Alternate WWI scenairo

Not seeing how bulletproof armor changes trench warfare. The point of tanks was that they could roll over barbed wire while being shot at my machineguns.

You could have shields to help take the brunt of machine gunfire and push the line as you advance.

>would still be useful, just have to deploy them right
Right, which makes me think you'd just fill a tank(s) with them. Drive them up to a trench and disgorge.

>tanks don't have arms to pull themselves out of a hole or mudd.
They usually didn't need them. They broke down a lot though.

FYI
sttheo.deviantart.com/

...

Tanks are also just cars, and thus drive themselves around... you know, like cars. Also, a man in a shitload of big heavy armor is probably going to have a hard time pulling himself out of mud or a hole too- in fact, he would probably sink faster because he's got more weight distributed on less surface contact area. Also going to have a hard time fitting into trenches. Or walking across the boards used by infantry to prevent sinking without breaking them.

But then why wear the armor? Also then presumably they couldn't use a rifle. Also, they still get caught up in barbed wire, which was a really big deal.

Also allies can't use them as cover. Also they can't transport other troops. Also they're probably much more expensive and have no precedent for design like tanks did with warcars and tractors.

The ONLY advantage I can think of is that they might be less susceptible to artillery or aircraft than tanks because of their smaller profile, but that's assuming they can move faster, and it's kind of redundant if the point is to be inside enemy trenches.

At least in WWII it KIND OF makes sense.

Also you forgot to make a point about why you are in love with the word also.

Also that.

user has many, many points to make

Tanks are still many times more useful than one man in a suit.

This whole idea strikes me as being made from someone who didn't do a lot of research on WW1. Didn't do much research on tanks, the effect of tanks on trenchwarfare, and the pitfalls and advantages presented by tanks in the first place.

Eh, probably more like someone who saw the tacticool pic and didn't think it through much more than that.

Another point to be made is that even now, a century later, material science's advanced to the point that ceramic SAPIs can do a helluva lot better than their equivalent weight or thickness in steel, and we're *still* preferring to err on the side of mobility instead of maximum protection. There's a reason why most exosuit research at the moment is based around carrying heavier loads rather than going all spehss mehreen

>But then why wear the armor?

Because power armor can carry a lot more than a normal human can for far less effort.

A power-armored soldier could likely carry a shield of two-inch-thick steel with little difficulty if it were designed to do so, in addition to the armor plates the suit would have as well. That's some SERIOUS resistance to small arms right there.

Not necessarily. The breakthrough could be in metallurgy rather than energy: a super-alloy would allow superior protection at a fraction of the weight. It would still have applications beyond warfare, but not to the extent of reliable compact energy sources.

>This whole idea strikes me as being made from someone who didn't do a lot of research on WW1.
Well, what would we have to do to the setting or the idea to make it work?

I'm not disagreeing with your guys' assessments, I'm just curious as to what you would think might make idea work.

>a super-alloy would allow superior protection at a fraction of the weight.
I can dig it.

From here we can fluff shields as well as armor, but how could you fluff the mechanical side of the power armor?

Have they invented man portable armor that can remotely take a .50 bmg round? Because i figure we wok here something if it was even remotely viable

Could carry it, yes. Could be effectively mobile with it, no. The suit's own armour would have gaps plenty big enough for any competent marksman (never mind sniper) to put some lead into; and those gaps are usually at parts of the body very vulnerable to damage. Goodbye, kneecaps. Especially because it'll be getting pleeeenty of focus fire.
Or if it did have enough coverage to be able to tank plenty of pew pew, you'd pretty much be a giant steel mannequin. Even kneeling would be incredibly awkward, and firing standing up while unsupported is not gonna get very good results. Unless you want them to bring melee weapons too to storm the trenches in close quarters, in which case I give up and refer you to 40gay.

Also, everything said.

Give them snowshoes for one. I still think delivering squads in tanks would be pretty good. But again you could just use regular dudes.
Maybe the war has continued to the point where attrition has become a real problem and keeping individual troopers alive is more important.
Maybe with that comes a scarcity in shells and petrol for artillery/vehicles and bigger bombs making these guys more viable since they're more immune to small arms.

>>a super-alloy would allow superior protection at a fraction of the weight.
This makes me think the setting would have zeppelin-style aircraft carriers since all the aircraft would be made of this new WonderMaterial.

>OP wants a WW1 with power armor
>"Hey, you know what's even better? Change all the period's tech to include whatever power source they are using."
>"To a point where they probably don't see power armor."

