1. We have added a Gift Upgrades feature that allows you to gift an account upgrade to another member, just in time for the holiday season. You can see the gift option when going to the Account Upgrades screen, or on any user profile screen.
    Dismiss Notice

Giant Death Robot in Civ !?

Discussion in 'Civ5 - General Discussions' started by SMA333M, Aug 28, 2010.

?

Do you find useful an option in Custom Game to choose if you want GDR in game or not?

  1. Yes, I want that !

    310 vote(s)
    55.2%
  2. No, not really...

    252 vote(s)
    44.8%
  1. SMA333M

    SMA333M Chieftain

    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2003
    Messages:
    148
    Location:
    Romania
    As you may know, one of the new units in Civ 5 will be a robot unit called "Giant Death Robot" (GDR).

    My problem with this is that the game is becoming too SF. I did play Civ 2 where you had a lot of SF things and I enjoyed at that time but I also remember after a while I wanted to have the SF parts of game out of my Civ.

    Robots can be really fun in Civ scenarios and mods... but why in the main game !?

    I think the GDR will destroy future era combat experience, and that was the part I liked the most in CiV 3 and Civ 4. I like all types of victories and all stuff in Civ but in the end, my favorite part is Conquest and Wars, but not any wars... future era wars, when you have all techs and you can do wars like in real life.

    So imagine I invade a country for oil :)D), I prepare my tactics very well, sending all types of modern units with different promotions for different situations, and when my Modern Armors are ready to step in what I find ? An enemy GDR ! lol. .. it's like I'm invading Aliens. GDR has 150 strenght... I mean come on !

    So my idea about it is that, in Custom Game, you should have an option to take GDR out of game if you want to... it;s simple to add and I believe that will make everyone happy. And that way I'm sure I will add it sometimes for extra fun...


    A small option that can change the game experience and make everyone happy.
    What do you think ?
     
  2. VainApocalypse

    VainApocalypse Chieftain

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2010
    Messages:
    245
    As far as I'm concerned, Civ V doesn't have a future era. The only thing representing the future era is the GDR, which will just make the late game feel incomplete.
     
  3. Louis XXIV

    Louis XXIV Le Roi Soleil

    Joined:
    Mar 12, 2003
    Messages:
    13,579
    Location:
    Norfolk, VA
    I feel they should add a bit more future weapons to match the GDR. But, no, I don't see the point of having a game option of removing something designed to be a part of the game. That's what modding is for.
     
  4. Sneaky Snake

    Sneaky Snake GDR Noob

    Joined:
    Aug 12, 2010
    Messages:
    166
    This.
     
  5. 12agnar0k

    12agnar0k Chieftain

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2010
    Messages:
    1,556
    Robots are not "SF" which I'm assuming is a ridicliously lazy way of saying "Sci-Fi" lol.

    They exist and are real.

    You like playing combat just like mordern combat in real life, well we use robotics in warfare so yeah, welcome to the future sir, Robots are real.

    A giant death robot can be built with todays technology. So I don't really see your point. The main reason why people don't like them is because they would be drastically inefficient in most cases.

    P.s, Not another GDR thread o.0.

    If you don't want them in your game then thats fine, you don't have to build them, personally I would prefer a lot more future or "SF" units in the game, the "Future Era" they have given us is the worst "Future" Era I have seen o.0, Atleast I get the GDR though, If you don't like the GDR then make a mod to remove it, hopefully someone else will make a mod to enchance the future era somewhat and then we can all have our cake and eat it.

    P.s.s I voted Yes, Bring on the Giant Robot of DEATH!
     
  6. Duffy ze Emu

    Duffy ze Emu Chieftain

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2009
    Messages:
    29
    Of course, you have to bear in mind the fact that it costs more hammers than The Manhattan Project and factor in the fact that resources are limited now. It really would take some dedication to make one of these things.
    And it's been added for balance, I'm sure. What else could they possibly put in the future era to make warfare work?


    Take it out and you might be left with a highly imbalanced game. Then again, you might not. As with most things CiV, the answer would be to wait and see, right?
     
