Thread 64489222

Would Terminator infantry make a difference in a war?

Yeah

no because people can inner city youth fatigue them with knives

>>64489222 (OP)
They are powerful but, in the movie they do mention that they're weak to EMP, hacking and .50 cal+ weapons. So, a competent modern military could take out terminator infantry with airstrikes, artillery and special EMP weapons

>>64489282
this anon >>64489245 just proved they can be taken out with knives so why bother with 50 cals or emps. just give some browns knives and let nature take it's course

Can they reliably shoot down drones? T800s wouldn't do well after a FPV drone or three cripples them

>>64489289
It looks like whatever knife that is has a bunch of electrical doodads on it, so I'm willing to believe that the knife portion is just to get into the terminator, at which point the tech part fries it with either some form of electrical pulse or something

>>64489222 (OP)
You could recreate banzai charges and shit with minimal casualties and maximal mental damage on the enemy. They are (as far as I know) able to resist indirect fire and small calibre direct fire.

That being said, they can be (partly) disabled with shit like a pipe bomb, so they aren't invincible.

>>64489222 (OP)
They are dangerous against light infantry and unarmed or lightly armed civilians
Against a mechanized force with mounted fiddycals and grenade launchers, they're outmatched, albeit still dangerous. That's not even getting into arti and air strikes
Their infiltration capabilities could pose a problem, but stricter security measures would keep them out of secure installations
A real problem could be their potential use for attacks in civilian centers, considering how difficult they are to kill with small arms. The panic and paranoia they'd spread, and the consequent destabilization, are not to be underestimated

>>64489536
They could carry much heavier weapons(more javelin) than a standard infantry force, if they were properly suplied they could do some serious damage.
Than their suicide option could work as anti armor built in, and while a .50 or more can kill them It d take a new still tò do it
>>64489314
Idk about reliably, they are sharper shooted compared to meat bags and have built in thermals

>>64489565
Against fast moving, up-armored technicals with mounted HMGs and grenade launchers, they'd stand little chance, let alone IFVs and tanks
I stand by my opinion that they'd stand little chance in conventional combat, but would be an absolute nightmare with their unparalleled jihadmaxxing abilities

What if the Terminator looks like a pretty girl (identity derived from human brainscan optional)?

>>64489586
if skynet can just teleport them anywhere through time it would autoresolve any conflict. same with the institute in fallout 4. you cant teleport spam your enemies with bombs. don't even need a terminator

>>64489588
you have AIDs

>>64489536
>Their infiltration capabilities could pose a problem

They could be designed to perfectly mimic an enemy soldier or civilian, meaning you wont know if your guys are really your guys. You could ofc x-ray everyone, but you will soon run into cumulative radiation dosage problems. And they do not need to look like people. They could look like deers or cats or whatever. The cat you just saw is actually a spybot stealing electronic intelligence from the inside of your command post.

>>64489613
Dogs counter their impersonation ability, if im remembering the first movie correctly

>>64489613
The 800 models are fucking massive, even with living tissue it would be easy to spot a T-800 among a bunch of lanklet soldiers and resistance. It seems the later movies confirmed that the 800 models are all Arnie sized, even if they come in different colors.

Dont even get me started on the pre-800 models, the 600's used rubber skin, while the 700's had living tissue, it wasn't able to live for long, and eventually the tissue starts to rot and stink.

>>64489613
You will known your own guys, and sniffer dogs at the gates will solve potential infiltrators
Encountering another unit on the battlefield can be solved through a daily rotation of call/response code words

>>64489222 (OP)
>can be destroyed by literal pipe bombs

Not really. Just score a direct hit with an FPV carrying a PG-7 warhead and you're basically guaranteed a kill

A T-1000 would be a little trickier though since even a direct impact from a 40mm grenade will only momentarily stun them (provided that they're not standing above a vat of molten steel).

>>64489316

So this is why Gordon was owed a beer!

>>64489222 (OP)
>can be destroyed by literal pipe bombs

Not really. Just score a direct hit with an FPV carrying a PG-7 warhead and you're basically guaranteed a kill

A T-1000 would be a little trickier though since even a direct impact from a 40mm grenade will only momentarily stun them (provided that they're not standing above a vat of molten steel).

>>64489316

So this is why Gordon was owed a beer!

>>64489536
>They are dangerous against light infantry

Even your standard United States Army rifle squad circa 1984 would stand a pretty good chance of killing a T-800 seeing as M72 LAWs and even M47 Dragons were regularly part of the TOE.*

*provided that they knew that the T-800s were not people but robots in an armored chassis

>>64489245
there it is. the t-800 is a joke you can just stab it.

>>64489222 (OP)
Yes. The Men of Iron nearly destroyed humanity and brought down the Golden Age of Humanity.

>>64489245
Robocop bros can't stop winning

>>64489591
Stop reading your medical diagnoses

>>64489222 (OP)
Are you asking if it would be useful to make your enemy's artillery 1/50th as effective with no downside?

>>64489314
>Can they reliably shoot down drones
Can humans?

>>64489222 (OP)
Probably not a huge one, but I wouldn’t want to be one of the guys fighting them on the ground. They’re essentially immune to anything short of .50 BMG AP rounds, and they don’t experience fear, so you can just forget the whole concept of suppressing fire. Better hope artillery and air support are on the fucking ball.

>>64494673
Just…ditch your rifle, ditch your ammo, ditch your body armor. None of that shit is gonna help you. You want to carry all the high explosives you can get your hands on. 40mm launchers, AT weapons, anti-materiel rifles. An AR-15 might as well be harsh language for all the good it will do.

>>64489635
Yeah I don't know why schizos don't just buy a dog.

>Is that a shadow person or a reflection
The dog would know.

Seriously why are assistant dogs not used for schizos like the blind? It'd sniff alien replicants impersonating your doctor without issue.

>>64494745
Pretty sure "the dogs told me the mailman was a demon" has been used as a defense more than once

The T-800s are impervious to anything less than .50 cals and 40mm grenades

Even if the military equips everyone with those the T-800s are smarter than most modern supercomputers and will readjust their strategy to compensate

In the more /k/ oriented Bale flick, Skynet mass-produced T-600s as cannon fodder to hard counter the remaining humans' .50 cals, attack helicopters, rocket launchers and heavy weaponry while the T-800s were used to hit specific objectives that would weaken human resistance

>>64489222 (OP)
So we see in T3 that Terminators (or at least some models) have internal fuel cells that detonate like mini nukes. So when they're sent out to kill somebody, why do they bother shooting them instead of just getting within 30-40 feet and self-destructing?

>>64495392
That’s because T3 was a stupid movie.

>>64495397
Valid point

>>64495403
I’m now imagining T1 ending with an exhausted, traumatized Sarah Connor shaking next to the hydraulic press, when all of a sudden the screen goes white as the ruptured power cell goes off like a Fallout mini nuke

>>64489588
men would charge T-doll squads just for the chance to fuck one, especially if those squads consist of DP12, HK416, RO635, or vidya butts.

>>64494673
Do you have any idea how much smaller the lethal radius of artillery would be against a target that can shrug off anything short of a heavy machine gun?

>>64495414
kek

>>64495922
Pretty damn small.

>>64495922
'bout tree fiddy?