Killing Kaiju?

[Formless]

I'll do you one better. The robots are outright divine intervention. The monsters are hell beasts representing the 666 heads of The Beast; the giant robots were constructed in heaven by angels.

*cough* *cough* Neon Genesis Evangelion - kinda' *cough*

Nah, that's more "the universe on acid having sex with Freud" culminating in a "white light" (i.e. "talking to god") experience. Or to summarize "psychedelics guyz!"

<--- NGE fan. Doesn't like the abuse of symbolism that's just window dressing by the writer's own admission.

[biostem]

What if the only thing that could hurt these monsters was some sort of extremely rare material? If the quantities of said material were limited to the point where they could only, say, coat the tip of a giant robot's melee weapon with said substance, would that be reason enough to go this route? The real limiting factors would seem to be that you'd need to have the giant robots before the monsters came, as an excuse as to why people would use them, and that the ability to simply coat missiles or bullets with the material, then try to recover it after the fact, was not possible...

[jollyreaper]

Here's a somewhat related question:


If *you* were writing the script for a movie that involved giant robots punching giant monsters, how would you write off that said punches, swords, and the like, would work, but conventional weapons wouldn't?


Would you say that the robots utilized some sort of exotic materials that couldn't be delivered via conventional means? Would you make the disparity between what a giant robot could do and regular hardware so wide that anyone or anything caught in the crossfire is utterly wiped out? What do you think?

That's really the question. I mean, we all like robots punching monsters in the face in theory, we just want it to be in a way we can get behind.

The Evangelion explanation was one of the better ones. Monsters have invulnerable shield, robots have similar shield and can negate it, then shoot and punch monster in the face.

Really, this is the same fundamental problem with battlemechs. Any weapon and power system the battlemech uses should be just as effective in a tank and turret configuration. It's easier to armor a box than a humanoid form.

Any setting that tries to justify the battlemech has to built the justification into the universe.

We're already talking about breaking physics with the giant monsters to begin with, same as breaking reality to have a good ghost story. So a good giant monster movie would figure out how the giant beast works and why the conventional weapons just don't work as well against them as they should against flesh and bone monsters. And presumably our study of how they work and why conventional weapons don't help explain why unconventional weapons must be robots and can't simply be retrofitted to conventional platforms. To be honest, I can't even imagine why those sprint missiles couldn't work.

Frankly, I would love to see a movie with the army going all-out against mid-sized monsters, T-rex size or such, there's a lot of them and we're blasting them to pieces with heavy weapons.

[Gaidin]

It's not like conventional weapons didn't work to an extent. I mean, one of them fired missiles out of its chest as a kill blow. Granted...big conventional weapons, persay. But...conventional. Unless those were just something other than what I saw. And the way the mechs actually fought just meant they brought it back to simple fighting and F = ma.

You say a movie with the army? They always talk about a sequel, I think they should do a prequel about the first kaiju to come up that the army actually has to deal with.

[Channel72]

This is a common Hollywood problem - not just with huge monsters and robots, but any "creature feature" that tries to be science fiction instead of relying on supernatural elements. Movie-goers sure do love sci-fi monsters (basically predatory megafauna), but it's hard to write a script about a giant monster that doesn't either ignore logic or force the protagonists to act stupid. I guess Alien pulled it off okay, considering the main cast was supposed to be an unarmed, blue-collar work crew with no weapons. But most script writers just fall back on contrived scenarios or character stupidity; Jurassic Park, for example, could have been solved in a few hours with shot guns.

[Gaidin]

This is a common Hollywood problem - not just with huge monsters and robots, but any "creature feature" that tries to be science fiction instead of relying on supernatural elements. Movie-goers sure do love giant monsters, but it's hard to write a script about a giant monster that doesn't either ignore logic or force the protagonists to act stupid. I guess Alien pulled it off okay, considering the main cast was supposed to be an unarmed, blue-collar work crew with no weapons. But most script writers just fall back on contrived scenarios or character stupidity; Jurassic Park, for example, could have been solved in a few hours with shot guns.

