P90s in 2062??

[Frost Phantom]

just noticed that in the trailer, the guards escorting kane are holding P-90s...
sure they look cool and all but they are plagued with jamming issues especially when they get knocked around a bit (which would prolly happen quite often in warzones)....yet for some reason, they are using it in 2062...you'd think they'd come up with something original for the purposes of a futuristic setting....
damn hollywood and their cool yet useless weapons!

yes i am bored XD

[eLDiablo]

The suits, ties, uniforms, eyeglasses and facial hair styles are all also from the current era; they should update them too.

[kyle]

The suits, ties, uniforms, eyeglasses and facial hair styles are all also from the current era; they should update them too.

Don't forget the actors. They're from the current era as well.

[eLDiablo]

And that wooden table; that is so 2003, they should use ultra-modern polymer at least that way it will at least look vaguely 2023ish

[Derek]

Should we even mention the language? Accents change, words come and go. I'm not saying it should be unintelligible, but there should be a hint of unfamiliarity to it.

[Coldwar05]

heheheh I noticed that off the bat they are P90's since I play so much FPS with them in it. Now what really gets me is an unarmed man who is exorted by 2 other men with P90's is to much. What is he gonan do use the tacticus as a nucluer bomb?

[eLDiablo]

heheheh I noticed that off the bat they are P90's since I play so much FPS with them in it. Now what really gets me is an unarmed man who is exorted by 2 other men with P90's is to much. What is he gonan do use the tacticus as a nucluer bomb?

Because you should totally escort a known terrorist without a vast advantage over him.



Seriously. Shut up.

[Frost Phantom]

well technically, the mastermind behind a whole lot of terrorist attacks generally wont blow themselves up...i mean all those terror groups in real life realy wouldnt exist if every one of their leaders did as they preached and blew themselves up for the fun of it...nooooo...usualy the masterminds just take advantage of their leadership traits and talk a whole bunch of less intelligent people into going on suicide missions.....

and my point with the P90s was more that i found it weird they still had relatively old weapons that dont work very well in the future even though methods and tool of killing each other is just about the only thing mankind has ever constantly updated....

[eLDiablo]

and my point with the P90s was more that i found it weird they still had relatively old weapons that dont work very well in the future even though methods and tool of killing each other is just about the only thing mankind has ever constantly updated....

should i link you back to the first 3 replies in this thread?

[Frost Phantom]

nope cuz i wont them them again anyways! :P

[Ivan_Moscavich]

I still say they should be using AK-47s.

[Mighty BOB!]

I think it's a floops on the part of the prop department. Still confounding that they didn't at least reuse props from the TW set.

[Ivan_Moscavich]

I think it's a floops on the part of the prop department. Still confounding that they didn't at least reuse props from the TW set.

Exactly, it wouldn't be hard to make something look like a GD-2.

[Frost Phantom]

especially since they dont actually have to fire it or anything.....
i'd still prefer something way over the top like a personnel ion cannon or a volt rifle like the ones in CNC Renegade :)

[Thumper]

thats the first thing that stuck out in the video for me. p90's? but hey, in a world ravaged by tiberium... who knows.

[Frost Phantom]

i just found it weird that they were using what would have been ancient guns in 2062. even though the improvement of weapons/methods of killing each other is the only thing in the history of the world that has been constant.

[apple23]

frost, you're sounding like a broken record. Perhaps you don't get it; everyone else is just having fun with the topic, we all get your point that it's weird that there are P90's in 2062, now what you need to realise is that they are going off on thier own tangents.

anyways, something I always wondered is that given the advance in technology, I have seen no significant enhancements in armor either. All infantry use the same basic armor, all tanks use the same armor plating, i mean in 60 years can't they invent some kind of cool reactive energy armor?

the way the tiberium universe has been going, it seems, is they are inventing bunches of new weapons, but all the old technologies have seen little to no upgrades. There are still basic rifles in general military use in 2062, i mean couldn't they upgrade to lasers or something?

[eLDiablo]

Apple, they've clearly recognized the futility of the arms race mentality. Better armor leads to stronger bullets leads to better armor etc.

They decided to spend their money in better ways, like badass helmet design.

[Thumper]

/applause

[apple23]

Apple, they've clearly recognized the futility of the arms race mentality. Better armor leads to stronger bullets leads to better armor etc.

They decided to spend their money in better ways, like badass helmet design.

I see what you mean.

I kind of agree with frost on his first point though, I think it's weird that they have all these cool new weapon systems like railguns, lasers, tiberium weapons, plasma weapons, etc. and yet the main bulk of thier army uses basic rifles, missiles and shells (it may be simply to show the difference between tech levels in the game tech tree, but advancing through an entire era of weapons tech through the construction of a tech lab?)

Though, I will admit that if all that money went to badass helmet design, it was money well spent.

[Cylon Crusader]

How about this:

Your tier one units will use bullets, shells and missles, but your units in their later technologicaly advanced states will upgrade the bullets to plasma rifles, the shells to plasma or laser cannons, and they can maybe invent some form of high tech missile as you go up the tech tree.

For the P90s:

It is weird that they are still being used, but the area in the trailer that we saw was manchester, a former blue zone, maybe shortage of supplies and manpower are to blame?

[Frost Phantom]

well thats all kinda my point. and yes i know this isnt a serious thread. i was just kinda disappointed they didnt walk around carrying portable railguns or something...as much as hollywood CGI replacing plot usually sucks in movies, you gotta admit, cool looking shiny things that make everything explode is rather awesome! and the trailer would have been better if it looked more sci-fi/futuristic and possibly some firefights! =]

[eLDiablo]

you gotta admit, cool looking shiny things that make everything explode is rather awesome!

when that's not all that makes something... but rarely is good graphics added after excellent gameplay and story, it's usually to hide the lackthereof.

and that's what's wrong with SEVERAL entertainment industries.

[Ivan_Moscavich]

when that's not all that makes something... but rarely is good graphics added after excellent gameplay and story, it's usually to hide the lackthereof.

and that's what's wrong with SEVERAL entertainment industries.

Sex and violence sell my friend.

[Frost Phantom]

very well too!

take transformers. seriously, the plot is stupid when you think about it.
but hey, Megan Fox + giant robots shooting at everything with giant rockets and lasers....saw it at the movies and definitely buying the dvd! even though i just about never buy dvds....but this is purely to support megan fox and her lack of cloth =] oh and the cool cgi XD

[Coldwar05]

Well, I also agree Frost they could have at least had some lazer/ railgun technology because if its already in the game why escout someone that wanted with just our time technology... dispite I found the teaser rather boring.

