://i.imgur.com/7sn0HkJ.png

                >boob armor
                >pussy plate
                >combat heels
                ME LIKEY

                Tell us all about how Apple invented hand-waving gesture control, something that's been available commercially since before Minority Report was made, and has been available to normal consumers since 2010.

                Are you a fucking chatbot or something?

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                This is my favorite thread at this point, it's got everything. Action, drama, anime, sci-fi, lots of autistic screams, no consistent topic or theme. It's delightful.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                >I derailed this thread by samefagging off-topic bullshit

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                >Everyone but me is one person

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                >implying there have been more than two people ITT for the last day or so.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                moron

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                That's a different technology which does not allow for multitouch.
                Which doesn't actually change the point which is science fiction preceeds science fact, because you have to imagine the thing you're trying to invent first. You absolute fuckwit.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                You're right, the tech used by an iPhone touchscreen is the OLDEST FUNCTIONAL MULTI-TOUCH TECHNOLOGY, capacitive. Again, capacitive multi-touch displays predate the founding of Apple.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                You are very wrong. IR and Ultrasonic multi-touch displays were utilized in numerous commercial products. The screen I was touching on 35 years ago was absolutely multi-touch, which was pretty interesting at the time as before that I'd only been hands on with early (shitty) resistive and single-touch IR screens.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                >Which doesn't actually change the point
                nobody is disputing your point, fuckhead; they're just disputing your ignorant-ass example, so quit being a disingenuous cunt, take the L and move on

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                touchscreens were a thing in Star Trek waaaay before

                a pocket iPhone-like device about the size of a palm with an apparently touchscreen UI (no buttons) and scant millimetre thickness is used in The Last Starfighter (1984) to show family photos

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                The only sci fi setting I care about is the dystopian cyberpunk hellworld known as IRL.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                >Exoskeletons don't work.
                Did you think he meant "in some show" or maybe IRL?

                This is a discussion about armor, not about what your kids are watching these days.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                Thread's about sci Fi, sci Fi and fantasy weapons and armor threads have been welcome on PrepHole since the very fucking begining you moron.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                >The French knights didn't armor their legs at all
                Just stop

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                right is better protected because any male opponent will try to seduce instead of attacking

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                https://i.imgur.com/a0TznqJ.jpg

                >Vagina plate
                So is this where the female armor debate ended?

                https://i.imgur.com/wBiT3gj.jpg

                They're both kinda terrible.
                There's nothing wrong with tactical tiddies. But shit kit design = shit soldiers.
                The reason I make these threads is because there was this big debate about female armor in vidya (mostly driven by gamergate nonsense) that was actually kind of making some good points, then it died in the arse at exactly the time when real world militaries started looking at body armor solutions for female soldiers.

                So it's not academic, but I look at which concept artists have come up with and it's terrible.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                That's a poor argument. The better argument is that there wouldn't be armor for women, because they wouldn't be fighting to begin with.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                He explained what a worm is and why it's on a hook, but you bit it anyway. Incredible.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                >This is an interesting conversation topic that I don't have anything productive to contribute to.
                >I am criticizing anyone who engages in that conversation
                >You are engaging in that conversation for perfectly valid reasons
                >Therefore I am criticizing you for no reason at all
                Every step of that was stupid.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                >ducking the unfavorable (to (you)r self) point this hard
                Based willful retard.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                >This is an interesting conversation topic
                Its not.
                Every bit of media of cheap, dumb entertainment that contains a chick in armor starts this discussion by someone who due to autism or unwarranted self-importance cannot stop but point out to everyone that Santa, in fact, doesn't exist.

                >I am criticizing anyone
                Correct.

                >You are engaging in that conversation for perfectly valid reasons
                You're not, You're a pseud.

                >Therefore I am criticizing you for no reason at all
                No you're being criticized for unironically huffing your own farts and being proud of it.