  7. Louis XXIV

    Louis XXIV Le Roi Soleil

    Joined:
    Mar 12, 2003
    Messages:
    13,579
    Location:
    Norfolk, VA
    For what you could add, I wouldn't mind seeing Predator drones. I realize you would have just gotten Stealth Bombers, but they could distinguish them by making Stealth Bombers more expensive, more powerful, and harder to shoot down, while Predator drones would be far, far cheaper and more expendable. I also usually suggest the Landwarrior, but it appears the project was canceled (even the army didn't have faith in it).

    BTW, there have been future things in the game before. The Space Elevator is an example (as was Cure for Cancer in earlier Civ games).
     
  8. playshogi

    playshogi Chieftain

    Joined:
    Nov 1, 2001
    Messages:
    1,387
    You do have an option to remove the GDR from the game: win the game before GDR are available!
     
  9. allypower

    allypower Chieftain

    Joined:
    May 26, 2010
    Messages:
    161
    You don't like the GDR? In the XML file for unit. Edit with notepad, press F3, search for Giant.Death.Robot, highlight all of its information, press the delete button and voila, it's gone. I don't see why people make a big deal out of this.
     
  10. Sofar Sogood

    Sofar Sogood Chieftain

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2009
    Messages:
    64
    A (very expensive) Giant Death Robot or two probably wouldn't be too horrific to deal with, especially if you have indeed prepared your tactics well. It doesn't receive defensive bonuses and all, so if you beat up on it with your ships and bombers and tanks and all that, you should be able to take it off the field.

    Failing that, if your opponent has more Giant Death Robots than you do and you have a roughly equal amount of Uranium, that means you have more Nukes. I'd suppose that to be something you would use to your advantage.

    I've read around, and apparently Giant Death Robots are built so as to fit in with game balance, so an option to turn them off may hold unintended consequences. \

    I think the poll was as to whether or not you'd want an option to turn GDR's off -- which is actually pretty reasonable to ask, I guess -- not if you wanted them in the game period. :p
     
  11. Fin

    Fin Chieftain

    Joined:
    Aug 25, 2010
    Messages:
    166
    Location:
    Texas
    But it would be just one more option to clutter up the screen. If, for example, I don't like the idea of Scouts, should there be an option to disable Scouts in a game? Kind of silly to put an option just to remove one single unit, in my opinion. :mischief:
     
  12. Lyoncet

    Lyoncet Chieftain

    Joined:
    Dec 20, 2009
    Messages:
    1,676
    Location:
    Minnesota
    No, actually it's a slightly antiquated way of saying "Sci-Fi" used well into the 20th century by patently non-lazy SF writers (such as, say, Isaac Asimov).

    More on-topic, no way is the GDR sci-fi! I totally saw his little brother at the State Fair Thursday! He even has a website! For some reason it sort of reminded me of the Grand Galactic Inquisitor.
     
  13. AriochIV

    AriochIV Analyst

    Joined:
    Jul 25, 2006
    Messages:
    5,617
    Location:
    San Jose, California
    The death robot is just a fun unit to trash your enemies with while you're waiting for 2050. That's all.

    I just wish they hadn't given it such a silly name.
     
  14. Psyringe

    Psyringe Scout

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2001
    Messages:
    3,394
    Location:
    Berlin, Germany
    I think that a GDR - if it is indeed implemented as in the preview, with the same Civilopedia text - is so silly that it risks destroying the atmosphere of the game for the lulz. Having battle robots is okay imho; they aren't a realistic path of weapon development, but they are a well-established trope in modern SF, and I like Civ to expand more into the future. I was always disappointed that Civ4 didn't do that, and enjoyed the mods that expanded the future era. But a "Giant Death Robot" that kills its opponent with kung fu moves? Please, that's on par with the awful "Caesar Salad" joke in Civ4.

    Nevertheless, introducing an option to remove the unit, as suggested in the poll, doesn't make sense. The game needs to be balanced. If it doesn't make a difference for game balance whether a unit is present or not, then the unit should either be removed, or changed so that it makes a difference. If a unit makes a difference, then an option to remove it is most likely bad for game balance. As others already said, that's a job for modders. If the GDR actually appears in-game (I'll have to see it to actually believe it).