All things being equal, Jurassic Park mostly was. The thing is the story was mostly about the group that got stuck out there without the shotguns and the fact that they didn't have the number of people to really partner up when they did have shotguns because everybody'd left the island for a hurricane coming, to the writers' credit.

Pacific Rim was quite a bit more contrived than Jurassic Park was, but get's a lot more forgiven because nearly everybody that sees it doesn't have a clue what can really be thrown at those things, and those that do probably had their share of fun anyway.

[Sea Skimmer]

Jurassic Park the book made a strong point about basically Hammond believing that the dinosaurs were worth more then peoples lives, and so they only had a few special weapons on hand to deal with them kept under lock and key. Plus they just didn't think the dangerous ones could ever escape, and didn't know they were breeding due to a poorly thought out computer programing decision.

Pacific Rim meanwhile gives us not one but TWO scenes in which strafing F-22 fighters fly into the monsters and explode

[jollyreaper]

This is a common Hollywood problem - not just with huge monsters and robots, but any "creature feature" that tries to be science fiction instead of relying on supernatural elements. Movie-goers sure do love sci-fi monsters (basically predatory megafauna), but it's hard to write a script about a giant monster that doesn't either ignore logic or force the protagonists to act stupid. I guess Alien pulled it off okay, considering the main cast was supposed to be an unarmed, blue-collar work crew with no weapons. But most script writers just fall back on contrived scenarios or character stupidity; Jurassic Park, for example, could have been solved in a few hours with shot guns.

If your script only works with stupid characters, then your whole effort is stupid.

I think the essential problem is that it's difficult to write a character smarter than you are but quite a bit easier to write for a fool. And by extension smart plots are hard, idiot plots are easy.

For the life of me, though, I can't understand what levels of stupid are fine for American audiences and what levels fail. I was obliged to sit through Lone Ranger with the ol' extended family. It was comprehensively awful, about on par with the new Transformers or Crystal Skull. However, Crystal Skull was a resounding box office success and the Lone Ranger a legendary bomb. Was Harrison Ford as Indy a sufficient draw? Depp has been an even bigger draw in the past. No more?

Whatever the answer is on that, the one clear thing is that finding the best, most competent solution to a fantastic and extraordinary problem is not something the movie-going public is clamoring for so we are unlikely to ever see it but by chance.

[phred]

I was obliged to sit through Lone Ranger with the ol' extended family. It was comprehensively awful, about on par with the new Transformers or Crystal Skull. However, Crystal Skull was a resounding box office success and the Lone Ranger a legendary bomb. Was Harrison Ford as Indy a sufficient draw? Depp has been an even bigger draw in the past. No more?

That's easy. Indy is a franchise. He has 3 other movies backing him up. Transformers also has 80's nostalgia going for it, while Lone Ranger didn't.
Pacific Rim had awesome going for it. I mean, who could resist giant monsters vs giant robots? Once again, Lone Ranger didn't. All it had was Depp acting crazy, and we've seen that already.

[Borgholio]

I saw Crystal Skull for no other reason than it was Indiana Jones. Despite the fact I was not impressed (didn't hate it...just wasn't impressed), I'd go see the next one in a heartbeat because...it's Indiana fucking Jones. He has a following even Johnny Depp doesn't have.

[Channel72]

Crystal Skull was obviously successful. It had Phantom Menace level anticipation going for it. Lone Ranger had... nothing really, other than vague cultural name recognition and generic Johnny Depp eccentric character number 4353.

[Irbis]

Frankly, I would love to see a movie with the army going all-out against mid-sized monsters, T-rex size or such, there's a lot of them and we're blasting them to pieces with heavy weapons.

Reign of Fire, maybe?

