>The human form is the most efficient combat form there is
>All attempts at moving beyond the human form fail, you can only improve upon and upgrade the base form (ie transhumanism, power armor, mechs, etc.)
Since this theme is pretty common in a lot of sci-fi TRPGs, would this be a good justification for the whole Star Trek-eque "Rubber Forehead aliens" that you see in those kinds of settings? If we make the reasonable assumption that the human body is optimized for warfare, then it only makes sense that for any species to survive it would eventually have to evolve to be like humans in shape and form. Gonna be running my own setting soon and thought this would be an interesting idea to propose.
>this theme is pretty common in a lot of sci-fi TRPGs
name three
Battletech, Warhammer 40k, Eclipse Phase, Lancer
This is true in none of these games, they all just happen to have mechs/power armour
>they all just happen to have mechs/power armour
And those mechs/power armor are the most powerful land vehicles of their settings.
>And those mechs/power armor are the most powerful land vehicles of their settings.
Stop right there.
Nice cube you have there. Would be a shame if someone stepped on it.
>Erases your Emperor Titan in a single shot
Nothin' personnel primitive.
Is that thing even still canon?
Like lots of things from old Epic, we have no idea because they never get mentioned. The same can be said of the bigger Titans though, who have had a handful of mentions in entire decades despite Imperial lore being at least ten fifty as common as Necron lore.
But we continue to see them in other tie-in material all the time. Massive frickoff titans are a constant in the Spess Mehreen game and its boomer-shooter midquel.
It's not not canon. Like most things in 40k.
>dies to a handful of half-naked green morons with exploding spears
>idiot doesn't know what he's talking about
Picrel is the most iconic and arguably most powerful war machine on the battlefields of Battletech
Bird legs, large bubble wienerpit in the torso, no hands, no shoulders, just large boxy missile pods.
The ideal human form...
>two arms
>two legs
>a head
>literally designed because it was an easy design for the human mind to wrap around
TBF, I never mount good weapons outside the torso, unless the "arm" is basically a side-torso turret. I'd rather a worse firing arc if it means it doesn't get shot off easy.
I always hated humanoid-shaped Battlemechs.
>I always hated humanoid-shaped Battlemechs
Why?
Yeah, that's because you actually just want to play a tank game and have some kind of self punishment complex.
I'm pretty sure there is lore in the setting that the reason turret topped and 5+ limbed mechs don't work is because the piloting system used is too alien for mechwarriors to properly understand and use efficiently. Hence when the, what is it, poseidon? is made, a 3 leg, 2 armed mech, it's such a clusterfrick it takes 2? 3? people to properly pilot
That's the basic gist of it.
>The ideal human form...
well, it is featherless biped
>Eclipse Phase
Bullshit, that game repeatedly says the human form is terrible for combat and have both biological and cybernetic replacements. It even explains that most situations the human form is not even mid tier for the job.
>>The human form is the most efficient combat form there is
The premise is flawed from the start. The most efficient combat form would likely be something more like a starfish, capable of instant 360 movement, has multiple limbs, decentralised organs/nervous system, etc.
Star Trek's excuse for rubber forehead aliens is that all of them were made by a single humanoid species seeding life on planets with specific genetic instructions to form more humanoid life. Go for something like that.
>The most efficient combat form would likely be something more like a starfish
That is simply not true both IRL and in these settings. There's a reason nobody is making Starfish-shaped mechs, and why humans, not Starfish rule over the Earth.
>There's a reason nobody is making Starfish-shaped mechs
They make tanks and helicopters instead. Nobody makes mechs for war.
>and why humans, not Starfish rule over the Earth
You're confusing brainpower on a single planet to combat. If you want to be a pedantic little frick like this, then you naked in a forest is immediately outclassed by wolves, bears, big cats, snakes, and even large enough eagles.
>Nobody makes mechs for war.
Somebody should tell all the factions in Battletech, Warhammer 40k, and Lancer then.
Those are fictional settings where the rule of cool is taking over. You know they're not an argument for combat effectiveness, right?
I'm not talking about real life. I'm talking about TRPG settings.
>There's a reason nobody is making Starfish-shaped mechs
>I'm not talking about real life
Then you're an even bigger moron than I thought.
https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/StarfishRobots
>Goes down to Tabletop Games section
>Only 3 examples
>None of them are sci-fi
That's what I thought.
>ignores all the sci-fi settings
>ignores anything that isn't sci-fi in the tabletop section
Cool, so you're just going to be an ignorant little frick.
This is /tg/, if it's not a tabletop game setting, why would I give a frick
>establishes a premise
>immediately limits it to tabletop settings
>Battletech, Warhammer 40k, Eclipse Phase, Lancer
>none support the premise
All of the settings you named have human-shaped characters to make you identify with them. They look like humans because it's hard to personally identify with a car unless you're a motorhead. It's an emotional appeal, not a matter of efficiency. The theme of the human form being the most efficient for combat is never explicitly reinforced. The human form is a recognizable medium that we as humans can consciously build upon.