                >Every step of that was stupid.
                You are just as bad a cyclist or a vegan.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                >huffing your own farts
                moron you don't have to be in this thread. Even assuming I am huffing my own farts, the only reason you're here is to huff them too while complaining about the smell.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                Nah, im just here for sexy armor.
                We are not the same.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                >bitch bitch bitch
                >But also post moar

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                >pounding her from behind.
                " No, no... keep your face plate down on... helps with clean up..."

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        >bathroom
        >not catheterizing your space marines and installing a recycling system so that they can piss and shoot ayys at the same time
        NGMI

  10. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    What could've been a thread about future body armor and character aesthetics ruined by physics sperging

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      It can be saved. Though only with vagina plates I'm afraid.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        >boob armor
        >pussy plate
        >combat heels
        ME LIKEY

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          Wait but why is he a doctor? Is he okay? It just seems like a big leap.

  11. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    It's memeing on a real/funny phenomena. Henry VIII has some giant dick plate armor on display at the Tower of London.

    A lot of sci-fi is subtly bringing back old historical trends that seem odd to us now and mixing them into a futuristic setting (Dune does this with the HRE inspired government and names, Star Wars with templar-like knights in a secret order).

    >Inb4 the Jedi aren't secret
    They fucking were in the first three movies, the good ones. They are called a secret order and people think they are a myth. Then George fucks it all up by having them rule the galaxy in his shitty prequels. So Han and Moff Tarkin not believing in them is like someone in Russia in 2006 thinking communists are a fucking myth. It is so dumb. Luke is like 18-21 in the first movie, and he has the Jedi everywhere right before he is conceived.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >someone in Russia in 2006 thinking communists are a fucking myth.
      This made me think of the people who think garden gnomes aren't real.

      Most late medieval/early modern heavy cavalry armor involved a skirt, not pants.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >the first three movies, the good ones
      Only "The Empire Strikes Back" was good.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >Penis plate
      So is this where the male armor debate ended?

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        Codpieces are peak fashion. All men should wear them as part of casual and formal dress. Especially when entertaining foreign dignitaries or declaring wars.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      in fairness, there were like 200 jedi spread across a galaxy of hundreds of thousands of planets. and they werent politicians, they were like high level freemasons or bohemian grove cultists. politically adjacent and involved, sure, but not the types that would appear on galactic CNN.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >Han and Moff Tarkin not believing in them is like someone in Russia in 2006 thinking communists are a fucking myth

      in fairness, there were like 200 jedi spread across a galaxy of hundreds of thousands of planets. and they werent politicians, they were like high level freemasons or bohemian grove cultists. politically adjacent and involved, sure, but not the types that would appear on galactic CNN.

      There were 10,000 Jedi, which was still few enough that those in the field were deployed at roughly 1 per system. 200 is the number that was sent to Geonosis, of which maybe two dozen survived.

      >not the types that would appear on galactic CNN
      they were popular enough that everyone knew of them, especially when the war kicked off and they'd have been prominently figured in war reportage

      >They are called a secret order and people think they are a myth
      balls, everyone knew what a Jedi was; it was just that one Imperial general who poohed Vader and the Force which isn't surprising given the reputational blow the Jedi must have taken from being wiped out
      >Han and Moff Tarkin not believing in them is like someone in Russia in 2006 thinking communists are a fucking myth
      dude, zoomers hardly believe in the Berlin Wall let alone the Cold War, 20 years isn't that long especially when a regime is actively suppressing coverage of those incidents

  12. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    That character was played unbelievably dirty in the show, actually all the characters were made retard by the show.

  13. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    I want to marry bobbie

  14. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    until we get super light armor,flexible armor or exosuits chicks just wear the same armor dudes do whoch is a chest plate and a back plate

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      So firstly exosuits are not going to happen. They keep trying, they keep proving why exosuits are not going to happen.