[Cylon Crusader]

very well too!

take transformers. seriously, the plot is stupid when you think about it.
but hey, Megan Fox + giant robots shooting at everything with giant rockets and lasers....saw it at the movies and definitely buying the dvd! even though i just about never buy dvds....but this is purely to support megan fox and her lack of cloth =] oh and the cool cgi XD

Lol, too true man, too true.

:rofl:

[Madcap_Magician]

Here we are in 2010 with lots of armies using a 63-year-old automatic rifle design... the US Air Force flying a 58-year-old bomber... the US Marine Corps opting to go back to a 99-year-old handgun design...

[apple23]

the reason: simply put, they are tried and true technologies, and alot of people operate on the mantra of "if it isn't broken, don't fix it", which is why they haven't upgraded. It really wouldn't surprise me if there was at least some variant of the P90 in the 2060's

[Madcap_Magician]

the reason: simply put, they are tried and true technologies, and alot of people operate on the mantra of "if it isn't broken, don't fix it", which is why they haven't upgraded. It really wouldn't surprise me if there was at least some variant of the P90 in the 2060's

That was rather my point.

And I would be. The P90 is kind of fun to shoot, but I never saw the point of the 5.7 x 28 mm cartridge.

[Frost Phantom]

the if it isnt broken dont fix it mentality only works when the weapons you're comparing are of the same level of technology. doenst apply for differen teirs of tech such as crude projectile weapons and energy weapons....

afterall, that mentality didnt save the japs from the nukes now did it? and conventional bombs are a proven and tested weapon... nukes are just better....

[Madcap_Magician]

the if it isnt broken dont fix it mentality only works when the weapons you're comparing are of the same level of technology. doenst apply for differen teirs of tech such as crude projectile weapons and energy weapons....

afterall, that mentality didnt save the japs from the nukes now did it? and conventional bombs are a proven and tested weapon... nukes are just better....

Sure it does. If you have, 100 years down the line, people with plasma rifles, rail guns, lasers, what-have-you, you'll still have somebody killing somebody else with an AK-47. Why? Because they're cheap, easy to maintain and manufacture (Some in Pakistan and Afghanistan make them solely with hand tools). For lots of people, that will always make them better than your $90,000 Kill-O-Zap ray.

And after all, the superiority of nuclear weapons is the reason why we fight with them all these days. :squint:

In the words of a great, albeit fictional, hero of mine, we learn to throw knives in this age of nukes because "The enemy cannot push a button if you have pinned his hand to the wall."

[Frost Phantom]

plasma weapons once in mainstream deployment within the military would be very cheap to mass produce (other wise they wont enter mainstream service).. so you'll be comparing a cheap plasma rifle against an slightly cheaper AK-47... though the AK is a reliable weapon, it'd be like the polish sending cavalry against german panzers in ww2 all over again, just because something has worked reliably for the last 2000 years doesnt mean it will keep working as efficiently.

as for us not fighting with nukes, that has nothing at all to do with cost... that is more to do with the fact that a nuke is a deterrant more than a weapon, its not good firing them if the enemy is going to fire one back at you... or if you want somethign from the enemy
so maybe that was a bad example.... easier one to comprehend would be the developments in conventional bombs. a bomb that was dropped in WW2 was just as reliable as a bomb dropped nowadays, cept modern bombs come with 100times the destructiveness. according to the if it aint broken, dont fix it theory, we should still be using ww2 era bombs rather than our current bombs....

[Thumper]

a nuke is not a scalpel, its a ****ing axe. that leaves radiation behind...

[Frost Phantom]

thats arguable considering it depends heavily on the type of nukes your talking about... sure the early ones like the fission bombs dropped on japan in ww2 were just outright stupid and had everything good and bad in it.... but in modern nukes, there are several grades and types of nukes...
eg neutron bomb would flood an area with massive radiation, killing all living things yet leave buildings intact. whereas a thermal-nuclear fusion bomb would most likely flatten what it's fired at and the high temperature of the explosion would incinerate the majority of the radioactive matter, leaving very little radiation behind
then you have to take into account the yield and whether its an explosion or an implosion device.
then theres the matter of whether it's a ground level detonation, air drop, or an ICBM atmospheric detonation. ground level leaves the least radiation; air drop generally detonates 100-200m above ground lvl doing the most dmg, leaving okay amounts of radiation; atmospheric is generally used for ultra high yield detonations so they would still do a fair bit of initial dmg, but the radiation aftermath with one of those is cataclysmic

so yeah... a high yield thermonuclear fusion device using an implosion detonation at ground level would be able to flatten a city, kill millions, yet leave so little radiation it wouldnt effect our health =]

^^im so gonna build one of these one day (and a deadman's switch) and use it as a bargaining chip to get whatever i want =]

[Thumper]

there is no need to argue that point. instead argue why its an axe.

[Madcap_Magician]

plasma weapons once in mainstream deployment within the military would be very cheap to mass produce (other wise they wont enter mainstream service).. so you'll be comparing a cheap plasma rifle against an slightly cheaper AK-47... though the AK is a reliable weapon, it'd be like the polish sending cavalry against german panzers in ww2 all over again, just because something has worked reliably for the last 2000 years doesnt mean it will keep working as efficiently.

Nope, it doesn't. But if something has worked reliably for the last 2,000 years, I'd be willing to give good odds that it will continue to do so.

My point is that the AK-47 is cheap, easy to use and produce, and kills you just as dead as that fancy Kill-O-Zap ray would. And that's even assuming you're right about "plasma weapons" being cheap and mass-produced, which seems like a dubious claim at best.

The problem with your analogy (Besides the fact that it never happened, the Polish actually charged against an encamped Nazi unit headquarters, when that headquarters received armor support, the Poles withdrew), is that cavalry sabers are fundamentally outclassed by armor. Sabers have zero effect on armor. The AK-47 is not fundamentally outclassed by a theoretical energy weapon. Both of them are equally effective at killing people. A person with an AK-47 who puts a bullet into the head of a future soldier with a plasma weapon will kill him just as dead as the future soldier who puts a plasma bolt into the head of an insurgent with an AK-47.

so maybe that was a bad example.... easier one to comprehend would be the developments in conventional bombs. a bomb that was dropped in WW2 was just as reliable as a bomb dropped nowadays, cept modern bombs come with 100times the destructiveness. according to the if it aint broken, dont fix it theory, we should still be using ww2 era bombs rather than our current bombs....