BUT if you wanted to break into theory and say you want a setting where the human form is the most efficient for combat, look at any fortification or structure for war as an example instead. Castles, bunkers, storm shelters--we create environments that are beneficial to us from environments that are not. The fact is that the human form is NOT the most efficient for combat because combat can take so many forms. Our bodies are made for climbing, running, and shooting things; many creatures can beat us in any of the three, but no creature can beat us in all three.
>The theme of the human form being the most efficient for combat is never explicitly reinforced.
It is in Battletech.
Tripods and Quads.
You lose.
Next.
Tripods and quads are both explicitly stated to be less popular and efficient than bipedal forms. Read the lore next time moron.
They kick ass on the table.
Play the game onstead of making garbage threads homosexual.
see
>Lancer
Lancer mechs are explicitly not for war. They're morale boosting cheerleaders at best and usually just used to oppress mud farmers trying to maintain their independence
If you think about it, a tank is basically a crab with a gun turret and no claws.
A tank is an infinitely looping railroad.
Beyond brain power, what made us the most devastating animal to ever walk on land was our ability to hit something with a rock/spear/arrow/bullet then slowly jog after it until it died of exhaustion or blood loss. We were extincting larger mammals simply by walking towards em like Lancelot in Monty Python. We were such a fricking horror that fear of us ingrained in the DNA of the survivors and they only lose that fear if they're fed by us, or so desperate it'll attempt a pounce. Or a shitbull.
Fricking starfish come at us, if you're edible we'll eat your clones forever and if not we'll make your skin into clothes.
And give a 6ft starfish the intelligence of a human and it would wreck your shit. Very clearly the OP's moronic premise is that the humanoid FORM is superior, and I think we've both shown otherwise.
And yet the non-humanoid mechs always fall short in Battletech so clearly you haven’t
Nobody gives a shit about Battletech, you goalshifting moronic c**t.
>Nobody gives a shit about Battletech
Thank god, it won’t be ruined
The non-humanoid mechs explicitly fall short because the Human piloting them can't really do a great job without extensive training - making it inefficient for specifically Humans.
You know what else exists in Battletech that absolutely annihilate Mechs with zero issue whenever the two are in the same battlespace though? Aerospace fighters. They explicitly dab on BattleMechs in almost every way except being expensive.
>They explicitly dab on BattleMechs in almost every way except being expensive.
Paper, meet scissors.
I don't know how the Rifleman and the Jager match up to Aerospace Fighters - they absolutely body conventional fighters though.
That being said, if you need a specialized platform to match a multipurpose platform it's a pretty big indicator that the latter is superior.
>specialized platform to match a multipurpose platform
Yeah, like a regular bipedal mech they slapped autocannons and a targeting computer in shooting down space-air fighters.
So a specialized platform, for shooting down multi-purpose platforms that, at least in the case of the BattleMech's airspace comparison, the Aerospace Fighter, can fight back - possibly just as efficiently - without being made to counter BattleMechs.
They're just there to frick up anything with wings. Or just anything else with a targeting system and an autocannon, really. That's just to make it cheaper. They're the settings definite hard counter.
Literally bottom of the food chain algae scrubber. We don't eat starfish much solely because they don't taste any good.
>Literally bottom of the food chain algae scrubber.
If humans were as small as starfish with their intelligence, they'd be in the same position. Again, absolutely nothing to do with form.
Keep in mind SEAD isn’t a thing in Battletech thanks to the technology of the setting, so while you might want a rifleman with your mech squad, you only need one and you’ve effectively shut down enemy air support for good
They stop conventional fighters just fine, but taking out the infrastructure for deploying Aerospace Fighters in particular was a prime concern in virtually every conflict because of how dangerous they were. The remaining conventional fighters were much easier to deal with and Riflemen, later Jagers, could shut them down hard.
That being said I don't know if we ever really got a good matchup between Riflemen and Aerospace Fighters and my knowledge of the game is far from encyclopedic so I don't know how those two specifically interact.
All I'm hearing is intelligent meat. Catch these hands starfish, we're feeding starship crews with you.
>1 ton creature
>covered in calcified ossicle spikes and plates
>skin so tough and leathery that it's basically natural kevlar
>strong enough to pull metal doors off of vehicles
>even if you do injure it, it can just regenerate
>decentralised internal organs and nervous system so you have to destroy all of it to beat it
>can envelop you and digest you while you're still alive
>can climb any surface
>can breathe underwater
You're really not getting it.
>also incapable of moving on land, where you can have fire
Also known as being food for humanoid fishermen.
>also incapable of moving on land
>has never seen a starfish moving on land
Get out and see the world a bit before you start thinking you know everything.
A one ton starfish is not going to be moving on land.
A terrestrial starfish wouldn't get to 1 ton without being able to move, therefore it has to be. Checkmate.
Good god, when will the endurance hunting reddit HFY meme die off, it's been torn apart already and shown to be bullshit peddled by literally one guy trying to sell his books.