      More importantly
      >the same armor dudes do whoch is a chest plate
      The trouble with that is even a moderately endowed woman can't hold a rifle properly while wearing a flat chestplate. And it doesn't actually provide much protection either due to the large gaps from any angle except the direct front. The result is women, particularly those armed with bullpups, having to take a very square stance to fire their rifle ineffectively.

      The boobplate and a carbine or SMG with a collapsible stock on the other hand solves this problem entirely while actually providing superior protection to that a man with a flat plate gets for roughly the same weight. The drawback being it is considerably more expensive to produce.

      So unless we're resticting service to the itty bitty tittie brigade, we need a better solution now-ish.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        >we need a better solution now-ish.
        No women in military.
        There I solved it.

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          Not actually an option for some countries.
          Australia for example is outnumbered 500:1, the idea we can fight a major war, or hell even a limited war, while keeping a full half of the population out of it just isn't realistic.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            If you don't have enough combat-ready men it's only right your enemies will take your women.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      What's up with those berets? Why were they the one thing they decided to give an actual pattern and what's with the two way press? Hell, while it looks whacky, at least it could work is they all decided to wear them the same way.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      Second from right actually looks like Ashley Williams from Mass Effect. I need to see her in this armor now:

      https://i.imgur.com/Ott1mar.png

      Reject modernity.
      Embrace tradition.

  15. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    All combat personnel are turned into fuck nugget MEC troopers.
    Problem solved.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >play enemy within
      >this time I just wanna focus hard on MEC
      >starting team is all women except one guy
      >who immediately gets rekt
      >very quickly end up with almost entirely female veterans
      >MEC time
      >latter half of the game is done almost entirely with huge cyborg chicks

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        i miss MECs, SPARKs are just not the same

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          I just wish I could give MECs psychic powers.

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          Unironically one of the reasons I never got into XCOM 2.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        https://i.imgur.com/HetuHBU.jpg

        Unironically one of the reasons I never got into XCOM 2.

        Got any more of these?

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          Yeah, Aka6 made them.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            Forgot to post the rest.

            • 1 month ago
              Anonymous
              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous
              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous
              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                And that's all I have. Wait timer kept making me go do other stuff and forget about this.

  16. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    >le heckin' realistic empowering diverse space combat

  17. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    unrelated because i do not care for women or their problems at all but
    how does powered armor in scifi make people run faster? Is there not a person inside the armor having their muscles overstretched and shredded?

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      well even today there's exoskeleton tech that exists which basically reads your movements and pushes you as you go, allowing you to run faster for longer

  18. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    And here we have the Japanese modern armor system. Some people think speed and maneuverability superior to armoring up. Mostly poors who have to pick one or the other.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >Covers all the vital organs and protects the neck without restricting movement or reducing flexibility.
      That's actually not bad, the kneepads are a plus too.

  19. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    I want Bobby to crush my head between her thighs

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      I think there's a line.

  20. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    How can people stomach that crap show?

  21. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Bobbie's accent had me hard all the time

  22. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Is this the Halo show?

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      It's The Expanse

  23. 1 month ago
    Journalism LMAO

    The only part of the body women should wear armor on is the vagina. That way if they get shot and killed at least they can get raped

  24. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    aesthetics>practicality

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      Only the lazy cant have both. Plate armor was fucking pimping.

  25. 1 month ago
    Anonymous
  26. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Why is she making the tails gets trolled face

  27. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Lol OP cited that show because it followed such an incredibly stupid pattern that seemingly all Sci-Fi follows now, fucking retarded armor, doubly so for women.

    Bunch of autists went off talking about fictional space battles and pretending they know anything about physics, because they think this is PrepHole or /a/.

  28. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Imagine putting a morongay and a pack of dykes into power suits so they can accidentally behead themselves when they make a Tiktok video.

  29. 1 month ago
    Anonymous
  30. 1 month ago
    Anonymous
  31. 1 month ago
    Anonymous
  32. 1 month ago
    Anonymous
  33. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

Your email address will not be published.