How many features is too many features when designing your ultimate supersoldier powered armor?

Depends on the person, to be honest.
Some people thought it was extremely good and genuinely thought-provoking, others thought it was too random and meaningless.
Personally, I loved it.

> Daniel Radcliffe's Post Harry Potter Career: The Movie
There's also the Good Doctor, and the movie where he plays a neonazi (don't remember that name). Radcliffe got genuinely good at acting, to be honest.
If we're talking Harry Potter, Rupert Green was also pretty good, but the only movie that comes where he starred was Driving Lessons, and that was way back, like a decade ago or so.
And Watson is just meh - can't remember a single good movie where she played a prominent role.

Watson, whatever you might think of her politics, was probably the one who best read where the wind was blowing for her and best capitalized on the opportunities. She knows her big bucks are in modeling and advertisement and she picks her movie projects more for brand identity than artistic value. Depending on how cynical you are that's either smart or heartless, but you can't deny that despite probably being a worse actor she's still much more of a household name than Green, whom many people think was swallowed by the earth after Deathly Hollows.

I think you mean Rupert Grint, although that really only backs up your point.

>too many features
>designing your ultimate supersoldier powered armor
I don't understand the question

Gint was pretty funny in Moon Walkers

It depends on what the suit is ultimately meant to do. If it's meant to be stealthy then it should have advanced sensors, radar stealth, be lightweight, and fast. If it's for frontline then armor and capacity for weapons/ammo.

Granted, you said ultimate, which sounds like putting shit on shit just for the sake of it being able to do every task, whether it could sanely work together or not.

Enough to be too annoying and pricey to make and maintain.

Knowing actual soldiers, anything besides a bullet armor vest (as light and non bulky as possible), the lightest rifle possible, and a couple magazines is too much.

Those niggas count bullets, cut off toothbrush handles, and secretly toss their digging spades just so they don't have to lug around as much shit, especially when they're being passed around heavy LMG barrels and mortar base plates to even out squad loads.

When it goes beyond what is needed for the plot. If you are sticking to any sort of internal consistency then by whatever rules limit the whole "infinity +1" syndrome of powers.

Well, to be honest if you are designing a 'tank' suit, it will just end up being the Glitter Boy from Rifts your version.

I'd say it is better to step back, and be more pragmatic, what is the specific threat was it made to be a countermeasure to, or first strike weapon against? That way, instead of just loading it with two pages of features, you focus on two or three that are essential to is doing its job.

> Is it stealthy, than the armor should be for shit.
> Is it near indestructible, than the thing should be a real pain in the ass to maneuver and travel rapidly in a human sized firefight.
> Is it loaded with electronic counter measures, than it should be a vehicle/mecha hunter/killer like the Elemental suits from Battletech were.
> Does it act as an armor plated space suit with how completely it protects the wearer from the environment, than explain how it sucks for standard Earth gravity combat in an atmosphere.

The nanosuit from Crysis can be a tad overkill, player power fantasy, for a game unless it is super hero level one man army in theme and setting. Where as the exo skeleton from the movie Elysium maybe a better compromise for your game.

Ultimately I'd say it is a matter of keeping the thing designed with a very specific purpose and avoiding the 'Iron Man' trope.

He bought an ice cream truck and has a bunch of miniature animal friends. I'd say he won.

Neonazi Radcliffe movie is called Imperium btw.
And he's technically an undercover fed.

Do you want to be Cyrax or Sektor?

BEST

The autist in me was so pissed off the nanosuit didn't mount machineguns and missile launchers. IT NEEDED MACHINEGUNS AND MISSILE LAUNCHERS.

>Be millionaire
>Roll around in your comfy ice cream van
>See happy kids on sunny days
>Stay home if it's cold
On the downside
>We all have to concede gingers might have souls

I mean less is more sometimes, you can weigh in your jack of all trades, you can go all out in one area, or yiu can go for the cheap and cheerful option that gets you more soldiers. Typically I'm fond of the latter, Ive never been a fan of eggs in one basket, the end result is a killing machine but fuck would they be expensive.

Power armoured super soldiers are overrated anyways, its not how I'd spend my military funding.

It's easier to count the things that wouldn't be improved by machineguns and missiles.

it's too many features when the (trained) operator can't operate them when needed without confusion, when the cost of production/maintenance/training outweighs strategic benefits, or whenever it would be hindered in completing its mission in an acceptable manner.

>A soufflé
>Columbine
>A quiet factory

As long as you can keep piling on useful features without them negatively impacting other features, "too many" is not a thing.