try to release Xenonauts final version much earlier than the new XCOM ENEMY UNKNOWN

[Gorlom]

Check them out in the gym when they exercise, next to female agents.

Did you comment on why the female soldiers weapons were smaller then the male soldiers?

Seriously? This doesn't look protective?

As for the hollow plastic, they do mention it's made out of alien alloys, which is a substance that may as well *look* like hollow plastic ... unless you have actually seen alien alloys up close. I sure as heck haven't.

As for realism, I'm pretty sure I couldn't even walk if I wore this ...

http://ufopaedia.xcomufo.com/images/powersuit.gif

... but I'm not going to convince you, since you are obviously positive in your views.

Say what you want but The X-com powersuit looks like it could hide servos and mechanic components under the surface, making it a robotic exoskeleton suit rather then a heavy set of plate armour.

The XCOM armour looks like it doesn't offer any protection unless Alien alloys has the same properties of "vibranium" from Marvel comics, where it absorbs energy and basically flips the bird to laws of thermodynamics. Sure it's XCOMs unobtanium but the design is trying too hard to be cool rather than protective. That's all fine and dandy.. unless you start analyzing and comparing them.

Edited January 1, 2013 by Gorlom

[zzz1010]

for the sake of justice

The XCOM armour looks like it doesn't offer any protection unless Alien alloys has the same properties of "vibranium" from Marvel comics

But it is looks much more like armor and less comics then personal armor blue latex suits from eu94(it only lacks of red cape)

Edited January 1, 2013 by zzz1010

[HWP]

Seriously? This doesn't look protective?

Like heat protection maybe.

When I look at a suit of armor, I automatically evaluate its areal density based on coverage area and human encumbrance limits. I also automatically estimate its gravimetric density based on its apparent thickness. Finally I automatically attempt to classify the material based on its appearance. These mechanisms can't be switched off; they are part of basic human visual processing.

This armor looks like it's made out of syntactic foam under a glossy ABS plastic shell.

As for the hollow plastic, they do mention it's made out of alien alloys, which is a substance that may as well *look* like hollow plastic ... unless you have actually seen alien alloys up close. I sure as heck haven't.

The worst offender is actually your initial armor.

Which isn't even made of alien alloys, because you have no idea they even use alloys, rather than composites like white people do.

For comparison, take a look at this:

Now this does look like armor. Note how small the coverage area is and how the plate is thin enough that you know it has some density to it, yet not phone-thin, letting you know it means business.

It also devotes a piece to the security of family heirloom, which shows that the wearer cares and makes it appear particularly realistic. You can easily tell soldiers in a war theater apart from soldiers on peacetime exercise by whether they are wearing their groin protection.

The only part of this armor that looks weak is the helmet. But that's because it really is weak - MICH isn't even rated to stop handgun bullets. Though it does stop Saturday Night Specials in practice, but there's no STANAG for it and NIJ calls for 99.7% protection level which it wouldn't pass.

[Nickolaidas]

I'm not trying to be an ass, nor do I defy what you say. But visually, those US soldiers look to me more like they're wearing 5 cottom shirts one after the other, rather than wearing armor. Not saying they do, just saying what they look like to me.

I don't know ... maybe I read too many a comic books or something ... but the armors and clothing look sci-fi realistic to me, especially when taking into consideration they are made by an unexistent material which isn't found on Earth.

Gorlom: Yeah, that's exactly what I'm considering as far as the alloys go, some sort of vibranium or something.

As for the female carrying smaller weapons ... can't say I noticed that. Not calling you a liar, I honestly didn't notice that. I'll check it out sometime.

The only weapons which I admit that they are ridiculously huge are the heavy's loadouts. Seriously, the heavy plasma is about as tall as your soldier. Don't really mind it though, like I didn't really mind the power suit, even though it looked silly.

Look, in all fairness, silliness and campiness was always a big part of X-COM. Remember the starter suits in APOC? They looked like something out of a Power Ranger episode.

[HWP]

I'm not trying to be an ass, nor do I defy what you say. But visually, those US soldiers look to me more like they're wearing 5 cottom shirts one after the other, rather than wearing armor.

Have you ever worn armor? Of any kind. That provides protection, I mean, not cosplay.

More importantly, have you ever seen armor - of course you have. So the question is, what armor are you using as benchmark for your comparisons. Likeness to what specific kit of armor are you using as your yardstick for what looks like armor and what doesn't?

especially when taking into consideration they are made by an unexistent material which isn't found on Earth.