    Also ...

    Just a couple of years ago "Sci-Fi" was perceived as a ridiculously convoluted way of saying SF, at least among large swathes of the fandom. How the times change ... have some TV marketing people create a snazzy new term to advertise their shoes, and suddenly the old and well-established term is "ridiculous" ...
     
  15. adam_grif

    adam_grif Chieftain

    Joined:
    Aug 21, 2010
    Messages:
    78
    If you mean we could physically build a chassis that resembles GDR and mount weapons on it, yes. If you mean we could actually get it to move and be effective in combat, then HELL NO. Actual large robots move at a snails pace, completely useless for warfare. Even small ones like Asimo are practically worthless for getting anywhere in a hurry.

    Bipedal war robots are the worst idea to come out of Japan since Pearl Harbor.

    They:

    - are an unstable firing platform.
    - have an extremely high surface area:volume ratio.
    - are needlessly complex, in terms of construction and locomotion.
    - exert enormous ground pressure.
    - have no advantages over conventional armored vehicles.

    Bipedal chassis have a very high center of gravity, meaning that if you mounted a 120mm smoothebore tank gun on it, the thing would topple over backwards because it's uselessly unstable. This limits the munitions you mount on it to recoilless weapons such as rockets and lasers. There is nothing inherently bad about rockets and lasers, but this does make mecha inherently less flexible than a conventional chassis of identical mass.

    Tanks, being approximately rectangular (and thus, close to a regular shape) have a very good ratio of volume:surface area. Bipedal mecha, on the other hand, are tall, thin and have a LOT of surface area for a given volume. The reason this is disadvantageous is that it means that for a given payload (determined by the volume of the chassis), you are required to use significantly more armor to get good coverage (determined by the surface area). So, for a tank of volume X and a mecha of volume X, the mecha must mount significantly more armor to protect the same volume. This means that in order to keep the mass of both platforms the same, the mecha must mount thinner, less-effective armor, making it more vulnerable to enemy fire. On the other hand, if you want to make it just as good at resisting enemy fire, you have to drastically increase the mass, making it slower. And the decreased internal volume means less fuel and ammunition, while the increased mass means that the fuel you DO mount is inherently less effective (because it must move more mass, meaning that to get the same speed, you must use more fuel).

    But it's not like they're going to be able to hit the 80+ KPH that tanks and other similar vehicles get anyway. Because legs sucks from a mechanical perspective. But "Cheetahs can run really fast", you shout. Yep, but how fast can an elephant run? Why can't an elephant run at the speed of a Cheetah? It's because of the square-cube law, and legs DO NOT scale well in performance terms when you just make them three times as large. To even get an elephant to be able to move at all, it needs to have 4 legs, not 2. The mass of an Elephant is far closer to what you're going to get for a giant mecha, and even then if it's the SIZE of an elephant while being made of STEEL, COMPOSITES and powered by a FISSION REACTOR, it's going to have a mass several times higher than an elephant.

    Legs are needlessly complex. Go talk to a robotics engineer and ask him why we can't build human-scale robots that can run as well as human legs do yet. Now ask him if he could scale up a robot leg to 10x human size and whether the performance would scale too. I'll be waiting. The answer is: the mechanical complexity of a leg is insane, and while you could build one 10x human size, it would have terrible performance, because human-legs are built for human-sized animals. For those of you not in the know, added mechanical complexity = increased manufacturing costs and higher maintenance costs.

    Oh, and the entire mass of a bipedal robot is applying pressure to it's two tiny feet. The ground pressure of an M1 Abrams tank is somewhere in the region of 15 psi. The ground pressure of a stationary horse is ~25 psi, climbing to 500 psi when it gallops, and now scale up to a 50+ tonne (M1 Abrams = ~65 tonnes, so a mech that is way bigger is going to weigh at least that much) robot and have it walking on TWO legs.