No. Just no. Don't post in the thread if you don't want to buy the premise.

>imagine WWI but with this cool thing
Okay well I mean aside from like the first thing you mentioned and desperately want us to focus on, there's als-
>no shut up only imagine what I want you to imagine

>People built personal safe nuclear reactors.
>But we'll only use them to power inefficent combat suits.
>Forget the implications on the rest of the world.
This is the same reason so many fantasy settings are complete garbage.

You can modify weather and make mountains fly, but nah we'll still use the feudal system and live in huts made of poo.

>T-Gewehrs being a squad-level asset, or the planned german AT machine gun coming into full production

Be still my penis

Currently the very cutting edge materials (i.e. the shit with the prefix "nano" being thrown around everywhere) could, in theory, stop them. If development comes to fruition. At the moment, the best plate inserts out there could *probably* survive being hit with a .50 - but it's unlikely the person behind it would.

majority of deaths on the western front were from artillery. not even a late-war mk vi could withstand a direct hit; these guys would be slower, less agile infantry with less protection than a tank. In short, they'd be every artillery officer's wet dream for a target.

I'm fine with what-if military history and I love power armour, but occasionally the reality of warfare takes over, and WW1 was mainly fought the way it was through a combination of advancing military tech and really, /really/ shitty conditions

What are shaver heads doing performing dynamic entry?

Is this the last thing a stoner sees when SWAT breaks down their door?

hopefully with less "crouch behind my shield and spray bullets faster than a guardian can aim" bullshit

>pic
my sides
>filename
MY SIDES

lazy town is always good for a meme or two. can't claim credit, its from one of them oldfangled "filename threads"

This. As much as I love the idea of power armor, protective gear has erred towards the side of mobility. Why? Because even if your armor's 99.9% infallible(and any soldier would kill for those odds), it's better not to roll the dice on the chance it will fail and just avoid the hit entirely.

When guns got better at piercing armor, the breastplate got thicker and the limb armor went. Eventually, even that went because the off chance the plate will stop the bullet wasn't worth the weight

Body armor's making a comeback because of lightweight materials, but power armor would have to be pretty damn efficient to be worth the loss in mobility.

> deselpunk idea is unrealistic

Thanks for pointing this out user. Us chumps thought this was a flawless idea with no drawbacks 'till your sage wisdom set us straight. Now we can go on to happily never enjoy an unrealistic idea ever again.

The stalemate is broken by actual Landships!

Jesus Christ this fucker. This is everything non-/pol/ related that is wrong with with Veeky Forums. How are you poking holes in the design of something THAT DOESN'T FUCKING EXIST. You made up details of the design JUST TO POKE HOLES IN THEM. You're barley even going into its real flaws, which it has plenty of being a fantasy idea on a board dedicated to fantasy ideas. And I bet this neckbeard is sitting there smugly thinking about how he showed all those Veeky Forums plebs who had dared to use their imaginations for a goal other then to complain.

If shits like this were more widespread mankind never would have developed beyond the sword

> Tank
> Oh wow, it costs millions and can be destroyed by one grenade
> did you even think about the fuel costs?
> it's armor must have fault-lines that anyone can shoot through
> how are the people inside meant to see without having cracks in the armor?
> back to the drawing board boyo this idea is clearly unrealistic

And you just know that if this suit appeared in anons favorite series he'd be hard at work defending its design to the hilt. I know you think your enriching the board with your autism but please for the love of god stop.

And finally
> 40gay
Oh wow user you dislike a popular well liked series your tastes must be so refined.

>trying this hard

Not that guy, but you're real fuckin' cool. Trying's lame as fuck.

>Triggered and gay

>being nitpicky about details
>being full on autismo about balance and/or realism
>everything non-/pol/ related that is wrong with with Veeky Forums
what even is crunch

Haha, wow, what a fantastic way to debunk someone! Call them gay!

Don't feed him.

>Implying you're not

Historical WW1 scenario, trench breaking armor is prototyped and attempted. Not exactly a success.

Assuming that they managed to get it right, it'd be really cool. The tanks of the time weren't nearly as lethal as they could have been. The suits could allow for actual trench clearing. Assuming the Brits came up with them instead of tanks we either have a similar end to the war but with some badasses like the aviators had or the reduction in casualties prevents WWII as we know it because Europeans were less concerned about dying in another pointless war.