Except modern bombs are actually more reliable than WW2 iron bombs in that A. the fuses are more reliable and accurate and B. the guidance systems available mean that a lot fewer modern bombs are necessary to accomplish the same goal.

Also, we still use essentially the same explosives used in World War II.

I would also point out that modern military aircraft STILL use iron bombs that are little removed from the ones dropped on Berlin and Tokyo.

Considering small arms as well, there hasn't really been any significant advantage in small arms technology since the introduction and widespread use of the brass cartridge case. All other small arms developments have been incremental, with weapons becoming simply a bit lighter, a bit more accurate, and actually less powerful. (Witness the change in service rifle caliber.)

For a while, we thought that caseless ammo might be the new thing, but nobody seems to have a propellant that will burn completely.

*shrug*

[Mighty BOB!]

A person with an AK-47 who puts a bullet into the head of a future soldier with a plasma weapon will kill him just as dead as the future soldier who puts a plasma bolt into the head of an insurgent with an AK-47.
Unless said person is wearing Zone armor, in which case I don't think a 7.62mm round is going to cut it. Hence the need for the kill-o-zap ray, which I think is indeed mass-producible, otherwise we wouldn't see everyone and their grandmother armed with one like we do in C&C4.

[Frost Phantom]

Nope, it doesn't. But if something has worked reliably for the last 2,000 years, I'd be willing to give good odds that it will continue to do so.
ummm... horses + swords vs tanks?

And that's even assuming you're right about "plasma weapons" being cheap and mass-produced, which seems like a dubious claim at best.
thats what they said about guns when taht idea first came round... mass production always lowers the price. especially since if somethign is in such high demand that it is mass produced, more research would be put into it to further reduce costs....

the very concept of energy weapons is that they would be light weight, zero recoil, immune to issues such as bullet drop, wind, etc. ie, a highly accurate gun with better range, easier to use, and lighter (allowing for better mobility). not to mention the fact that the appeal of energy weapons also lies within its anti armor capabilities. Imagine an army that is equiped with rifles that have multiple firing modes allowing for use as an assault rifle, a sniper rifle, an anti-armor rifle, and anti-structure! aka the Zone troppers and their personel ion cannons =]

when tech reaches those stages, AK-47s will be just like the polish cavalry during ww2. sure they can still kill people, but against a far superior tech, they are simply useless...

[Thumper]

ummm... horses + swords vs tanks?

Umm... infantry can win vs tanks without horses or tanks of thier own if done right. And they didnt ONLY have swords im sure.

And of course mass production lowers price of things. something cannot be mass produced unless a process is developed to make them easier to make, that cuts labor. and something cant be mass produced unless its cheaper to make, or else why make a lot of them. You dont see five thousand space shuttles flying around after all.

[Frost Phantom]

thats the problem... they did.... kinda like how in the air, the polish tried to fight the german luftwaffe with WWI planes.... very unsuccessfully i may add... all this played a huge part in how fast the polish were conquered...

theres alot of stupid things the polish did during its very brief involvment in the military aspect that amuses the hell out of anyone that likes military tech... its full of perfect examples of what happens when the idiots in charge refuse to conform with the tides of change, and instead, hold on dearly to weapons of the past.

as for the mass production, you'll find that when something first enters mass production, the rate at which it is produced is nowhere near as efficient as the rate at which it is produced say one year down the line... the process of finding ways to make things cheaper is ongoing, and often much easier to do once the mass production has begun... practical data always beats theoretical data =]

[Derek]

thats the problem... they did.... kinda like how in the air, the polish tried to fight the german luftwaffe with WWI planes.... very unsuccessfully i may add... all this played a huge part in how fast the polish were conquered...

theres alot of stupid things the polish did during its very brief involvment in the military aspect that amuses the hell out of anyone that likes military tech... its full of perfect examples of what happens when the idiots in charge refuse to conform with the tides of change, and instead, hold on dearly to weapons of the past.

as for the mass production, you'll find that when something first enters mass production, the rate at which it is produced is nowhere near as efficient as the rate at which it is produced say one year down the line... the process of finding ways to make things cheaper is ongoing, and often much easier to do once the mass production has begun... practical data always beats theoretical data =]
Actually the Polish did quite well consider they were attacked from two sides by much stronger powers. Their strategy against the Germans was to hold them off until the French and British could come to their aid, and it probably would have worked had the Soviets not attacked from the east (where the Polish had planned to hold) and the British and French not been so incompetently slow to mobilize. They never charged tanks with sword wielding calvary, no one had even used sword wielding cavalry in almost a hundred years at that point. They did have cavalry brigades, but they were essentially just highly mobile infantry. The Polish held out almost as long as the French against much worse odds and while inflicting much heavier casualties on the Germans. Overall, the Polish were much more prepared for war than any of the other Allied powers. You can read about it here (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Invasion_of_Poland_(1939)#Nazi_propaganda) and here (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polish_cavalry#World_War_II).

[Frost Phantom]

fine, just wikied the charge at krojanty, turns out its just mis-reporting that turned into urban legend..... guess its a good thing i studied weapons engineering rather than history, would have flunked so hard if i did!

but as for how well the polish did... history is written by the victors and the strength of the loser is determined by how much blood the victors shed. poland did badly in this... and yes the french did even worse since they entrenched themselves in the maginot line only for the germans to skip that area entirely.... explains alot about why they are the butt of alot of military jokes!

but the point about the cavalry was more to prove that a weapon as old and proven as cavalry (been around for like 2000+ years), would not stand a chance against tanks, which were a relatively new tech at the time. and that is pretty much what infantry with AK-47s will be to the zone troopers that drop into battles from space....

[Derek]

No, but consider how long cavalry was effective: From at least 900 BC (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cavalry#History) to 1900 AD, a period of 2800 years. So there is no reason to assume that standard guns will become obsolete so soon. For plasma weapons to completely replace conventional firearms, they would have to have some clearcut advantage in nearly every situation. I don't see this as particularly likely.

[Madcap_Magician]

thats what they said about guns when taht idea first came round... mass production always lowers the price. especially since if somethign is in such high demand that it is mass produced, more research would be put into it to further reduce costs....

True, but irrelevant.

the very concept of energy weapons is that they would be light weight, zero recoil, immune to issues such as bullet drop, wind, etc. ie, a highly accurate gun with better range, easier to use, and lighter (allowing for better mobility). not to mention the fact that the appeal of energy weapons also lies within its anti armor capabilities. Imagine an army that is equiped with rifles that have multiple firing modes allowing for use as an assault rifle, a sniper rifle, an anti-armor rifle, and anti-structure! aka the Zone troppers and their personel ion cannons =]

People who thought like you did managed to come up with the OICW, a fancy-schmancy 5.56mm rifle combined with a super high-tech 20mm grenade launcher. It went exactly nowhere, because while it was a Swiss Army knife rifle with an assault rifle and a grenade launcher with antipersonnel and antivehicle, it weighed a ton.