The base armor isn't.

And as for alien alloys, we know they are alloys. An alloy is a combination of 2 (1) or more of the 92 known metals and metalloids with 0 (1) or more of the 18 known non-metals.

Elements get heavier as they go down and right through the table. Only the first 18 elements in the first 3 rows and the other 8 elements in the first 2 columns are lightweight.

We know them all, we know there can be no more, and we know, at the very least, the density of any combination of them. Any element that "doesn't exist on Earth" is extremely heavy. No way around it.

And even if you don't follow the above - in X-Com, which dictates the canon, you can make these alloys.

It only stands to reason. Any strong-but-light material has to consist predominantly of one or more of the first 22 elements and no more than a small amount of one or more of the first 83 that are (mostly) stable.

You have understood at least a word or two of the above sentences. If that was it, then TL;DR version goes as: no useful alloy will be less dense than ~1.5g/cc, and most will be more dense.

[Gorlom]

And as for alien alloys, we know they are alloys. An alloy is a combination of 2 (1) or more of the 92 known metals and metalloids with 0 (1) or more of the 18 known non-metals.

Elements get heavier as they go down and right through the table. Only the first 18 elements in the first 3 rows and the other 8 elements in the first 2 columns are lightweight.

We know them all, we know there can be no more, and we know, at the very least, the density of any combination of them. Any element that "doesn't exist on Earth" is extremely heavy. No way around it.

And even if you don't follow the above - in X-Com, which dictates the canon, you can make these alloys.

It only stands to reason. Any strong-but-light material has to consist predominantly of one or more of the first 22 elements and no more than a small amount of one or more of the first 83 that are (mostly) stable.

You have understood at least a word or two of the above sentences. If that was it, then TL;DR version goes as: no useful alloy will be less dense than ~1.5g/cc, and most will be more dense.

Maybe it has more to do with the structure than the elements that compose the alloy? Carbon can be either a brick of coal or a diamond. Who is to say they haven't designed/come up a method of fusing 2 or more elements together that humans haven't dreamed of or can even understand?.

[Max_Caine]

Just for the record, new elements are being discovered beyond the "classic" number of elements that exist on the periodic table.

See?

However, please also note that these "new" elements are generally very short-lived and are usually considered "superheavy", so are not germaine to the discussion.

[HWP]

Just for the record, new elements are being discovered beyond the "classic" number of elements that exist on the periodic table.

Yes. My point was that everything other than the top 3 rows and first 2 columns is dense. The further lower, the heavier.

Maybe it has more to do with the structure than the elements that compose the alloy? Carbon can be either a brick of coal or a diamond.

But either is heavier than water. Similar in weight really.

Who is to say they haven't designed/come up a method of fusing 2 or more elements together that humans haven't dreamed of or can even understand?.

There is no such method. We really understand that part; it's not - OK, it is - but it's still really well described. If it weren't, nuclear reactors wouldn't be possible.

And if one existed, the material still would not have the density of styrofoam.

[Gorlom]

for the sake of justice

But it is looks much more like armor and less comics then personal armor blue latex suits from eu94(it only lacks of red cape)

Considering that the starting "armour" in X-com94 is a plain coverall I'd consider an oversized latex condom big enough to cover their entire body to be armour.

However as far as I know XCOM2012 starts out with your guys wearing proper protective gear with bullet resistant vests etc. In which case I'm doubtful to the "upgrade" of plastic toy armour. But it looks cool, and it does it's job to set the illusion so I don't really care.

Comparably though it sucks!

[HWP]

Considering that the starting "armour" in X-com94 is a plain coverall I'd consider an oversized latex condom big enough to cover their entire body to be armour.

However as far as I know XCOM2012 starts out with your guys wearing proper protective gear with bullet resistant vests etc.

You may have heard wrong. EU2012 armor looks like this:

The graphics in '12 are really shitty. I mean, they beat the '94 one, just because they're 3d, but they look like 2003-2004 technology used by 1980s action figure designers without computer skills.

[Gorlom]

Yes. My point was that everything other than the top 3 rows and first 2 columns is dense. The further lower, the heavier.

So?

But either is heavier than water. Similar in weight really.

What does the weight compared to water have to do with it? (The same amount of carbon should have the same weight regardless of form.)

