Why so few robot armys?

[lordofchange13]

i just recently finished reading the robots series by Isaac Asimov, as well as 2 of the culture books. a question can to my mind: why through out the vast universe(s) of each popular sci fi series(star trek, star wars, babylon5,star gate) there are so few instances of civilization using a wholly robotic military? i couldn't think of a logical for this other then taboo, or the writer didn't think it wouldn't be cool with them. are there any other reasons for this phenomenon?

[mr friendly guy]

There was an episode in TOS where an AI turned against the Federation. It could help explain why they are reluctant to deploy them again.

[lordofchange13]

I was really referring to ENTIRELY robot army's. like that which the separatist's used in the star wars prequels

[Morilore]

Armies of human soldiers are something humans intuitively understand. A world where the entire military is fundamentally robotic is scary and weird, and writers are lazy. Same reason "space is an ocean."

[Stark]

Don't forget; tanks are better. :v

In many settings it would be either irrelevant or change the focus of the story. Drama takes precedence over pet tech nonsense.

[Darth Fanboy]

i just recently finished reading the robots series by Isaac Asimov, as well as 2 of the culture books. a question can to my mind: why through out the vast universe(s) of each popular sci fi series(star trek, star wars, babylon5,star gate) there are so few instances of civilization using a wholly robotic military?

Star Trek: Previously mentioned AI debacle aside, the technology for a fully robotic life form seems to be somewhat unique in the Trek galaxy. Harry Mudd's androids and the Soong androids are the only fully mechanical beings that I can really recall offhand.

Star Wars: Obviously there was at least one droid army and battle droids had been around for some time, the effect of the Droid Army on the galactic populace probably had an effect on future use of battle droids.

Bab5: Not familiar enough to make any kind of evaluation.

Stargate: I think you could count the Replicators.

Also you have Skynet in the Terminator universe, Cybertronians in Transformers, The Cylons in BSG. The truth is that there are a fair number of robotic militaries.

[Vendetta]

In short, in order to make a robot army interesting to tell a story about, you have to create some individual characters, because people like stories about people.

So, in order to tell your story about robot armies you have to take away the one thing that makes robot armies preferable to fleshy ones (easy mass production).

Either that or your robot army is a faceless horde for the protagonist to blow up in vast number without a pang of guilt, because hey, robots. (see: Star Wars, Vanquish, etc.)

[lordofchange13]

Stargate: I think you could count the Replicators.

the replicators were more of a horde of locusts then an actual military

[lordofchange13]

In short, in order to make a robot army interesting to tell a story about, you have to create some individual characters, because people like stories about people.

So, in order to tell your story about robot armies you have to take away the one thing that makes robot armies preferable to fleshy ones (easy mass production).

Either that or your robot army is a faceless horde for the protagonist to blow up in vast number without a pang of guilt, because hey, robots. (see: Star Wars, Vanquish, etc.)

yes, but are there any logical in universe reasons for not having whole robot army's(excluding taboo, and technology limitations)?

[lordofchange13]

In short, in order to make a robot army interesting to tell a story about, you have to create some individual characters, because people like stories about people.

So, in order to tell your story about robot armies you have to take away the one thing that makes robot armies preferable to fleshy ones (easy mass production).

Either that or your robot army is a faceless horde for the protagonist to blow up in vast number without a pang of guilt, because hey, robots. (see: Star Wars, Vanquish, etc.)

yes, but are there any logical in universe reasons for not having whole robot army's(excluding taboo, and technology limitations)?

[Stark]

PS, the plural of 'army' is 'armies'. Learn the fucking language.

If you're asking about technical reasons not to do it, many settings have quite poor robot technology and cost:performance ratios are inferior, or the primary theatre is space/transforming planes/the human mind so robots wouldn't be useful. A specific set of needs and technologies needs to be in place for it to make sense.

[lordofchange13]

PS, the plural of 'army' is 'armies'. Learn the fucking language.

If you're asking about technical reasons not to do it, many settings have quite poor robot technology and cost:performance ratios are inferior, or the primary theatre is space/transforming planes/the human mind so robots wouldn't be useful. A specific set of needs and technologies needs to be in place for it to make sense.

sorry I'm not very good with the English language. I asked for reasons not pertaining to: taboo, or technological limitations in my last post!