So I can imagine some bean counter coming up with a service rifle that can mow down dudes from a mile away, kill tanks, and blow up buildings. And I can imagine some bean counter telling me this will enhance my capabilities as a soldier. And I'll tell him to go screw himself, because that weapon will be the size of a tank.

Also consider that bullet drop and wind drift have little to no effect on the average soldier, who cannot see or effectively engage targets much past 300 meters anyway. For snipers, this is a different matter.

Effective personal energy weapons require a power source leaps and bounds beyond any modern portable technology. I mean, it's great that you have a laser gun. Too bad about the battery being the size of a backpack and only having enough power for four shots. But you have a laser!

And remember, energy weapons aren't the be-all, end-all for piercing armor. Actually, since the ersatz projectile has no mass, they'd probably be terrible at piercing armor.

when tech reaches those stages, AK-47s will be just like the polish cavalry during ww2. sure they can still kill people, but against a far superior tech, they are simply useless...

Tell that to Al-Qaeda, who seems to be utilizing useless technology with great effectiveness against the most technologically advanced military in the world.

EDIT: I am reminded why I don't come here often anymore... this thread is one of SIX that's been updated since I visited yesterday?

[nilloC]

Yeah, Frost Phantom, you should probably stop using history analogies, based mostly on the grounds that they're a bit off.

[Frost Phantom]

hey, if they become urban legends, they must be true!!! :P

People who thought like you did managed to come up with the OICW, a fancy-schmancy 5.56mm rifle combined with a super high-tech 20mm grenade launcher. It went exactly nowhere, because while it was a Swiss Army knife rifle with an assault rifle and a grenade launcher with antipersonnel and antivehicle, it weighed a ton.
that doesnt qualify for teh lightweight part + high mobility part....

Effective personal energy weapons require a power source leaps and bounds beyond any modern portable technology. I mean, it's great that you have a laser gun. Too bad about the battery being the size of a backpack and only having enough power for four shots. But you have a laser!
not tlaking about what we have now... we're talkign about the C&C tiberium universe in 2062.. they obviously have viable personel power sources considering they've been using that in open warfare for several decades....

And remember, energy weapons aren't the be-all, end-all for piercing armor. Actually, since the ersatz projectile has no mass, they'd probably be terrible at piercing armor.
once again... this was regarding the tib universe and zone troopers seem pretty deadly against tanks =]

Tell that to Al-Qaeda, who seems to be utilizing useless technology with great effectiveness against the most technologically advanced military in the world.
they dont win open firefights with equal numbers... and thats with weapons of the same teir of tech (projectile weapons). besides, alot of that comes down to tactics and the fact that the american army isnt exactly the best trained military.... they just get all the cool new toys before anyone else....
besides, the AK-47 design wise is near perfect in terms of projectile weapons, newer guns merely offer cooler attachments and better munitions, both of which could be modified for use with the AK.

but a better comparison would be AKs vs bombers and cruise missiles... different tiers of technology matter :P


besides, the point of this thread isnt to argue the sciences and stuff. it was merely to point out that in an age where energy weapons have become standard in warfare, it's weird to see elite guards using ancient projectile weapons... especially given then fact that heavy armor (which is mostly immune to small arms fire) is also very very common. Those guards were escorting Kane into the heart of GDI... there'd most likely be plenty of extremists willign to try and kill him... so wouldnt the guards be armed better to deal with all sorts of situations?
imagine if Bin Ladin was going to the White House as an important guest rather than a prisoner... they'd have to step up security massively to stop him from getting killed!

[Madcap_Magician]

that doesnt qualify for teh lightweight part + high mobility part....
After reliability, weight is the single most important factor in a soldier's load. To the soldier. I am an infantryman, and I already carry nearly my own body weight in crap.
You've got this deus ex machina gun that is miraculously both lightweight and can perform a wide array of very different tasks. That suggests to me that all your knowledge of weapons is based on video games. The weapon you describe is not likely to appear, ever. The problem with nifty weapons in video games is that the weapon you use in a video game weighs absolutely nothing, even if it's a rocket launcher with 99 rockets.
Take Counter-Strike, for example. The M249 is a nifty gun in Counter-Strike. But it weighs SEVENTEEN pounds. Unloaded. I know, I carry one, plus 800 rounds of ammunition, which adds another TWENTY pounds of dead, awkward-to-maneuver-in, weight. Thus, my weapon and ammo ALONE weighs 37 pounds. And that's assuming I'm not carrying another weapon or extra ammo.
not tlaking about what we have now... we're talkign about the C&C tiberium universe in 2062.. they obviously have viable personel power sources considering they've been using that in open warfare for several decades....
once again... this was regarding the tib universe and zone troopers seem pretty deadly against tanks =]
Zone troopers have powered armor suits, another thing which doesn't seem real likely any time soon. And again, you're basing your theories off of the oversimplified mechanics of a video game.
they dont win open firefights with equal numbers... and thats with weapons of the same teir of tech (projectile weapons). besides, alot of that comes down to tactics and the fact that the american army isnt exactly the best trained military.... they just get all the cool new toys before anyone else....
besides, the AK-47 design wise is near perfect in terms of projectile weapons, newer guns merely offer cooler attachments and better munitions, both of which could be modified for use with the AK.
You're clearly just as ignorant of the U.S. military and actual military tactics as you are of real-life weapons.
If you are in an open firefight with equal numbers, your tactics suck. Open firefights between equal numbers do not happen in wartime.
The U.S. military, as a whole, is the best-trained military in the world. Some units are more than others. The "cool new toys" have a lot to do with our military effectiveness, but the biggest contributors to our success are the fact that we put the money and time into making training as realistic and rigorous as possible, because we have a more experienced Army than just about everyone at this time (Due to combat deployment tempo), and because we have a professional NCO corps.
but a better comparison would be AKs vs bombers and cruise missiles... different tiers of technology matter :P
Again, I bring up Al-Qaeda.
besides, the point of this thread isnt to argue the sciences and stuff. it was merely to point out that in an age where energy weapons have become standard in warfare, it's weird to see elite guards using ancient projectile weapons... especially given then fact that heavy armor (which is mostly immune to small arms fire) is also very very common. Those guards were escorting Kane into the heart of GDI... there'd most likely be plenty of extremists willign to try and kill him... so wouldnt the guards be armed better to deal with all sorts of situations?
imagine if Bin Ladin was going to the White House as an important guest rather than a prisoner... they'd have to step up security massively to stop him from getting killed!
I would point out that even in the C&C universe, the standard Nod weapons are largely projectile weapons. The militant, shadow team, buggy, scorpion, and venom all use machine guns or cannons as the base weapon.