Was Harrison Ford as Indy a sufficient draw? Depp has been an even bigger draw in the past. No more?

Is he? I saw a chart recently by someone trying to prove movies where Depp is basically side character along someone do well, Depp primary star movies bomb. Sadly, didn't saw enough of those to have an opinion.

[biostem]

Let's take the concept from Pacific Rim, only this time the aliens start off by firing several massive ICBMs through the rift in order to wipe out the main military forces. The invaders send the Kaiju as a cleanup crew, having expended their stockpile of ICBMs in the alpha strike. A civilian robotics facility was just about to start production on a line of large scale construction robots, and they weren't targeted because these were not seen as a threat. These humanoid robots have no integrated weapons, as they were not intended to be used for combat.

Would the above be feasible as a setting where it'd make sense to use the giant robots to fight the Kaiju? I'm imaging that all large scale military assets were wiped out, so while you may have a retrofitted attack chopper here or there, there's no real military to call upon to save the day...

[Darth Tanner]

Why would construction robots look like giant people... they would be large cranes or bulldozers but with robot cabins instead of drivers seats. Giant people would be of little real use for construction... especially as you would need a train of smaller construction crews/robots behind them to repair the damage they do to the road surfaces.

[Metahive]

Let's take the concept from Pacific Rim, only this time the aliens start off by firing several massive ICBMs through the rift in order to wipe out the main military forces. The invaders send the Kaiju as a cleanup crew, having expended their stockpile of ICBMs in the alpha strike. A civilian robotics facility was just about to start production on a line of large scale construction robots, and they weren't targeted because these were not seen as a threat. These humanoid robots have no integrated weapons, as they were not intended to be used for combat.

Would the above be feasible as a setting where it'd make sense to use the giant robots to fight the Kaiju? I'm imaging that all large scale military assets were wiped out, so while you may have a retrofitted attack chopper here or there, there's no real military to call upon to save the day...

How about this, the aliens release first their contagion en masse into the oceans and therefore snap a few foodchains and screw over humanity. Then they release all their strongest monsters early and quickly.

The problem with movies like Pacific Rim is that they require the bad guys to act like video game villains for basically no established reason at all. They don't need to send their monsters piecemeal or start with the weakest first and gradually up the ante other than to give the good guys a sporting chance.

[Channel72]

Sending giant biological organisms at intervals to colonize (or was it destroy?) human civilization is a stupid plan anyway, if you have ICBMs or contagions in your arsenal.

No... sadly, there really is no way to write a movie about giant monsters fighting giant robots in any way that makes sense. The only way to do it is to create a full-on fantasy setting.

[Channel72]

That being said, there is one movie, at least, that sort of managed to pull off that premise effectively. Although, even there I still don't remember why they didn't just use guns.

[madd0ct0r]

I've frequently seen the argument that power armour and mechs only make sense at the smallest scale - basically human sized or close to make use of the infrastructure.

What if we were fighting on the aliens planet and they were kajui sized? So everything, from elevators to kerbstones are built at kajiu scale. Worth bringing out the robots then?

[Metahive]

Since the alien's dimension is some sort of wacky parallel universe hidden behind a sphincter, maybe their Kaiju's are just their form of bulldozers.

[Vendetta]

The problem with movies like Pacific Rim is that they require the bad guys to act like video game villains for basically no established reason at all. They don't need to send their monsters piecemeal or start with the weakest first and gradually up the ante other than to give the good guys a sporting chance.

Sad thing is that's so easy for them to explain in one line of expository wibble.

"Every time they use the portal it gets a bit bigger, a bit more stable. They can send bigger attacks and more often".

Job done, don't need to explain why, just say that it is.

[Sea Skimmer]

I've frequently seen the argument that power armour and mechs only make sense at the smallest scale - basically human sized or close to make use of the infrastructure.

