<![CDATA[Assembling Machines]]>Just an idea I got for new units, and I hope it hasn't been discussed before.
What if there were few units that can act individually and also assemble together to create a more powerful single unit?

]]>http://wiredforwar.org/topic/62/assembling-machinesRSS for NodeFri, 12 Jun 2026 17:34:07 GMTWed, 20 May 2015 13:22:19 GMT60<![CDATA[Reply to Assembling Machines on Tue, 05 Jul 2016 06:21:22 GMT]]>Ooo ooo! that fan one gave me an idea.

I present the "TRI-Flyer" or "The flea" for the individual ones.
On on their own they can climb terrain and they hop to move around, but cant fly, but when three join together they can fly and move quicker and pick up other units! but they cant attack, unless you keep them a "flea" and change out their adapter for a weapon? alternatively it could be a faster scout.. you could disconnect them with a "flea" button and they'd pop apart mid air. giving them a better chance to partially survive in a bad situation.
Triflier.jpg

]]>http://wiredforwar.org/post/1188http://wiredforwar.org/post/1188Tue, 05 Jul 2016 06:21:22 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Assembling Machines on Tue, 05 Jul 2016 06:32:16 GMT]]>I actually agree with making machines have switchable weapons. Did anyone ever play Warzone 2100?
Custom Tanks Screen
somewhere in it lets you customize body/wheels/weapon to make your own units pretty much.
I dont want to go crazy with that, but having choose-able weapons works well. I mean you could do the same thing with body/locomotion/weapons but then there'd be no point to each of the units. It might make creating units simpler.

]]>http://wiredforwar.org/post/1186http://wiredforwar.org/post/1186Tue, 05 Jul 2016 06:32:16 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Assembling Machines on Tue, 05 Jul 2016 04:02:06 GMT]]>Cerberus reminds me of that Assault troop transport? in C&C? that transports smaller units but lets them fight. so it basically gets so many slots, and then can fire a weapon of each type. Bit like a moving bunker from terran/starcraft

Assault troop transport
Assault troop transport.jpg

]]>http://wiredforwar.org/post/1183http://wiredforwar.org/post/1183Tue, 05 Jul 2016 04:02:06 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Assembling Machines on Wed, 02 Mar 2016 13:38:10 GMT]]>@Ddc_Cl Well, yeah. This thing. The Vortex Singularity fires some sort of a sphere which is black. I guess it either sucks everything in or sends everything to a different dimension, but since I can't find a damn piece of information about it...

yay.gorilla

]]>http://wiredforwar.org/post/1045http://wiredforwar.org/post/1045Wed, 02 Mar 2016 13:38:10 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Assembling Machines on Wed, 02 Mar 2016 00:43:32 GMT]]>@Encrypted The Vortex Singularity Black Holes Canon

]]>http://wiredforwar.org/post/1043http://wiredforwar.org/post/1043Wed, 02 Mar 2016 00:43:32 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Assembling Machines on Wed, 22 Jul 2015 23:26:22 GMT]]>@Encrypted
Repurposing chamber? :)

]]>http://wiredforwar.org/post/847http://wiredforwar.org/post/847Wed, 22 Jul 2015 23:26:22 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Assembling Machines on Tue, 21 Jul 2015 11:35:34 GMT]]>Damn, that's looking good!

Also, whatever the Vortex Singularity does, I'm almost sure it quickly sends machines to alternate dimensions, where they get destroyed because of unknown reasons.

]]>http://wiredforwar.org/post/836http://wiredforwar.org/post/836Tue, 21 Jul 2015 11:35:34 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Assembling Machines on Tue, 21 Jul 2015 07:42:31 GMT]]>Amazing, I'd love to see this in game!

]]>http://wiredforwar.org/post/833http://wiredforwar.org/post/833Tue, 21 Jul 2015 07:42:31 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Assembling Machines on Tue, 14 Jul 2015 22:48:30 GMT]]>mchns.jpg
CERBERUS.jpg

]]>http://wiredforwar.org/post/817http://wiredforwar.org/post/817Tue, 14 Jul 2015 22:48:30 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Assembling Machines on Thu, 02 Jul 2015 14:35:17 GMT]]>@Gameuser10
Edit:
Good reference! I've never played Halo, although the original Gestalt unit was inspired by Boston Dynamics' robots:
bigdog-darpa-google-skynet-marine-usmc-hawaii-sketch-prototype-schematic-diagram-architecture-robot-dog-limewit-limewit.com.png
Do you think that we should choose the Cerberus design or the first one? Or keep on trying?

]]>http://wiredforwar.org/post/784http://wiredforwar.org/post/784Thu, 02 Jul 2015 14:35:17 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Assembling Machines on Thu, 02 Jul 2015 09:14:51 GMT]]>Reminded me of this.... Skip to 3:14 https://youtu.be/3A785RkGfl0?

]]>http://wiredforwar.org/post/783http://wiredforwar.org/post/783Thu, 02 Jul 2015 09:14:51 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Assembling Machines on Thu, 02 Jul 2015 02:25:57 GMT]]>Little sketch of a Gestalt prototype :)
gestalt_prototype.jpg

]]>http://wiredforwar.org/post/782http://wiredforwar.org/post/782Thu, 02 Jul 2015 02:25:57 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Assembling Machines on Thu, 02 Jul 2015 00:02:40 GMT]]>20150701_203349.jpg 20150701_203321.jpg 20150701_203314.jpg 20150701_203306.jpg 20150701_203258.jpg 20150701_203123.jpg 20150701_203056.jpg 20150701_203049.jpg 20150701_203031.jpg 20150701_203023.jpg

]]>http://wiredforwar.org/post/780http://wiredforwar.org/post/780Thu, 02 Jul 2015 00:02:40 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Assembling Machines on Tue, 30 Jun 2015 12:46:34 GMT]]>I developed another design for the Gestalt program. It's called Cerberus. I'll upload the sketches soon, although the portfolio isn't ready (I'm undertaking exams and need to study).