>hen will the endurance hunting reddit HFY meme die off
When it stops being true
It isn't true, though. Humans aren't endurance hunters, we were ambush hunters and scavengers.
>When it stops being true
>It isn't true, though.
The truth is that it hasn't been true in any numbers for a long long time, other that a few tribal dudes who still do it today.
You're moronic
>and why humans, not Starfish rule over the Earth.
Who’s gonna tell him?
-360 vision
-3d manuverability
-redundant limbs
-metabolizes hydrocarbons for 2x strength and 20x logistical superiority
-shrapnel proof shell
-spams the ultimate infantry weapon: thrown HEDP impact fuzed rifle grenades
Tentacular beach balls are the ultimate infantry unit and only get better on closer examination.
>The human form is the most efficient combat form there is
No but it's one of the most efficient in terms of energy consumption (as in bypedal motion helped our ancestors in chasing their preys and taking them by exhaustion)
That's not true, rotational motion such as seen with wheels and tracks is more efficient for energy consumption, but less efficient in all other ways.
> Bipedal form is the most efficient combat form there is.
Lol no. We do well within the constraints of the structural form but we are in no way "the best".
Additionally, the biggest advantage our shape provides in combat is completely lost in 99.999% of Mechan representations. Especially in BT. Humans can be said to be well built for combat because we have a very efficient shoulder/arm assembly and the means to transfer strength efficiently throughout our body so as to go beyond the "control" limitations set on our muscles. That's where the "humans can punch stronger than gorillas" meme come from (which btw is absolutely moronic because the gorilla may not be able to make a nice strong jab as strong as you, but he can split your skull like its nothing with the weakest hammer strike). Mechs almost never have the level of arm mobility required for this.
The most efficient/versatile combat form for ground warfare would be some sort of tank that has the capability to transition between treads and 4 legs, assuming hover technology is not yet feasible in setting.
Treads are by far most efficient on flat ground, and legs are more efficient on uneven/incline terrain.
Under no circumstances, even the contrived conditions set by the setting you mentioned, would a humanoid mech be efficient.
>The most efficient/versatile combat form for ground warfare would be some sort of tank that has the capability to transition between treads and 4 legs
Battletech tried that, it didn't work.
It's solvable with a multi-scale combat system. One part (the truck) transports units over flat areas and the other (the humans) moves through complex terrain.
>American posting hours
>catalogue is immediately filled with dogshit ragebait about nothing
>OP doesn't get enough engagement so samegays endlessly to get his fix solipsistically
The frick is wrong with your country. Why do you people do this shit.
lol, this sort of circular logic is peak human narcissism.
>>The human form is the most efficient combat form there is
>>All attempts at moving beyond the human form fail, you can only improve upon and upgrade the base form (ie transhumanism, power armor, mechs, etc.)
that's fricking bullshit, the vehicles and weapons actually used IRL are the most efficient ones, but if you want space babes you might as well justify it with something like that or that the bipedal upright walking 2 legs 2 arms big brain body plan is the one that works the best. It's not like anyone can disprove you
>the vehicles and weapons actually used IRL are the most efficient ones
Not in Battletech they aren’t
this has to be one of the most moronic threads i've seen in weeks. good job OP i'm not sure if this is bait
Funny how OP keeps saying "muh Battletech" every time anybody says anything to the contrary, as it is the only argument he has that can barely hold water. I should have realized he is woefully moronic or trolling when he opened mentioning Star Trek, but shut up at mention of anything other than Battletech, even when proven wrong. Battletech doesn't even have intelligent humanoid aliens in it.
The rope is the most efficient combat form for your neck, you pseud. I recommend you become acquainted before creating another meaningless thread.
It’s the same in Warhammer 40k though. The most powerful vehicles for Imperium and Tau alike are humanoid.
>Battletech doesn't even have intelligent humanoid aliens in it
Nobody tell him.
About what? Capellans?
Some book had intelligent birs in it or something.
Doesn't matter, really. It is not canon and is ignored by everyone in their minds.
Or so it was last time I've checked into Battletech, which was about 5 years ago.
Crab with jumpjets is probably more efficient, we just don't have it on this planet.
Honestly, trying to explain how or why humanoid mechs could realistically replace tank's role in ground warfare is fool's errand. Mechs are cool, so we use mechs to fight, deal with it.
If you really want something semi-plausable you could take the route Gundam or Armored Core took and make your mechs into a mix between jet and attack helicopter, that just happen to have humanoid shape for mostly aesthetic purposes.
It's a media thing. If scifi films really used the most effective combat forms their primative brains would shit themselves in terror. Society of these settings will dissolve as the second a pilot steps in the machine they are overcome with a complex that declares them the human predator, the one to balance nature through death!
Convergent evolution is another explanation as far as shape. Another anon brought up the thought that something like a starfish is best for warfare, because of the 360 degree movement, etc. The human body is stellar at warfare, definitely, but I wouldn't say best.
Non-humanoid freakshits be jelly
No it won't? It'd be some sort of monkey