You're probably going to have to give yourself some artistic license, if melee weapons are going to be important again, it's not going to happen for a while.

In the Dune books, they had energy shields that blocked anything going faster than a given velocity, so you had to get close to the opponent and shank them old-style.

Quote:

Original post by CAPS I'm trying to make a Combat(read: Fighting) game in which technology has advanced in such a way that it favours Close range weapons (swords, scythes, daggers) over Long range weapons (guns, rifles etc). However I'm trying to use technology that's already present or is currently in R&D-stage.

You have three approaches here: armour strong enough to stop projectiles, cloaking to make it hard to see the target well enough to shoot at it, and movement fast enough to dodge incoming projectiles.

Unfortunately, this can all be countered with guided anti-tank missiles. These exist currently, can be fired from a hand-held rocket launcher, can use a variety of detection and guidance systems to overcome the cloaking and dodging, and can punch through any armour you could mount on a person.

-----

If you ever decide to leave behind the complete realism angle, Frank Herbert's Dune had a very nice 'personal shield' mechanic, where the shields only stop high-velocity objects from entering. This has the dual effect of making projectile weapons obsolete, and also slowing down the hand-to-hand combat (fast slash with a blade will bounce).

Quote:

Original post by theOcelot Well, I think that's as good as it's going to get. Every increase in the level of protection decreases your mobility. Given the "buttload of energy" carried by a bullet, even your thick cloak won't help much, unless it's very heavy, which would be prohibitively cumbersome. The bullet will just push it out of the way. The whole concept of "technology has evolved to favor melee weapons over ranged ones" is a bit unrealistic in itself. By the time all these other technologies are ready, won't we also have directed-energy weapons too, á la laser guns? Those are being developed too. I think the US Army just tested a laser weapon on a missile.

You mean this? http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-3181489483846658366
And ... http://news.cnet.com/8301-11386_3-10201745-76.html.

It'll take a long long time before we see any lasers on the battlefield. All the above mentioned technologies are already in a advanced stadium of research. Usually the problem is making them on large scale. This is not to say my idea is likely.

I have found my answer tho, it seems Biosteel and Carbon Nanotubes will be the future. Woven Fibers Body Armors distribute the impact energy over the entire surface unlike the DragonSkin which works much like Standard Kevlar but instead in discs-form overlapping each other distributed over the Armor.

So I think I've formulated my solution.

Quote:

Original post by Prinz Eugn You're probably going to have to give yourself some artistic license, if melee weapons are going to be important again, it's not going to happen for a while. In the Dune books, they had energy shields that blocked anything going faster than a given velocity, so you had to get close to the opponent and shank them old-style.

What exactly do you mean with Artistic License?

Quote:

Original post by swiftcoder Quote: Original post by CAPS I'm trying to make a Combat(read: Fighting) game in which technology has advanced in such a way that it favours Close range weapons (swords, scythes, daggers) over Long range weapons (guns, rifles etc). However I'm trying to use technology that's already present or is currently in R&D-stage. You have three approaches here: armour strong enough to stop projectiles, cloaking to make it hard to see the target well enough to shoot at it, and movement fast enough to dodge incoming projectiles. Unfortunately, this can all be countered with guided anti-tank missiles. These exist currently, can be fired from a hand-held rocket launcher, can use a variety of detection and guidance systems to overcome the cloaking and dodging, and can punch through any armour you could mount on a person. ----- If you ever decide to leave behind the complete realism angle, Frank Herbert's Dune had a very nice 'personal shield' mechanic, where the shields only stop high-velocity objects from entering. This has the dual effect of making projectile weapons obsolete, and also slowing down the hand-to-hand combat (fast slash with a blade will bounce).

How do these guided systems work, heat? Movement?

I'm determined to stick with my realism angle. Shields are for later, the ''laser''-era.

Quote:

Original post by CAPS Quote: Original post by Prinz Eugn You're probably going to have to give yourself some artistic license, if melee weapons are going to be important again, it's not going to happen for a while. What exactly do you mean with Artistic License?

As in, there is no rule saying that artists have to pursue realism.

Quote:

Quote: Original post by swiftcoder Unfortunately, this can all be countered with guided anti-tank missiles. These exist currently, can be fired from a hand-held rocket launcher, can use a variety of detection and guidance systems to overcome the cloaking and dodging, and can punch through any armour you could mount on a person. How do these guided systems work, heat? Movement?

As I said, a variety. Any metric you like can be used for guidance: heat, visible motion, radar, radar motion, etc. or any combination of the above. You can't cloak every signature of a person (even B-2 bombers are visible to radar from some angles), and the enemy can choose to develop whichever tracking system you aren't able to cloak.

And look at current warfare: already the issue is avoidance and stealth rather than armour (armour being primarily effective against infantry). If the enemy can find you, they can destroy you - even the most heavily armoured tank can be destroyed by a single air-to-ground missile, or a direct hit from another tank.

All guided weapons can be defeated by some form of countermeasure ( ie flares, active defense, IR blocking smoke, jamming, etc.. ) if you have sufficient level of tech. Of course right now all these guided weapons are focused toward high priority targets (tanks, helicopters, fighter planes) since a single infantry solider or squad isn't valuable enough to expend a multi-million dollar guided missile on.

Advance stealthy cyber enhanced soldiers who are strong enough to carry a variety of countermeasures to defeat long range guided weapons can possibly close with the enemy fast enough to engage in close range combat, where their added armor, augmented reflex and super strength will give them an incredible edge.

