|
Chaos
|
 |
« Reply #15 on: August 09, 2007, 10:16:16 AM » |
|
The most significant upgrade IMO had to have been between the Classic armor and the Silver Centruion. The introduction of the pulse bolts, force fields, and cloaking technology have all remain staples of Iron Man tech since then.
I agree, and I think that was the last time an armor upgrade was significantly different other than just appearance. The Neo Classic, while it may have been significantly more advanced than the Centurion, had pretty much the same systems and weapons, just upgraded versions. Every armor since seems to be same things, different look sans the Modular which was created totally different. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Iron Kaiser
|
|
« Reply #16 on: August 09, 2007, 10:20:13 AM » |
|
We can debate for a long time which armor upgrade was the best. I currently find it to be a tie between the Silver Cent. replacing the Classic and the New Red and Gold suit replacing the Silver Cent. My reasoning for the latter option is the new wrist-mounted shield inspired by the Raiders and the incorporation of the new Beta Particle power supply. That, and Firepower literally couldn't harm IM after using that new Red and Gold. Oh, and Chaos, the War Machine was also a totally different paradigm, not just the Modular.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Chaos
|
|
« Reply #17 on: August 09, 2007, 12:32:01 PM » |
|
Oh, and Chaos, the War Machine was also a totally different paradigm, not just the Modular.
I was leaving out the specialty suits  |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Iron Kaiser
|
|
« Reply #18 on: August 09, 2007, 01:08:31 PM » |
|
OK. Still, if it were accepted, the War Machine would definitely be one of the most deviant armors from the standard paradigm.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
The IronJedi
|
|
« Reply #19 on: August 09, 2007, 01:12:02 PM » |
|
OK. Still, if it were accepted, the War Machine would definitely be one of the most deviant armors from the standard paradigm.
I believe you meant divergent... unless you know something about WM the rest of us don't. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
 “I would rather live my life as if there is a God and die to find out there isn't, than live my life as if there isn't and die to find out there is." - Albert Camus |
|
|
|
Iron Kaiser
|
|
« Reply #20 on: August 09, 2007, 01:16:11 PM » |
|
Oh, you're right, Divergent. My bad.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
The IronJedi
|
|
« Reply #21 on: August 09, 2007, 01:25:30 PM » |
|
Just looking out for ya' IK.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
“I would rather live my life as if there is a God and die to find out there isn't, than live my life as if there isn't and die to find out there is." - Albert Camus |
|
|
|
Iron Kaiser
|
|
« Reply #22 on: August 09, 2007, 02:19:42 PM » |
|
Thanks Master.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Tetragrammaton
|
|
« Reply #23 on: October 10, 2007, 12:19:57 PM » |
|
Good question.
Hey, here's a question: In the movie IM is using repulsor tech for both his gauntlets and boots. If it's providing thrust for flight, how can he use them as weapons firing from his hands without being thrown backwards?
Vic
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Mario Di Giacomo
|
|
« Reply #24 on: October 10, 2007, 12:57:49 PM » |
|
I have two answers: One (as I posted) is that the palm repulsors may be relatively low powered, and only used for manuevering. The other (and more likely, I think) is that these repulsers don't have _any_ recoil, which may help explain how Tony can break the sound barrier without breaking his ankles, too.  |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Iron Guy
|
|
« Reply #25 on: October 10, 2007, 02:16:12 PM » |
|
In reverse order: I would imagine that the recoil from the boot jets would be absorbed more by the armor than by Tony's skeleton. No recoil = no thrust. However, maybe Tony's got the Star Trek inertial dampening generators from the U.S.S. Enterprise.  They're an offshoot of their artificial gravity system. And I believe that it's been mentioned that Tony's been playing around with anti-gravity technology, so he's already been messing around with the gravitons/anti-gravitons to make such a device. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Tetragrammaton
|
|
« Reply #26 on: October 10, 2007, 03:50:36 PM » |
|
The times we have seen the repulsors produce an opposite recoil force have been few and far between. One early incident occurred when used against the Crusher and again when used against Mr. Fixit (Hulk) come to mind.
Obviously, if Iron Man can use the repulsors to break his fall (ASM 544) or add them to the thrust of his boot jets, there must exist some sort recoil.
We do know the repulsors have varied firing modes (decelerative / concussive / penetrative) so there must be a way for him to control the degree of recoil. Exactly how this works...I don't know.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Mario Di Giacomo
|
|
« Reply #27 on: October 11, 2007, 05:48:45 AM » |
|
Then there must be some way that he can spread the recoil across the entire armor, possibly tied to the force field.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Agent 333
|
|
« Reply #28 on: October 15, 2007, 04:30:18 PM » |
|
In Vol. 4 number... 1? 2? Tony mentions that repulsors are "reactionless force", which, of course, breaks Newton's 3rd law in half. But it's been shown to slow his fall on at least two occasions, one of which more recently than the 'reactionless force' comment. Also, I believe that Tony's braced before giving off a 'max power' repulsor before, indicating that there is at least some recoil. All in all, it's up to the author how much recoil is given by any particular repulsor blast, anywhere from 0 to F, where F is the force of the blast (and thereby keeping Newton's laws intact). I don't think there is any examples of the recoil being greater than the force exerted on the target, though I may be wrong.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Mario Di Giacomo
|
|
« Reply #29 on: November 05, 2007, 06:07:53 AM » |
|
Well, the international trailer for the movie answers the recoil question. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