My point was about the way the atoms are connected makes materials behave differently.

There is no such method. We really understand that part; it's not - OK, it is - but it's still really well described. If it weren't, nuclear reactors wouldn't be possible.

And if one existed, the material still would not have the density of styrofoam.

You misunderstand me. I wasn't talking about fusing at a nuclear level to create a different periodic element. I was talking about in how to structure atomic bindings within the compound to alter its properties, it is an alloy after all. is it not?

I don't even recall if allenum is supposed to be a specific periodic element or if that could be a composite similar to how Kryptonite is in some lore a composite.

You may have heard wrong. EU2012 armor looks like this:

Proper as in "not just a coverall"

Edited January 1, 2013 by Gorlom

[HWP]

So? What does the weight compared to water have to do with it? ...

My point was about the way the atoms are connected makes materials behave differently.

It does. But density remains. If someone is wearing 40 liters of armor - it has to be made out of something like styrofoam, or it will weight 60+ kg with the lightest useful elements, 100+ with metal alloys.

You misunderstand me. I wasn't talking about fusing at a nuclear level to create a different periodic element. I was talking about in how to structure atomic bindings within the compound to alter its properties.

We know most there is to know about it. Can't use it all. But know the idea.

Some materials can have stronger forms. Some can't. Either way, nothing useful has the density of styrofoam.

[Gorlom]

It does. But density remains. If someone is wearing 40 liters of armor - it has to be made out of something like styrofoam, or it will weight 60+ kg with the lightest useful elements, 100+ with metal alloys.

That is assuming that the heavier materials are used in majority.

We know most there is to know about it. Can't use it all. But know the idea.

Some materials can have stronger forms. Some can't. Either way, nothing useful has the density of styrofoam.

You said it yourself that it is an alloy a compound of more than one material. I don't believe every combination of periodic elements combinations has been tried out. mostly because a lot of them would be too expensive to be useful even if the material itself would be useful...

You are also assuming materials in the regular periodic table. You completely neglect the antimatter equivalent of the periodic table. Who is to say the Aliens hasn't found a means to stabilize and contain antimatter in a regular matter world? maybe even within a regular matter compound. The properties of the material would at that point be unexplored territory.

Also I reject the notion that we know everything about atomic structures and alloy compounds. It was just a few years ago that some new crystalline structure previously thought impossible was discovered. (Don't have any link because I have no idea what to search for)

[Max_Caine]

Is this what you were referring to, Gorlom?

Anyway, guys, it's just a game. Does it really matter that much?

[zzz1010]

Anyway, guys, it's just a game. Does it really matter that much?

Gorlom and HPW just like to speak on such topics with each other. Armour from anti-matter, how many rounds real mg fire durning turn. Amount of sense is not matter.

[HWP]

That is assuming that the heavier materials are used in majority.

Correct. But that is a fair assumption. If you want to defend against bullets, you want metal or ceramics in front, fiber in the back. If you want to defend against plasma, you just want ceramics.

There are some nuances to it - esp.the latter - but in the end, whichever way you go, a useful suit of armor won't end up looking like these ugly plastic toys. The best defense against plasma will look like a silvery fire proximity suit.

You said it yourself that it is an alloy a compound of more than one material. I don't believe every combination of periodic elements combinations has been tried out. mostly because a lot of them would be too expensive to be useful even if the material itself would be useful...

Only the first 22 - actually the 11 metals and metalloids out of the first 22 - are useful as the primary components of a light alloy.

And yes. Every binary (and even every trinary) combination of these has been tried out. What makes the least sense of all? I think mixing heavy and high-temperature titanium with reactive sodium... oh wait: http://www.springermaterials.com/docs/info/10522884_2171.html

You are also assuming materials in the regular periodic table. You completely neglect the antimatter equivalent of the periodic table. Who is to say the Aliens hasn't found a means to stabilize and contain antimatter in a regular matter world? maybe even within a regular matter compound. The properties of the material would at that point be unexplored territory.

Antimatter can not coexist with matter in an alloy; they annihilate one another on a level far below molecular.

In an "antimatter world", it would behave the same as respective normal matter in ours.

Also I reject the notion that we know everything about atomic structures and alloy compounds. It was just a few years ago that some new crystalline structure previously thought impossible was discovered. (Don't have any link because I have no idea what to search for)

We know enough to predict the properties of anything useful for protective purposes.