[Frost Phantom]

You've got this deus ex machina gun that is miraculously both lightweight and can perform a wide array of very different tasks. That suggests to me that all your knowledge of weapons is based on video games.
no... but the point of this thread isnt about rl weapons..its about the weapons in the tib universe....

Zone troopers have powered armor suits, another thing which doesn't seem real likely any time soon. And again, you're basing your theories off of the oversimplified mechanics of a video game.
yes, but it already exists int eh tib universe and is in mass production, meaning it wouldnt be hard for them to equip the guards with it.. nor would it be hard for extremists trying to kill kane get their hands on it....

The U.S. military, as a whole, is the best-trained military in the world.
dude.. i've worked with US army rangers and their supposedly exceptional combat training is nothing more than what our basic infantry units get...
get over your patriotic high horse cuz if it werent for the superior tech, the US military would be useless.... they've yet to win a war since the end of WW2!

Again, I bring up Al-Qaeda.
look how wel they are doing... surviving by hiding is not the same as surviving by holding off the enemy...

I would point out that even in the C&C universe, the standard Nod weapons are largely projectile weapons. The militant, shadow team, buggy, scorpion, and venom all use machine guns or cannons as the base weapon.
but the vid is clearly in GDI headquarters.... with GDI guards... besides, most of those nod units are able to upgrade their weaponry into energy ones, and as i said, when guarding the most important (or most hated) person in the world, you'd think they'd use their best .....

After reliability, weight is the single most important factor in a soldier's load. To the soldier. I am an infantryman, and I already carry nearly my own body weight in crap.
yeah....i know that which is why i pointed out the ONLY reason for the military to switch to energy weapons would be if they qualified ALL those requirements, including the lightweight and high mobility. Obviously, in the tiberium universe, they have....
you're the one who failed to read the post properly and jumped the gun ont he argument....

no one said anything about realism... the thread itself is regarding the fact that those guarding kane are using dodgy modern era body armor, and P90s, which would have been useless should a GDI extremist faction try to assassinate kane using zonetrooper gear....

[Mighty BOB!]

Well, I think we can say the reason they weren't wearing zone trooper gear is because it was a live-action shoot and they didn't want to build real powered armor or put in CG zone troops in post editing. :p

But they could have at least gotten better weapon props.

[Madcap_Magician]

dude.. i've worked with US army rangers and their supposedly exceptional combat training is nothing more than what our basic infantry units get... get over your patriotic high horse cuz if it werent for the superior tech, the US military would be useless.... they've yet to win a war since the end of WW2!

What exactly is your expertise in this subject? What credibility do you have as an analyst of comparative military training? I don't know what your basic infantry units get trained in. I don't know where you're from. So I can't pass judgment on that. If you have undergone some kind of military training yourself, we can compare. I have four years enlisted as an Army infantryman. I won't pretend I'm some kind of commando or anything, I'm just a grunt.

As to the Rangers, I can't say I disagree a whole lot, per se. I have not been to Ranger school, but from what I do know of it, they don't really seem learn anything the rest of us don't learn. They just train a bit harder at it for three months. If Gravis856 was around, undoubtedly he would disagree.

There are several militaries in the world that, save for size, I'd certainly put on par with the United States. The full-time Israeli military are some tough dudes, and they have more experience than most other militaries. The British and German units are generally quite good. Some of the French units are very good, likewise Canada. We've crosstrained with some Croatian troops who were freakin' beasts, but on the other hand, I'm sure Croatia didn't exactly pay to send a platoon of their biggest losers to train in the U.S.

Of course, given the level of cross-training between all the first world militaries, the qualitative differences are pretty slim.

One big difference I have noticed as far as U.S. training compared to most other militaries is how much more shooting we do. I've probably shot through 15,000 rounds of ammunition in M16s, and another 5,000-10,000 in various machine guns. The Croatians we trained with said they barely fired 50 rounds a year.

no one said anything about realism... the thread itself is regarding the fact that those guarding kane are using dodgy modern era body armor, and P90s, which would have been useless should a GDI extremist faction try to assassinate kane using zonetrooper gear....

Well, of course, if you discount reality in toto, you can come to any conclusion you like.

[Thumper]

im not reading this entire topic but i want to say that it does feel weird that they are using p90's because every single weapon in cnc 4 appears to be a plasma weapon or a high powered laser, even what the infantry use.

its like if they were using muskets in call of duty 2.

[Frost Phantom]

What exactly is your expertise in this subject?engineer/analyst for defense contractor...

and my comparison are made from having worked with both US defense forces and australian defense forces to fix certain equipment failures, and the US troops always have more complaints about random crap that should be common sense to someone who has recieved military training.

and its not discounting reality in total. regardless of whether you look at it through an engineering or a business perspective, the only reason for any weapon to be seriously mass produced and mass distributed to the point where even all the militant groups are using that technology would be if it is superior to its predecessor in all aspects. so for guns, that would be weight, mobility, accuracy, munition capacity, and power. if any of those 5 do not meet the standards set by the previous technology, then the old technology would not have been phased out completely.

[Madcap_Magician]

engineer/analyst for defense contractor...

and my comparison are made from having worked with both US defense forces and australian defense forces to fix certain equipment failures, and the US troops always have more complaints about random crap that should be common sense to someone who has recieved military training.

So you have no military experience, and your evidence is based on your subjective impression that US soldiers complain more about stuff that you think the military should train them on?

and its not discounting reality in total. regardless of whether you look at it through an engineering or a business perspective, the only reason for any weapon to be seriously mass produced and mass distributed to the point where even all the militant groups are using that technology would be if it is superior to its predecessor in all aspects. so for guns, that would be weight, mobility, accuracy, munition capacity, and power. if any of those 5 do not meet the standards set by the previous technology, then the old technology would not have been phased out completely.

There's also the problem about the industrial ability to mass produce. I think that something as sufficiently complex as a plasma rifle would never approach the affordability of production as the very simple AK-47. Given that the Kalashnikov design is reasonably effective, durable, and cheap to produce, there will probably always be somebody who chooses to use them. A plasma rifle like in C&C would involve high-end electronics manufacturing capability, complicated battery manufacturing, and require the kind of sterile factory and machining/molding precision that automatically equates to more time and money.