To be fair.... that basically is non powered, heavy as balls armor, that left all 4 limbs exposed and looks exactly like how my dick would look if I glued Dreadnought parts to it.

>Sherman Power Armor fighting off against massive Panzers more like mechs then suits
>Have to gang up and pile on the Panzers to have a chance and unload at close range
>Panzers have hammers and sweep away anyone that gets close to them while unloading machine guns

You need to go back further or /k/ will shoot your idea full of holes (heh)

As has been said, artillery makes this pointless

So go back further

Leonardo Da Vinci develops power armor (congrats on making steam punk that's not 100% ass)

Do tanks resist artillery bombardments?

Well, the scientists of the time figured that your dick would at least have a decent armor save and maybe an extra wound. Except the Italians. The Italians just thought it would be hilarious to give some of their troops hope before sending them to die meaninglessly.

I suppose that depends on where the shell lands. The top armor tends to be the thinnest on older tanks. They might be fine if it doesn't score a direct hit on them. Not an expert though.

But this powered armor wouldn't be made to withstand artillery attacks, it would be made to lead the charges against enemy trenches and soak up the machine gun fire. It doesn't come out of the trench when the shells are still flying.

Me neither, but then I wouldn't imagine dudes in power armor walking across a field during one even with power armor.

That said, I'd like to imagine just like the gradual advancement of the tank from this clunky box with guns to the weapon it is today the same would happen to the power armor especially when you have such technological advances like lightweight armor and compact engines.

Fails because getting through the trench was never the problem. The problem was that once the breakthrough had been achieved the defenders could rush reinforcements to the area, by rail, so much faster than the attacker could push forces through the break on foot.

Large forces of tanks simply drove through. Even considering the slow speed and mechanical unreliability of the early tanks, this was still more effective than slogging through the mud on foot dragging artillery behind you.

So with tanks the Entente could do what had been impossible, even for the Germans in 1918 when the Peace Offensive blew the British lines wide open: Break through the trench lines then consolidate the breakthrough against counter attacks, finally making it possible to realize permanent gains.

There was already armour developed for trench assault operations. The technology for powered armour was so far out of reach in WW1, and isn't even viable yet in the modern day. I award you 0 points.

Wizards and dragons.

Magitech is acceptable but wholly different from "alternative WW1 scenario".

>complains about nitpicking a fantasy design
>he brings up fucking /pol/ in the second sentence.
Never change, Veeky Forums, never change.

woth immunity to the standard .303 ammunition, and due to being smaller are harder to get a direct hit with an artillery shell, fights between 2 suits will be determined by wrestling and punching until proper AP rounds are made

Best use for power armor isn't so much the armor as the power. Allows soldiers to carry more gear and more powerful weapons.

Nah, this is an absurd objection. The distribution of bullet hits on a body is basically random, soldiers have enough trouble hitting their targets in first place when they are being shot at and shells are exploding everywhere - a condition known as combat - just forget about shooting at seams in armour.

It is obviously impossible to build powered armour in the first world war. The materials weren't up to it, a suitable power source didn't exist, sufficiently small and powerful actuators didn't exist, there was no way to keep it on its feet and no way for the user to control it.

But there is no reason the concept can't be entertained.

>This makes me think the setting would have zeppelin-style aircraft carriers since all the aircraft would be made of this new WonderMaterial.
Nice.

Armored zeppelin carriers. New armored aircraft and power armor for elite units.

Not to mention armor for standard soldiers as well as better vehicles with compact and more effiencent engines of the sort that can run this power armor.

>zeppelin to zeppelin combat, with broadsides

Hahahahahahahaha How The Fuck Is Power Armour Real Hahahaha Nigga Just Shoot Him With A Panzergewehr Like Nigga Reverse Your Bullets Haha

compact fighter craft being like batman's bike from The Dark Knight except it can fly.

>WW1 doesn't end, ever
>all of Europe becomes a cesspool of noxious gases inhabited by OP's stupid giant battlesuits with smoggy diesels and integrated rebreather apparatuses
>international commerce grinds to a halt as u-boats destroy all shipping
>regional governments based on silly early 20th century fads like syndicalism/national syndicalism, anarchism, co-operative democracy, etc dominate this hellscape and conscript citizens en masse to go die in the trenches to giant power suit dudes
>cataphracts become common as horses get power armor with machine guns slung off the sides
>airships float around dumping barrels of poison gas all over the place

I don't know where I was going with this but I like the idea

>Pic related.
>But 3x the size.
>With flight and bomb decks.
>Floating military city bases of poison and death with power armored stormtruppen.
>People flee underground and into intricate bunker cities in hollowed out mountains.