]]>http://wiredforwar.org/post/770http://wiredforwar.org/post/770Tue, 30 Jun 2015 12:46:34 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Assembling Machines on Thu, 11 Jun 2015 01:39:08 GMT]]>@Encrypted
Mmm... I'm not sure. These guys are quite small, and don't have any arms. Their tails can switch between an individual mode (bipedal) as a balancing item for better running performance (horizontal position), and gestalt mode, in which their tails turn upwards to support the aerial unit. The twins (ground units) assemble their backs in gestalt mode to form a quadrupedal unit. The aerial unit can assemble with both their bipedal or quadrupedal forms.
This description refers that design only. It is one of my favourites.
Yet, I have to make an organized portfolio with descriptions so that you can compare the designs, etc. But, as I said in one of my recent posts, I won't be uploading as much stuff as usual for some weeks. Yet, I'll be back!

Here is my very first set of sketches:
DSC_0002.JPG

@Aquarillis
Your suggestions are interesting! I'll keep them in mind for future designs.

]]>http://wiredforwar.org/post/747http://wiredforwar.org/post/747Thu, 11 Jun 2015 01:39:08 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Assembling Machines on Wed, 10 Jun 2015 14:48:14 GMT]]>@Pisarz said:

20150609_212709.jpg

You know what, those legged units kinda remind me of...
emperor.gif
...this guy, also known as the Cycloid Emperor. Especially their legs. And their upper body, too.

]]>http://wiredforwar.org/post/746http://wiredforwar.org/post/746Wed, 10 Jun 2015 14:48:14 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Assembling Machines on Wed, 10 Jun 2015 04:03:16 GMT]]>How about electronic warfare units?

One unit could scramble/jam a unit's radar, rendering it unaware of anything not immediately in front of it.

Another unit may discharge an EMP blast that temporarily immobilizes an enemy unit.

Make it possible for any unit with night vision to "share" their field of view with any machines in their squadron.

]]>http://wiredforwar.org/post/743http://wiredforwar.org/post/743Wed, 10 Jun 2015 04:03:16 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Assembling Machines on Wed, 10 Jun 2015 01:09:48 GMT]]>20150609_212709.jpg
20150609_212737.jpg
20150609_212754.jpg
20150609_212835.jpg
20150609_212846.jpg
20150609_212902.jpg
20150609_212937.jpg
20150609_212946.jpg
20150609_213006.jpg
20150609_213017.jpg
20150609_213021.jpg
20150609_213056.jpg
20150609_213104.jpg
20150609_213126.jpg

]]>http://wiredforwar.org/post/742http://wiredforwar.org/post/742Wed, 10 Jun 2015 01:09:48 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Assembling Machines on Thu, 28 May 2015 11:03:54 GMT]]>It depends on what you want it to do at the moment you deploy it. It's meant to be versatile.

]]>http://wiredforwar.org/post/661http://wiredforwar.org/post/661Thu, 28 May 2015 11:03:54 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Assembling Machines on Thu, 28 May 2015 09:15:23 GMT]]>@Byrgius Oh, yeah, it might also become a hovering unit!

]]>http://wiredforwar.org/post/659http://wiredforwar.org/post/659Thu, 28 May 2015 09:15:23 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Assembling Machines on Thu, 28 May 2015 06:22:28 GMT]]>@Pisarz Yes I think that's an awesome idea! But once assembled it becomes a land unit?

]]>http://wiredforwar.org/post/656http://wiredforwar.org/post/656Thu, 28 May 2015 06:22:28 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Assembling Machines on Thu, 28 May 2015 01:00:45 GMT]]>@Encrypted
That would be a nice feature! Imagine using it on an inclined plane: the area of effect would be greater and it could act as a moving barrier (especially if it's on fire).

@Byrgius
One question: what if there are two units that complement each other in such a way that one is land-based (on-field unit) and the other one is aerial (recon, close air support and long-range transportation)?

]]>http://wiredforwar.org/post/653http://wiredforwar.org/post/653Thu, 28 May 2015 01:00:45 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Assembling Machines on Wed, 27 May 2015 14:22:02 GMT]]>Hmm, why not?
What if we have a dynamic liquid system? So if that oil mine explodes near a cliff, the oil slick won't stay in one place, it'll simply drop down that cliff.

yay.gorilla <--- wow

]]>http://wiredforwar.org/post/647http://wiredforwar.org/post/647Wed, 27 May 2015 14:22:02 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to Assembling Machines on Tue, 26 May 2015 21:50:49 GMT]]>@Encrypted said:

Hey, @Pisarz, you've just brought me an awesome idea!

What if there was a special kind of mine for a Spy? When it explodes, it throws some shrapnel around and releases a burning slick of oil that lasts for a long time and damages everything on the ground that comes across and steps on it. Shouldn't really work on air units, but... well.

It sounds interesting. I have a suggestion: what if we discard the shrapnel and use the substance (oil, or something else) only? The shrapnel can be used in the conventional mines anyway.

I might do a sketch of that, but first I need to finish the ones related with this thread.

]]>http://wiredforwar.org/post/644http://wiredforwar.org/post/644Tue, 26 May 2015 21:50:49 GMT