As far as guns go, you're forgetting ease of resupply of critical components and ammunition, ease of field maintenance, and reliability. For an insurgent force, it doesn't seem real likely to me that any kind of energy gun will be meeting those needs within the next hundred years. But... things change.

[Mighty BOB!]

The Global Defense Initiative is not an insurgent force. Neither is Nod. They both have vast resources available to them.

[Madcap_Magician]

The Global Defense Initiative is not an insurgent force. Neither is Nod. They both have vast resources available to them.

Point conceded.

[Frost Phantom]

So you have no military experience, and your evidence is based on your subjective impression that US soldiers complain more about stuff that you think the military should train them on
i've had minimal military experience, but i have to deal with military personel so much that i am able to objectively say american grunts are much less organised when compared to armies from other developed countries. the level of discipline, standards for education and social background are generally lower.

There's also the problem about the industrial ability to mass produce. I think that something as sufficiently complex as a plasma rifle would never approach the affordability of production as the very simple AK-47. Given that the Kalashnikov design is reasonably effective, durable, and cheap to produce, there will probably always be somebody who chooses to use them. A plasma rifle like in C&C would involve high-end electronics manufacturing capability, complicated battery manufacturing, and require the kind of sterile factory and machining/molding precision that automatically equates to more time and money.

recent advances in robotics and mechatronics have led to massive drops in prodcution costs allowing for the mass production of items and technology which 50 years ago would have been impossible to mass produce. yes the plasma rifle may seem like some high tech gizmo to us in our current era, but in the context of C&C4, they are the equivalent of our current age projectile weapons, meaning they are not some high end equipment that costs millions to produce, they are a typical mass deployment weapon which cost $100. Kinda like how an F-111 medium range bomber, an outdated technology in our current age, would have been a sci-fi like advanced tech to those in the american civil war. or how guns would have seemed like magic to those living in ancient greece.

besides, currently, most governments place a limit on the use of full autonomous production robots because a factory of robots is capable of replacing 100,000s of workers, which would cause massive problems with unemployment considering most people dont work in offices.

it doesn't seem real likely to me that any kind of energy gun will be meeting those needs within the next hundred yearsin reality, most likely not, but in the context of C&C4, this has already happened.

[Madcap_Magician]

i've had minimal military experience, but i have to deal with military personel so much that i am able to objectively say american grunts are much less organised when compared to armies from other developed countries. the level of discipline, standards for education and social background are generally lower.

The ability to "objectively say" would mean you had a broad-based means of comparing similar soldiers from a wide array of international sources against a fixed and defined standard, as opposed to what you have, which is X number of subjective interpretations as to the level of discipline, education, and social background of soldiers.

Additionally I would argue that the last is largely irrelevant. A soldier's social background has no causal influence on his or her personal abilities as a soldier, and I would argue that any correlation is spurious at best.


recent advances in robotics and mechatronics have led to massive drops in prodcution costs allowing for the mass production of items and technology which 50 years ago would have been impossible to mass produce. yes the plasma rifle may seem like some high tech gizmo to us in our current era, but in the context of C&C4, they are the equivalent of our current age projectile weapons, meaning they are not some high end equipment that costs millions to produce, they are a typical mass deployment weapon which cost $100. Kinda like how an F-111 medium range bomber, an outdated technology in our current age, would have been a sci-fi like advanced tech to those in the american civil war. or how guns would have seemed like magic to those living in ancient greece.

besides, currently, most governments place a limit on the use of full autonomous production robots because a factory of robots is capable of replacing 100,000s of workers, which would cause massive problems with unemployment considering most people dont work in offices.

in reality, most likely not, but in the context of C&C4, this has already happened.

What I'm saying, though, is that the AK-47 will always be easier to manufacture and maintain. No amount of manufacturing advances will change the fact that some illiterate guy with a puddling forge and a hammer can make an AK-47 and not a plasma rifle.

[Frost Phantom]

a soldier's social background determines their approach to problems. one that comes from the bottom of society would generally be less educated and less willing to learn. then theres the matter of discipline which is often directly correlated with one's social background.

and yes, i have compared them to a fixed and defined standard because unlike soldiers, instead i get given a piece of paper with each soldier's personal record on it when im trying to find suitable personel for testing stuff. and after 3 years of doing this, i have been able to work out an average skill level for soldiers worldwide which our company supplies. american soldiers are just on average less capable especially when it comes to dealing with new technology.

What I'm saying, though, is that the AK-47 will always be easier to manufacture and maintain. No amount of manufacturing advances will change the fact that some illiterate guy with a puddling forge and a hammer can make an AK-47 and not a plasma rifle.and what im telling you is that once technology reaches the stage where plasma weapons is the norm, that wont be the case because both are being produced by machines with the same level of efficiency, the only thing deteremining the cost would be material.
kinda like how a proper sword costs more to produce than an AK-47. despite the fact that swords are an ancient and outdated tech, on a mass production line where both are being manufactured by robotics, an AK will cost less because it requires less material and does not require tempering and sharpening.

then theres the fact that for plasma rifles to become the standard weapon, technology would have gotten to the point where plasma technology is very simple and part of what gets taught at school. for soldiers, knowing their weapon is very important so it can be safely assumed that the military would have given them a solid understanding of their gun. this means by that time, average joe would also be able to make a plasma rifle at home because to them this tech would be as simple as projectile tech is to us now.

its just a matter of context, you're failing to see this in the setting of C&C4. it's a typical inability to think outside the box that most military personel tend to have. prolly why all modern wars are won with technological superiority rather than numbers.

[Madcap_Magician]

a soldier's social background determines their approach to problems. one that comes from the bottom of society would generally be less educated and less willing to learn. then theres the matter of discipline which is often directly correlated with one's social background.

This thread is the real reason I come back to this forum now.

What you said here is just about the most moronic and bigoted thing I've ever heard, and I'm not surprised I heard it on the internet. You might as well have said that women are generally inherently less intelligent than men, or that black people are generally incapable of higher learning.

and yes, i have compared them to a fixed and defined standard because unlike soldiers, instead i get given a piece of paper with each soldier's personal record on it when im trying to find suitable personel for testing stuff. and after 3 years of doing this, i have been able to work out an average skill level for soldiers worldwide which our company supplies. american soldiers are just on average less capable especially when it comes to dealing with new technology.