Any reason why they would poison the land?

I fucking love it.

What would be a decent system to play a game in this sort of scenario?

What are we prioitizing? Does the Armor need and specific rules to it ? Do we need complex gun mechanics?

Depending on where in the world you were it'd probably be better or worse.

I imagine large parts of europe would be a wasteland. I mean look at places that are still filled with unexploded ordinance, miasma, buried barb wire, and all kinds of other horrible stuff that makes it a no go zone. Amply that by lots.
Add lingering death and gas, I imagine not a lot would live.

Because the fucking krauts tried to invade Glorious Britannia (and vice versa).

>entire flight decks of prop biplanes flying around dropping one (1) bomb and returning to their giant flying base to re-load
>power armored guys jumping out of blimps with high-caliber bolt action rifles and parachutes, trying to get past the enemy trench lines, while armored cavalry ride out to intercept them

FUND IT

I'd say we oughta have some solid and somewhat gritty combat rules with systems for the armors, guns, vehicles and etc. That way we'd have a solid set of "toys" to work with and use on different campaigns and combats.
Considering the degree of novelty WW1 has going on I'd also say we should have interesting rules for character customization, just not to have generic placeholder characters for the players.

Did someone say WWI-era power armour?

At least the pimplehelm would look a lot more intimidating.

...

Have you any idea of inefficient and gutless early 20th century engines were?

It's only recently that cars have been able to get 100hp/litre on mass-produced engines.

obviously the diesel engine is far stronger than any other known engine

Diesel didn't become commonplace for heavy vehicles until the 1960s/70s, user.

the wonders of petrol allow a man to lift things 10 times his own weight, while weighing only twice the user

>This whole idea strikes me as being made from someone who didn't do a lot of research on WW1
Or, you know, he just thinks this looks neat. I mean, that's a distinct possibility, isn't it?

>Boarding action against enemy blimps
>Cities become underground complexes with mass AA guns above
How does the October Revolution go? Do the Reds have access to Trench Breakers?

lol you're a fucking faggot dude

It wouldnt be much use in the northern part of the western front, the ground was so bad there that mud was a major killer. The eastern front was too big and open to allow for slow moving systems like that.

Best places for that kind of tech to be employed would be in central and southern france in the middle of summer when the ground is hard. Also potentially to break the deadlock in Galipoli and allow for a war in greater Turkey

pffft

>pic looks like a kid who went out trick or treating

>Still gets stuck in mud.
This might be the main problem in a WW1 setting, honestly. Especially considering the weight distribution of such a suit, so it would get stuck far more frequently I'd guess

>Also potentially to break the deadlock in Galipoli and allow for a war in greater Turkey
THAT would be a worthwhile alternate history. The landings may not have been a failure with armoured suit support.

After the war, power armoured systems would have been developed as a method of supporting tanks. WW2 would have taken a much different character, with power infantry countering the blitzkrieg.

In Somme it can't, because even a man with just a uniform and a rifle sinks into mud.

That looks pretty cool. Where is it from?

Here's the thing - the artillery ruled because the infantry stayed stationary in their trenches due to how well, the trench warfare worked, it was simply that kind of war. But if you get guys that could change that, move through no man's land and and cover his comrades as they advanced and cleared out the trenches the battles would be more back and forth and artillery would have less obvious targets and couldn't just be zeroed in on the same two locations the whole time.

Might have also been used in a support role. Strip off the armour and just have a guy running around with loads of extra carrying capacity, and issues of supplying ammo and the like to the front are greatly reduced

>Strip off the armour and just have a guy running around with loads of extra carrying capacity

> British tooops fighting in Gallipoli break the front open using power armour
> Constantinople falls within days, urban fighting by the Turks rendered innefective by naval bombardment and heavy infantry attack
> Turkey out of the war and supply lines opened with Russia, Germany has to struggle to keep Entente forces out of Poland and Austria
> Powered armour becomes a tool in the kit rather than a war-winner, used to break fortifications but not terribly helpful in a fast moving war of maneuver

> War ends with German defeat, Russia remains imperial with entente help
> Hitler rises to prominence, champions his generals ideas of a highly mobile force of armoured infantry rather than the behempths favoured by the other powers
> Britain and France scale back their armuor programs, seeing it as a product of an immobile war of attrition and not useful in further conflict

> WW2