They will be carrying enough armor to stop most if not all standard infantry projectile weapons so the combat might very well resort to hand 2 hand. They themselves should be able to carry devastating heavy weapons like mobile mortars, heavy machine guns, etc..

Directed energy weapons are quite possible, however they will be quite expensive and high priority targets, defended like how AA batteries are now, don't think they will be used against low priority targets like infantry.

-ddn

Quote:

Original post by ddn3 They will be carrying enough armor to stop most if not all standard infantry projectile weapons so the combat might very well resort to hand 2 hand. They themselves should be able to carry devastating heavy weapons like mobile mortars, heavy machine guns, etc.. -ddn

So, we move up to non-standard weapons. Screw infantry, I'll take the same techs used on your super infantry, mount them on a LAV, and then set them up with 6+ 30mm auto cannons that are controlled by gunners inside you use a wide spectrum sensor suite on each cannon to guide their cones of fire.

Or, if all infantry can run at super speeds, then I'll withdraw till we're both nearly out of power, then ambush you while you try to get close enough to cut my men.

That, or land mines. Lots, and lots and lots of landmines. And I'm not talking about those puny little blow a tank up mines, I'm talking defend my holdings with mines that go off and leave a 20 foot crater, and are then replaced by robots.

I really thing Frank Herbert had it almost right, the only method that is going to make soldiers go back to bladed weapons is some form of defense that would protect from even the most massive physical energies, but not minor forces. However the flaw here is low pressure grenade launchers. Design a weapon that travels slow enough to pass through the shields, and then explodes.


But the real answer? Honour and Tradition. This is by far the best and most probable method of going back to the sword and shield. Make a culture at war with itself that values not just the killing of an opponent, but the method used to kill them.

Quote:

Original post by Talroth I really thing Frank Herbert had it almost right, the only method that is going to make soldiers go back to bladed weapons is some form of defense that would protect from even the most massive physical energies, but not minor forces. However the flaw here is low pressure grenade launchers. Design a weapon that travels slow enough to pass through the shields, and then explodes.

He did have a variant on this, with the slow-pellet stun guns. I also seem to recall shielded troops still being vulnerable to gas attacks in the later books.

Quote:

But the real answer? Honour and Tradition. This is by far the best and most probable method of going back to the sword and shield. Make a culture at war with itself that values not just the killing of an opponent, but the method used to kill them.

This would probably make the most sense - there are many examples of cultures throughout history that have placed a high value on honourable methods of war.

You do realize an armor made of carbon nanotubes would be much better than dragon skin?
It's hard and flexible at the same time...

Carbon nanotubs is really the material of the future.
You may want to take a look at: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Potential_applications_of_carbon_nanotubes

Note also you're not likely to cut carbon nanotubes with sword-like things, even if they're made of carbon nanotubes.

[Edited by - loufoque on June 4, 2009 9:22:24 PM]

"Inventing" any kind of body armor will not do your realism any good. Historically, the answer to heavily armored personal were long range weapons to pick them off. So using armor to explain the use of close combat weapons goes against anything anybody ever learned in history classes. Any armor that can protect a human from a bullet at high velocity will be suited or at least easily modifiable to protect at least as well from close combat weapons. Your only choice is to give close combat weapons an edge in another field that bullets can not deliver:

1) Have your melee weapons come attached to a large energy source and have them deal energy damage on impact. Like a taser on steroids. Short range and deadly if you can pierce the armor even a tiny little bit. This will not make long range weapons obsolete, just no longer the weapon of choice. Getting shot still sucks, it's just that getting hit by an energized close combat weapon sucks way more. Gets you killed three times over, not "only" twice like an automatic weapon. Add in some cyberware that will get fried by the energy weapon and you have two reasons to use those.

2) Have long range weapons be obsolete by increase in personal speed. A ranged weapon is deadly because I have 1-5 shots before you close in on me. If I have only one or even less before you are all over me with your sword, I'd probably rather have my own sword. But note that long range weapons would still be viable as a surprise weapon. Like fire once and then charge. Or in a terrain where you cannot charge easily.

3) Maybe only some very costly stuff is able to pierce the latest armor. a coated melee weapon is worth a lot, but rapidly firing tons of coated bullets of that stuff and hope to have one of them hit is way over budget. A melee weapon is reusable and efficient. Just note that corporations or states may still use hit squads with automated weapons using the stuff. They can afford it and they will if they really want someone dead.

4) Make your scenario so lowtech or otherwise unhealthy for technology (swamp, desert, no oil available...) that a sword or axe is the most reliable weapon. No moving parts, no energy required, can kill a bazillion people without the need for externally manufactored components (aka ammunition).


In other words: make your reasoning for melee combat logically sound. Don't ask me to believe that armor got so good that instead of a bullet I will need a sword. That's just not the way our world has worked for about 5000 years and it's highly unlikely that it will change tomorrow.

The main thing, is that by trying to stick to one form of realism, you're destroying another; which means that immersion will be much harder.

All you need is 1) an alien planet 2) a long-dead alien super-civilization 3) a war in such said civilization 4) armor and melee weapons which survived where the ammunition did not.

Stick it together with some fancy words, bright glowy things, and an insane cult or two, and you'll have everything you need to blast your game's mojo straight to the player's brain. You can mimic elements like the Brotherhood of Steel from the fallout universe, armor design from things like Too Human or In Fury Born, the wicked energy-blades from the original Gundam series, and so forth. Its pretty formulaic.