This is still tautological reasoning. You're still asking me to take what you're saying on faith- based on my (decreasing) level of trust in your sole subjective ability to analyze someone's records. In other words, you're right because you say you're right.

and what im telling you is that once technology reaches the stage where plasma weapons is the norm, that wont be the case because both are being produced by machines with the same level of efficiency, the only thing deteremining the cost would be material.
kinda like how a proper sword costs more to produce than an AK-47. despite the fact that swords are an ancient and outdated tech, on a mass production line where both are being manufactured by robotics, an AK will cost less because it requires less material and does not require tempering and sharpening.

I can make a functional sword for free by liberating a leaf spring from a junked car and spending about two days on it with metal files and a Dremel tool. A "proper" modern sword is a work of art. The reason it costs more to produce one now is because hardly anyone does it any more, and those who do, do it as artisans. There are still factories in China churning out millions of cheap, if functional knives and swords that require tempering and sharpening for a total cost to the consumer of about $5-$20. Do you know anyone that can make an AK that cheaply or quickly?

Similarly, an AK in Pakistan or Afghanistan costs about $50-$100 and is done in garage shops with hand tools.

Do you really think that by 2077 they'll be doing the same with plasma guns?

then theres the fact that for plasma rifles to become the standard weapon, technology would have gotten to the point where plasma technology is very simple and part of what gets taught at school. for soldiers, knowing their weapon is very important so it can be safely assumed that the military would have given them a solid understanding of their gun. this means by that time, average joe would also be able to make a plasma rifle at home because to them this tech would be as simple as projectile tech is to us now.

I look forward to the day when postdoctorate theoretical physics is taught at the elementary school level.

I say again: The average joe will never possess the capability to make a functional and reasonably practical energy weapon at home. The equipment and knowledge required to do this requires a significant amount of money, time, and education that the average person does not have.

You simply saying that this will happen at some indeterminate time in the future does not make it so.

its just a matter of context, you're failing to see this in the setting of C&C4. it's a typical inability to think outside the box that most military personel tend to have. prolly why all modern wars are won with technological superiority rather than numbers.

When the box is defined as reality, I really don't care if I can't think outside it- you evidently spend enough time outside that box for both of us.

As far as C&C4 goes, C&C 4 is set in 2077. So to connect reality to your box, another way to phrase the current question of debate would be "Will Joe Blow be able to make himself a plasma gun in his garage in the next 67 years?"

The answer: Possible, but kind of on the same odds as winning the biggest lottery in every state of the US... on the same day... without buying any tickets.

Now, to wayyyyy back to the original question, given Kane's stature, there's no reason why his bodyguards can't have plasma guns at that time besides personal preference. After all, they wouldn't need to make their own guns at home. So in that sense, our argument has been thoroughly derailed from the original subject matter.

Of course, given the rest of the C&C franchise, Kane hardly needs bodyguards, because he always gets 'killed' and mysteriously never dies, so from that perspective, it hardly matters what his guards are armed with, since they seem to have no effect.

Kane altered the field of battle forever when he unleashed his terrifying Obelisk of Light in the first conflicts between Nod and GDI, but it took decades to develop power supplies strong enough to sustain heavy beam weapons on mobile platforms.

Food for thought from the C&C 4 site: If it took decades to make power supplies to fit beam weapons on mobile platforms, how long do you suppose it'd take to reach the point where you can make one in your garage?

[Frost Phantom]

What you said here is just about the most moronic and bigoted thing I've ever heard, and I'm not surprised I heard it on the internet. You might as well have said that women are generally inherently less intelligent than men, or that black people are generally incapable of higher learning.
in this modern day of political correctness, people have actually started to believe the bs about everyone being equal... guess what, they are not! and it just so happens that those from lower end backgrounds tend to have lesser values. it's not a matter of intelligence as it is a matter of what values they are taught. my private school upbringing saw that i had the importance of education drilled into me from the very start, which ended in me going to uni. the warehouse workers at work generally came from a poorer family, went to dodgy public schools, and dropped out of school as soon as they could. and this is why i say social backgrounds matter. those from lower end backgrounds would not have the same values.

im right because for the same piece of equipment we send out, only the americans send back a broken one withing a month of use asking for more specific instructions and further improvements on the ease of use despite the fact that all our other customers didnt have any issues with it at all!


It has ALREADY entered mass production in the setting of C&C4...
ie it has obviously already met all the requirements for the military...

go back 1000 years and people would not have believed you if you told them planes would be the determining factor in warfare. or that they could be possible at all for that matter.

after all this, you are still judging this on the basis of modern tech and science despite the fact that they have obviously gone beyond it in C&C4...

it is impossible to do in RL but in the context of C&C4, this has all happened already...

as for the complexity of the physics involved being taught at school. go back 50 years and the things they learned in university are what is being covered in a typical high school syllabus because our knowledge of those topics have gradually increased to the point where we are able to simplify them to a level that anyone could understand it. eg the atomic bomb was the most complex scientific achievement of its time, we were taught the theory behind implosion devices in year 11 as part of my high school physics course... whats to say that in the future, things we discover now that seem very high tech wouldnt be simplified to the level of high school work?

if you fail to grasp this simple concept of an ever increasing scientific knowledge base, then this discussion is pointless. afterall, if you are unable to see past current scientific achievements, you obviously dont see possiblities in new technology.

it took decades to invent something, reproducing it is much easier. It took the better part of a century to invent cars, it definitely doesnt take long for us to make them nowadays....

[Madcap_Magician]

in this modern day of political correctness, people have actually started to believe the bs about everyone being equal... guess what, they are not! and it just so happens that those from lower end backgrounds tend to have lesser values. it's not a matter of intelligence as it is a matter of what values they are taught. my private school upbringing saw that i had the importance of education drilled into me from the very start, which ended in me going to uni. the warehouse workers at work generally came from a poorer family, went to dodgy public schools, and dropped out of school as soon as they could. and this is why i say social backgrounds matter. those from lower end backgrounds would not have the same values.

Absolutely social backgrounds matter. But they do not determine the values of an individual person. Absolutely all people are not created equal. But you will find thousands of morons with PhDs, and thousands of people who didn't graduate high school who have above-average intelligence. Some of the people you condemn for having lower 'values' than you simply had to make do with the best choices they had available. Others overcame their situations.

Clearly the only thing you got from university was an arrogant and dismissive attitude toward anyone who doesn't have the same education, values, and approach to life that you do. Just as clear is that one thing you didn't get was an ability to use proper grammar or spelling. Ordinarily I would say nothing about this, as the internet is full of people of all ranges of educations and ages, but you claim to have gone to university and gotten a superior 'education and values.'

im right because for the same piece of equipment we send out, only the americans send back a broken one withing a month of use asking for more specific instructions and further improvements on the ease of use despite the fact that all our other customers didnt have any issues with it at all!