But most importantly - your initial armor is made before you discover alien alloys, and it sucks just as whorishly.

[erutan]

I think we should have a spandex suit that projects little blackholes that eat incoming projectiles. It can even have some cool styrofoam cups attached to the shoulders to appeal to the WoW crowd.

Discuss.

[HWP]

Who let Mike Sparks in here? Orderlies to the Firaxis ward!

[Gorlom]

Antimatter can not coexist with matter in an alloy; they annihilate one another on a level far below molecular.

In an "antimatter world", it would behave the same as respective normal matter in ours.

Didn't you argue that aliens were tech levels beyond human science and that you can not reverse engineer higher tech levels because you wouldn't even be able to grasp the theory behind it even when examining the technology and seeing it in action?

How can you argue that and at the same time say it is impossible to stabilize and fuse matter and antimatter at a much more advanced technology level?

The basic premise is that they destroy each other when they come into contact with each other. But at the same time the basic principles for protons is that they repel each other and shouldn't be able to be bunched together into a nuclei or atomic core.

[HWP]

Didn't you argue that aliens were tech levels beyond human science and that you can not reverse engineer higher tech levels because you wouldn't even be able to grasp the theory behind it even when examining the technology and seeing it in action?

Not quite. I stated ("argued" is too weak a word for falsifiable and confirmed fact) the exact opposite: that alien technology we reverse-engineer in X-Com could not be more than one tech level - defined as a full cycle from TRL1 to TRL9 to TRL1 for the next step - ahead of our own. Because if it were, we could not even begin to reverse-engineer it, we would be as useless as a dog trying to climb a polished chrome wall.

How can you argue that and at the same time say it is impossible to stabilize and fuse matter and antimatter at a much more advanced technology level?

Just because we don't know everything doesn't make the few things we know to be wrong any less wrong.

There is a concept of falsifiability. Simply put, "falsifiable" means "could in principle be proven wrong". Non-falsifiable statements can't be proven wrong even if they are, and because of that they can't be proven true either. They are considered void in science; and, of course, for the very same reasons they make up the primary building blocks of politicians' speeches.

The existence of inaccessible Forgotten Realms is non-falsifiable. Anything Obama ever said that hasn't been proven wrong is either not falsifiable at all or not falsifiable in time elapsed. Matter-antimatter behaving as a stable solid when combined in elementary forms is falsifiable. And it has been confirmed false.

The basic premise is that they destroy each other when they come into contact with each other. But at the same time the basic principles for protons is that they repel each other and shouldn't be able to be bunched together into a nuclei or atomic core.

Protons are also attracted by both the strong and the weak interactions, which at close distance are stronger than the electric force. It's quite basic and quite straightforward.

Matter and antimatter, according to most available data, attract one another. There is nothing to keep them apart. And any interaction causes immediate annihilation of both.

Even if you could somehow combine them, what makes you think it would produce a stronger material than, for instance... let's say combining beer foam with Jovian atmosphere - I'm sure no one tried that one either?

[Buzzles]

Even if you could somehow combine them, what makes you think it would produce a stronger material than, for instance... let's say combining beer foam with Jovian atmosphere - I'm sure no one tried that one either?

I forsee some new advertising billboards in Xenonauts town maps:

Red Spot Beer™: Brewing up a Storm!

[Gorlom]

Not quite. I stated ("argued" is too weak a word for falsifiable and confirmed fact) the exact opposite: that alien technology we reverse-engineer in X-Com could not be more than one tech level - defined as a full cycle from TRL1 to TRL9 to TRL1 for the next step - ahead of our own. Because if it were, we could not even begin to reverse-engineer it, we would be as useless as a dog trying to climb a polished chrome wall.

My bad I got that the wrong way around.

Just because we don't know everything doesn't make the few things we know to be wrong any less wrong.

Well.. my example (link provided by Max_caine) was about a crystaline structure that was previously thought impossible. Obviously wehat they knew to be wrong was proven to be right... wasn't it? The same way Galileo Galilei discovered that the earth and other planets revolved around the sun. Despite the church knowing that was wrong.

The existence of inaccessible Forgotten Realms is non-falsifiable. Anything Obama ever said that hasn't been proven wrong is either not falsifiable at all or not falsifiable in time elapsed. Matter-antimatter behaving as a stable solid when combined in elementary forms is falsifiable. And it has been confirmed false.