[Stark]

So you're asking why people who can but don't want to don't do it, but you don't want to hear 'because they don't want to' or 'because its not worth it'?

Which settings have the availability of suitable robots that don't use them?

[Rye]

i just recently finished reading the robots series by Isaac Asimov, as well as 2 of the culture books. a question can to my mind: why through out the vast universe(s) of each popular sci fi series(star trek, star wars, babylon5,star gate) there are so few instances of civilization using a wholly robotic military? i couldn't think of a logical for this other then taboo, or the writer didn't think it wouldn't be cool with them. are there any other reasons for this phenomenon?

It's not "taboo", it's just that a ton of stories revolve around sympathetic people in recognisable situations, not faceless automatons in a spreadsheet war. And there are lots of potentially "logical" reasons to not rely on robots in wars; the scale is inappropriate, the technology is unsafe, the technology is unethical and culturally inappropriate, take your pick.

[lordofchange13]

i just recently finished reading the robots series by Isaac Asimov, as well as 2 of the culture books. a question can to my mind: why through out the vast universe(s) of each popular sci fi series(star trek, star wars, babylon5,star gate) there are so few instances of civilization using a wholly robotic military? i couldn't think of a logical for this other then taboo, or the writer didn't think it wouldn't be cool with them. are there any other reasons for this phenomenon?

It's not "taboo", it's just that a ton of stories revolve around sympathetic people in recognisable situations, not faceless automatons in a spreadsheet war. And there are lots of potentially "logical" reasons to not rely on robots in wars; the scale is inappropriate, the technology is unsafe, the technology is unethical and culturally inappropriate, take your pick.

every thing you listed except "the technology is unsafe" would all fit in with the definition of Taboo.

[Stark]

By what fucked up definition does 'taboo' cover 'scale is inappropriate' or 'it isn't worth it'?

And why the fuck can you capitalise TABOO and not the start of your goddamn sentences? Why is the board full of sloppy kids?

[lordofchange13]

So you're asking why people who can but don't want to don't do it, but you don't want to hear 'because they don't want to' or 'because its not worth it'?

Exactly, I would just like it a little less vague!

[Stark]

If they don't want to, and it isn't worth it, and the technology isn't there.... Why the fuck WOULD anyone do it?

Your question is dumb.

[Batman]

What's vague about 'we don't want to'?

[lordofchange13]

What's vague about 'we don't want to'?

What reason would they not want to have a military that would not have the messiness of casualties,endless recruits, and being fearless. simply saying 'we don't want to' is utterly retarded, with all the advantages of having robo-soldiers over organics there must be a good reason!

[Stark]

Well, since you've already decided 'its too expensive' and 'they're not any good', who can say?

Using robots has disadvantages too, and depending on the technology involved this simply may not be worth it.

You appear to be asking 'since robots are teh winz why doesn't everyone use them', which is fucking retarded.

[Batman]

What's vague about 'we don't want to'?

What reason would they not want to have a military that would not have the messiness of casualties,endless recruits, and being fearless. simply saying 'we don't want to' is utterly retarded, with all the advantages of having robo-soldiers over organics there must be a good reason!

None of which has anything to do with that reasoning being 'vague' I'm afraid. 'Because we don't want to' may be stupid, and ill-reasoned, and possibly any other number of things I can't think of at the moment, but it's decidedly NOT vague. Quite the contrary.

[lordofchange13]

Ohh I'm sorry, i see were i have confused people: I'm asking why a race with robotics on par with star wars would use organic soldiers period. have never said anything about expensiveness, or 'they're not any good'. Can you please tell me these disadvantages?

[Batman]

Why don't you show where universes on par with Wars DIDN'T? Trek isn't, B5 isn't, BSG isn't and STILL had robotic soldiers as the prime antagonists. Wars DID at least twice and the side doing so lost both times.

[Stark]

You mean how the baseline SW robots are worse than regular soldiers and required a ridiculous system to provide security for those in charge? How they were regularly defeated by numerically inferior forces despite a massive industrial investment?

Sure, they can make specific models that are better than humans, but they're far more expensive and thus less attractive. Even with the stunningly terrible clone tactics, they still ruled the droids.