    This is where all of that BS people spout about "oh, legs are great for going over rough terrain!" falls apart completely. You ever seen a human being running on ice or over extremely rocky terrain? They fall over and hurt themselves frequently. Now factor in the EXTREME ground pressure, and you're tearing up roads as you run over them, sinking into/getting stuck in mud and marshland, and watching one try to climb up a rocky, uneven hill is going to be youtube comedy gold as "stable" ground that even an Abrams or Stryker could travel over with ease ends up crumbling beneath their pressure, giving way and causing them to trip over. How is a Giant Death Robot going to stand up if it falls over? It's not, it's going to have to get rescued, and you better hope you're not in enemy territory when it happens.

    BUT WHY WOULD YOU EVEN WANT A MECHA ANYWAY?! What advantage does it have over a tank or IFV? There. Are. None. It mounts FEWER weapons, is less flexible in the weapons it CAN mount, moves more slowly, clumsily, and destructively (try winning hearts and minds when your robot is destroying infrastructure and devastating the landscape just by walking over it), costs more to build, and is easier to kill. There are NO applications for giant robots. Appeals to "but, but, but... FUTURE TECH!" are dumb and irrelevant, because none of these facts change with technological progress. Any tech that improves robots ALSO improves tanks and IFVs, usually more so.

    So in conclusion, Giant Death Robot is a terrible idea and should not be included in the vanilla game. Replace it with some future supertank, I don't care, just please don't make it a giant robot.

    Wah wah ballance issues - look how many features are in Civ games that can be turned on and off: alliances, the entire espionage system, tech trading, tech brokering, vassal states, advanced starts, barbarians, etc... yet nobody complains that the option to turn these things on and off "ruins the ballance". And this doesn't even matter, because the game should already be ballanced BEFORE GDR comes out into the field in the modern/future era, so WHY WOULDN'T IT BE BALANCED IF YOU DISABLED IT?! It would just be exactly like BEFORE it became available to build.

    And finally, like I said, you can simply replace it with something that isn't a GDR but still has the same stats.

    If they must include it, then the option to turn it off would be greatly appreciated.
     
  16. 12agnar0k

    12agnar0k Chieftain

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2010
    Messages:
    1,556
    I said we could build one and get it to work, I also noted it would be inefficient in most cases, and I dont mean a nuclear fusion powered GDR with laser cannons and kung fu punch, I mean just a walking robot with guns, even a giant one.
    And no it wouldnt be efficient compared to the various better improvements in technology we have made since the idea of a "mech" was invented.
    Kind of a pointless long post arguing against me when you infact agreed with me.

    However I unlike you don't mind if it goes into the game, because its super cool.

    P.s their not going to release with a "turn off GDR button", if you want this, then mod it.
     
  17. the343danny

    the343danny Emperor

    Joined:
    Oct 12, 2008
    Messages:
    498
    Location:
    Silicon Valley
    I think you guys are just being sore that its a science fiction thing and its called something stupid like Giant Death Robot. Deal with it, you guys arent "too mature" for this
     
  18. Snoopaloop

    Snoopaloop Chieftain

    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2007
    Messages:
    607
    Just be prepared to find yourself outmatched in many end-game wars verse enemies that DID build them.

    I would be much happier without the gdr's, so I voted for the option to turn them off. I'm a big science fiction fan, but not when it comes to Civ. I always wished the game ended in the modern era, and the space race victory was when the first civ sent a human to the moon instead.

    I didn't even like discovering the "future tech" techs in civ4!
     
  19. allypower

    allypower Chieftain

    Joined:
    May 26, 2010
    Messages:
    161
    If you don't like it, mod it - or don't play it. Just that simple.
     
  20. Snoopaloop

    Snoopaloop Chieftain

    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2007
    Messages:
    607
    People can and will mod in many game options, but what is the problem with some of them coming standard with the game? I've only played 3 and 4, but we've had LOTS of standard options included that changed the game design. Some barely effected play while some more drastically: no goody huts, no random seed on reload, OCC, no vassal states, permanent alliances, no tech trading, no tech brokering, no barbarians, raging barbarians, no random events, turn off space race/domination victory/ conquest victory/diplomatic victory/time victory, and the option to turn on the actual leader unit that had to be killed for the civ to be eliminated in 3 (to name a few). Why not a simple "Turn off GDR's" option?
     

Share This Page