Are you talking about as in a natural state or as a product of unknown technology? I can't tell if you are assuming that I'm talking about just mashing antimatter and matter together or if you take into account every potential yet to be made theoretical sub particle and theory to keep them separated at a molecular level but at the same time part of the same substance.

(I can't believe you know enough about that to make an expert opinion on it.)

Protons are also attracted by both the strong and the weak interactions, which at close distance are stronger than the electric force. It's quite basic and quite straightforward.

Matter and antimatter, according to most available data, attract one another. There is nothing to keep them apart. And any interaction causes immediate annihilation of both.

I doubt we have sufficient data on the subbject to know everything about it. What if there is some kind of strong and/or weak natural law concerning matter-antimatter that we just haven't come across.

The main antimatter particles humans has been able to study is high energy molecules of antihydrogen. That small (unsuitable) sample pool and their volatility hardly lends itself to extensive experimentation and understanding.

Even if you could somehow combine them, what makes you think it would produce a stronger material than, for instance... let's say combining beer foam with Jovian atmosphere - I'm sure no one tried that one either?

Well we don't know that do we? but if antimatter has negative or zero gravitational interaction one would be able to use higher number elemental particles without making it heavier, wouldn't you? Denser but not heavier.

PS: BTW why was volume important to whether the material could provide protection? I would assume it is the mass and the structure that is important and volume to be a result of those two factors. Heavier material would mean less volume for the theoretical same amount of protection.

If volume is the only factor then why aren't we making armour out of gasses? or at least solid low number periodic element materials.

Edited January 2, 2013 by Gorlom

[HWP]

Obviously wehat they knew to be wrong was proven to be right... wasn't it?

No. What they didn't know to be right or wrong was proven to be right. Just that.

Are you talking about as in a natural state or as a product of unknown technology? I can't tell if you are assuming that I'm talking about just mashing antimatter and matter together or if you take into account every potential yet to be made theoretical sub particle and theory to keep them separated at a molecular level but at the same time part of the same substance.

I'll repeat the question already asked. What makes you think such a substance, if it even could exist, would have more strength than e.g. the foam head on a pint of English ale?

I doubt we have sufficient data on the subbject to know everything about it. What if there is some kind of strong and/or weak natural law concerning matter-antimatter that we just haven't come across.

Well. What if there is some law due to which waving your arms above a piece of cotton and saying "durka durka jihad durka" with an accent we've never tried before makes it 1000 times stronger than carbon nanotubes and also makes a spaceworthy Douglas DC-5 appear in your backyard?

PS: BTW why was volume important to whether the material could provide protection? I would assume it is the mass and the structure that is important and volume to be a result of those two factors. Heavier material would mean less volume for the theoretical same amount of protection.

It's all of these factors that affect it. Actually I argued that the volume of EU'12 armor is too high to be protective against kinetic projectiles - it would have to be styrofoam to be wearable.

[Gorlom]

No. What they didn't know to be right or wrong was proven to be right. Just that.

.... Really? then by extension we don't know anything to be wrong. We may think something is wrong but we don't know anything is wrong until it is in fact proven it is not wrong, but right instead... 0.o

I'll repeat the question already asked. What makes you think such a substance, if it even could exist, would have more strength than e.g. the foam head on a pint of English ale?

Why do I have to provide proof if my point is that we don't know enough? That if something "fantastic" (from that sliding scale of realism you linked earlier.. did you link it in the other thread?) is possible then it could have properties that goes against out expectations.

Well. What if there is some law due to which waving your arms above a piece of cotton and saying "durka durka jihad durka" with an accent we've never tried before makes it 1000 times stronger than carbon nanotubes and also makes a spaceworthy Douglas DC-5 appear in your backyard?

While entertaining in it's ridiculousness it does not invalidate the possibility that we do not know enough/ if there is something crucial about the behavior of antimatter. You can Reductio ad ridiculum all you want.

It's all of these factors that affect it. Actually I argued that the volume of EU'12 armor is too high to be protective against kinetic projectiles - it would have to be styrofoam to be wearable.

Which armour? the one linked by nickolaidas?

Summary of my understanding of your pov: Basically your argument is that "since we don't know, there can't be any". And admitting the possibility of natural laws we do not understand in science fiction is down right silly... ?

Edited January 2, 2013 by Gorlom

[GoodGuyEddy]

Picture Y U NO BE BIG!?