The basic issue is we need infantry to go places armored vehicles cannot, you need them to build certain things like mineplanting, and as a secondary function of being a less lethal option for dealing with non combattants and enemy prisoners. Anything which can improve the performance of infantry is useful, but it cannot come at the expense of infantry being able to perform those functions. The first one is key, the other functions could be met by not having all infantry in armor.

Thus the power armor needs to be small, and a mecha with the pilot inside the torso is just already going to be too big, unless we have a midget for a pilot. That might actually be an option for someone like the USSR with conscription from a large population base and a limited mecha fleet, but in more reasonable terms it is not. You could be as big as a huge human, maybe bigger then any human and still more or less get the job done, but if your taller then any ceiling? Pointless.

Imagine trying to clear a trench line when the power armor is wider then the trench is for example, built by humans without armor. Wouldn't work very well and if you have to stay in the open, well, tanks were invented for that!

What if we were fighting on the aliens planet and they were kajui sized? So everything, from elevators to kerbstones are built at kajiu scale. Worth bringing out the robots then?

Ah that would be the 'giant stair world' concept of SDN past, I forgot who coined the term but it was silly and flawed. The problem is if you make the environment bigger then you don't need bigger infantry, you need LESS infantry! If no nooks and crannies exist in which you need infantry to exterminate enemy anti tank teams inside of, then why not just field more tanks? And self propelled guns, and multiple rocket launchers and trucks with mach 3 anti ship missiles and helicopter and aircraft ect..

You could perhaps negate the aircraft issue if the kaiju world had no air, or at least not enough air for planes of useful wing loading to fly in, but did have gravity, and I see no reason why kaiju must be oxygen dependent, one could surmise some chemosynthesis processes by which they might be powered instead, but that wouldn't resolve the ground vehicle issue. Even with no atmosphere at all we can power an AFV with bottled oxygen and conventional fuel, it'd be an explosive hazard but very workable. Cooling the engine would be a problem, but this is all a massive problem for giant robot design in all contexts anyway, not to mention the kaiju biology.

Also no atmosphere will also make rockets and guns much more effective since they face no drag losses, though missiles will have to become more complicated to use reaction jet control alone. On the other hand SPRINT was already completely controlled by reaction jets... and built in the 1960s. Lack of air will also make unguided weapons a lot more accurate, since no wind induced errors.

Now maybe if the battle was inside the kaiju with a a kaiju so giant we deploy attack submarines into the blood stream, which deploy giant robots to hack at specific parts of the brain with a goal of damaging it to make the kaiju passive so we can train it like a dog... well yeah maybe we can come up with scenarios on these lines in which they make sense or at least are not overtly a really bad option. This sort of absurdity is also why I suggested maybe have giant robots originally designed for a non combat sort of purpose, but adapted to one. A super giant robot might be inferior to a giant tank made with the same technology, but if we already built the robot to play fetch with the kaiju to help domesticate, and the tank is 18 months from field trials... do what you have to do?

I also have had a pet idea on and off, which I have seen random internet art of so, I know its not a super original concept, of having giant robots which are actually giant monsters IN POWER ARMOR. But people usually want the main characters to be human, and not giant monsters in power armor crewing even more gigantic tanks. People are lame.

[Nephtys]

The problem with movies like Pacific Rim is that they require the bad guys to act like video game villains for basically no established reason at all. They don't need to send their monsters piecemeal or start with the weakest first and gradually up the ante other than to give the good guys a sporting chance.

Sad thing is that's so easy for them to explain in one line of expository wibble.

"Every time they use the portal it gets a bit bigger, a bit more stable. They can send bigger attacks and more often".

Job done, don't need to explain why, just say that it is.

They did totally say that. They said that the portal was getting larger with each object sent through.

And honestly, people need to stop associating 'that is an unreasonable solution to your ficticious premise!' with 'This movie is bad'. I for one, found Pacific Rim quite good, in that it did what it was supposed to do. Be a framework for a ridiculous but fun fantasy regarding giant robots elbowing giant monsters. You could say the same about say, Inception. Dumb and farfetched idea, but a good movie.