Maybe they're testing the units to destruction. *shrug* If I were field-testing your widgets, I'd sure want to know how much abuse they could handle in the field. After all, in the field, as opposed to your armchair and computer, things get handled by the occasional ham-fisted idiot, subjected to being dropped... sometimes out of airplanes, generally banged around, and occasionally damaged by... the enemy.

As to ease of use... I don't see how improving the ease of use of anything could somehow mean the user is stupid. Maybe American soldiers subscribe to the KISS principle. I understand that some people on the civilian side take a perverse joy in Rube Goldberg manifestations, but soldiers like simple things that work every time you use them, regardless of battlefield use and abuse.

And lastly, you are again basing your opinion not only on your subjective interpretation of your limited field of knowledge of the products that your single company makes. There are hundreds of thousands of products that have NSNs for the US military and DoD to purchase. Seems to me your sample size alone renders your conclusions invalid.

It has ALREADY entered mass production in the setting of C&C4...
ie it has obviously already met all the requirements for the military...

No it hasn't. It's met all the requirements for video game designers, most if not all of whom have even less real-world experience with military equipment or procurement than you do.

go back 1000 years and people would not have believed you if you told them planes would be the determining factor in warfare. or that they could be possible at all for that matter.

Sure. Go forward 1,000 years, and we can say the same thing about garage mechanic-created plasma rifles, and we may be right.

However, C&C 4 is only going forward 60 years. Sixty years before Wilbur and Orville Wright flew the Wright Flyer, flight was an accepted possibility, see: balloon use for observation in the American Civil War.

after all this, you are still judging this on the basis of modern tech and science despite the fact that they have obviously gone beyond it in C&C4...

it is impossible to do in RL but in the context of C&C4, this has all happened already...

I just thought of something that I will give you. War has a bootstrap effect on technology, and 15 years of it, plus Scrin technology and tiberium could theoretically produce the weapons that we see in C&C. Some credence should be given to this viewpoint by noting the general modernity of the original C&C weaponry and equipment.

I still maintain my original point; however, because the presence of technology itself does not mean that said technology can be easily made by amateurs with amateur equipment.

as for the complexity of the physics involved being taught at school. go back 50 years and the things they learned in university are what is being covered in a typical high school syllabus because our knowledge of those topics have gradually increased to the point where we are able to simplify them to a level that anyone could understand it. eg the atomic bomb was the most complex scientific achievement of its time, we were taught the theory behind implosion devices in year 11 as part of my high school physics course... whats to say that in the future, things we discover now that seem very high tech wouldnt be simplified to the level of high school work?

Congratulations, you understand the basic theory behind an implosion-type atomic weapon. It therefore follows that you can build one, right? Post pictures when you're done...

Understanding the general theory of something and being able to produce a functioning version of something that utilizes that general theory in a practical application are not the same thing.

Consider calculus, basic practical applications of which are still beyond the majority of people in the world... despite the fact that calculus as a recognizable mathematical science dates back to the 12th century.

if you fail to grasp this simple concept of an ever increasing scientific knowledge base, then this discussion is pointless. afterall, if you are unable to see past current scientific achievements, you obviously dont see possiblities in new technology.

This discussion is pointless for a lot of reasons. It is, after all, on the internet, between two people using pseudonyms, on a forum about a computer game series. Looking for meaning in conversations here is an exercise in futility.

The point of this discussion to me, at least, is to entertain me by poking one of the many idiots on the internet with a stick. You may feel the same way, in which case we have arrived at a mutually beneficial exchange.

I have no problem with the factually demonstrable idea that scientific knowledge expands continuously. I do have a problem with the farcical idea that from that general fact you can extrapolate a specific date by which a specific technology will be able to be made in one's garage.

[Quote=Frost Phantomit took decades to invent something, reproducing it is much easier. It took the better part of a century to invent cars, it definitely doesnt take long for us to make them nowadays....[/QUOTE]

... in factories. By thousands of people who are each trained to do a specific task and could not make a car by him or herself.

EDIT: Took so long to write this post that the DGNF logged me off.

[Frost Phantom]

Just as clear is that one thing you didn't get was an ability to use proper grammar or spelling
its an online forum... not a bloody thesis... just like how most people dont bother typing out every single word in an SMS or tweet...
and yes i am rather arrogant, however it comes from having to deal with intellectually challenged brutes on a weekly basis.
Seems to me your sample size alone renders your conclusions invalid.
k, that i suppose is a valid point. however theres only so much simpler a product can be made before you're reverting to its predecessors. if the military contracts us to carry out upgrades and improvements, we re-design the product according to their requirements, which is why alot of us get the *****s when the military sends it back with very non-specific feedback like "make it more space conservative for storage".

No it hasn't. It's met all the requirements for video game designers, most if not all of whom have even less real-world experience with military equipment or procurement than you do.
dude... have you actually played any of the C&C games? most of the units end up using energy weapons. so in the context of C&C4, it has met the requirements for mass production. i have said nothing about energy weapons being even feasible nowadays.

Congratulations, you understand the basic theory behind an implosion-type atomic weapon. It therefore follows that you can build one, right? Post pictures when you're done...
said nothing about building one. you said that schools wont be teaching PhD level physics. this was merely an example to show you that advanced technology will sooner or later become simple enough for even high school students to understand. not because the science in it gets easier, but rather our knowledge of it gets so immense that we are capable to simplifying it.

Consider calculus, basic practical applications of which are still beyond the majority of people in the world... despite the fact that calculus as a recognizable mathematical science dates back to the 12th century.
show me a single engineer who is registered with any major engineering regulation group that cant do basic calculus... it only takes one person to teach and supply others. eg not every "terrorist" knows how to make bombs, it only takes one of them to make them for the rest.

The point of this discussion to me, at least, is to entertain me by poking one of the many idiots on the internet with a stick. You may feel the same way, in which case we have arrived at a mutually beneficial exchange.
i have these discussion at work on a very regular basis... i dont like military personel much... i think alot of the hostility from me started fromt he fact that you said you were ex-military...

By thousands of people who are each trained to do a specific task and could not make a car by him or herself.
you'll find that more and more mass production facilities are moving towards CNCs nowadays instead of humans. machines are faster and produce items of higher quality. provided a company can foot the initial investment costs, they are also cheaper in the long run. assembly is stil mostly done by people, but it definitely doesnt take thousands of people....