Super Robots rarely make sense without some weird gimmick, it's true. So far, the only reasonable explanation I've ever seen for a humanoid weapon as opposed to a tank with the same gear, is if the control system was somehow way awesome and allowed far greater agility for the humanoid platform, as opposed to the raw power and armor of a big tank. Basically, 'very large infantry wearing a light armored car' type games/media, as opposed to Eva scale.

[Patroklos]

I've frequently seen the argument that power armour and mechs only make sense at the smallest scale - basically human sized or close to make use of the infrastructure.

The basic issue is we need infantry to go places armored vehicles cannot, you need them to build certain things like mineplanting, and as a secondary function of being a less lethal option for dealing with non combattants and enemy prisoners. Anything which can improve the performance of infantry is useful, but it cannot come at the expense of infantry being able to perform those functions. The first one is key, the other functions could be met by not having all infantry in armor.

Thus the power armor needs to be small, and a mecha with the pilot inside the torso is just already going to be too big, unless we have a midget for a pilot. That might actually be an option for someone like the USSR with conscription from a large population base and a limited mecha fleet, but in more reasonable terms it is not. You could be as big as a huge human, maybe bigger then any human and still more or less get the job done, but if your taller then any ceiling? Pointless.

Imagine trying to clear a trench line when the power armor is wider then the trench is for example, built by humans without armor. Wouldn't work very well and if you have to stay in the open, well, tanks were invented for that!

Walking mechs would have some advantages in lots of terrain situations though, so I could see a use for something the size of a tank bringing heavy weaponry into such enviroments. In an urban enviroment a mech might not be able to go into a normal building, but it could climb over a pile of rubble for instance that would halt a tank in its tracks.

They would still have to be relatively small though, because the other issue with giant mechs is that they basically become giant targets sillouetted against the sky. It doesn't matter how much mobility you have if every turret within a mile can easily see and target you. Basically you would still need to be scaled to make use of the cover provided by normal sized one story buildings and terrain features.

Another arguement for human or near human sized mechs is the intuitivness of the machine when paired with human perception. If you are wearing the thing and it can move and respond to commands at something approaching normal human movements and responses (a big if) it takes a lot of thinking out of the equation. When we want to walk all of us just walk. When we want to reverse a tank we need a dedicated driver who is trained to understand the controls, movement characteristics and limitations of the vehicle in question. I think this can somewhat be negated by the abilities of computers to replicate this type of "natural" understanding of a machines capabilities similar to what we have for our own bodies, which may also free us from using human forms for these machines to achieve the same effect.

[Sky Captain]

Walking mechs would have some advantages in lots of terrain situations though, so I could see a use for something the size of a tank bringing heavy weaponry into such enviroments. In an urban enviroment a mech might not be able to go into a normal building, but it could climb over a pile of rubble for instance that would halt a tank in its tracks.

In this case I think something like spider would make more sense. Think of Big Dog, but with multiple legs for redundancy if one or two gets shot. It would also sit lower and be less obvious target than giant human shaped mech. large human like mech would be prone to tripping and falling over while spider with its many legs would be naturally stable platform much like a tank.

[Zeropoint]

When we want to walk all of us just walk. When we want to reverse a tank we need a dedicated driver who is trained to understand the controls, movement characteristics and limitations of the vehicle in question. I think this can somewhat be negated by the abilities of computers to replicate this type of "natural" understanding of a machines capabilities similar to what we have for our own bodies, which may also free us from using human forms for these machines to achieve the same effect.

Yep. I've thought for some time now that operating a spider tank (or any kind of legged vehicle that doesn't simply mimic the wearer's motions) would be more akin to riding a horse than driving a car. You wouldn't directly control the drivetrain, you'd just let it know which way you wanted to go, and how fast, and let the machine worry about where it's putting its feet.