Why so few robot armys?

[lordofchange13]

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.

Doctor Who, Stargate, Warhammer 40K, and Halo. Trek did have a entire race of robots in it.

[lordofchange13]

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.

Though i did not say either of those the expensive is at least availed reason prohibiting robo-millitary. At last this page bares fruit!

[Stark]

So you're so stupid you just didn't notice they sucked shit and lost the war?

PS, both 40K and Stargate have robot armies. DW does too. Shit, even Space: Above and Beyond had robot armies. Halo fucking obviously doesn't have the technology.

[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.

Doctor Who,

Um-at least if we're talking nuWho, no. Both the Cybermen and the Daleks won (for the time being) on account of having technology, and by extension firepower hopelessly beyond anything their opponents had available.

Stargate

Where single figure omnidirectional GT warheads are worth mentioning when Wars has triple figure GT DEW on Clone Wars era troop transports.

and Halo.

Oh please. Spacewise, Halo can MAYBE stand up to Trek.

Trek did have a entire race of robots in it.

Which, I'm very much afraid to say, doesn't say anything whatsoever?

[xt828]

Like Stark said.

Stargate has the Replicators, who are undeniably robots, who occupy the position of Big Bad for a couple of seasons and nearly wipe out one of the most powerful races in the show. Aside from the Replicators and that guy who made copies of the SG-1 team, there haven't been any robots because the general tech level in the show is too low - they can't make any.

40k has the Necrons, yet another force dedicated to the destruction of everything, with technology that makes the rest of the setting look like backward peasants. 40k also has the rather uncommon Iron Men, from the Dark Age of Technology, whose rebellion led to the near-destruction of human civilisation. You also have the Eldar Ghost Warriors, robotic troops animated by the stored soul of a dead Eldar, and I guess Tau Drones would probably count too. The 40k setting has souls as an actual measurable thing, which leads to problems when creatures without them are created, so the two most common forms of robot, the Necrons and the Ghost Warriors, are animated by formerly living beings. I imagine this is yet another area in which the Tau will come a cropper due to ignorance.

[Chaotic Neutral]

I thought that Necrons had no soul, and that the Necrodermis actively repelled them?

[Cykeisme]

lordofchange13, all the technology bases we're dealing with here are fictional.
In some of them, robotic soldiers have a cost effectiveness (meaning the ratio of cost to effectiveness) that is good, in other settings they do not. Cost effectiveness also varies depending on scale; certain fictional conflicts are not widespread enough to warrant their fictional version of a robotic army, even the setting they had them.
Furthermore, in some settings, AI inevitably turns against its creators. Not so in other settings.

It also seems there are actually more examples of the very subject you said is rare.. just that you didn't know about them.

I thought that Necrons had no soul, and that the Necrodermis actively repelled them?
I thought that Necrons had no soul, and that the Necrodermis actively repelled them?

I'm not sure what you mean by that.
The Necrons are the souls of the Necrontyr race, trapped in bodes made of Necrodermis.

[madd0ct0r]

I thought the Necrons used uploaded 'brain patterns' or something like that, rather then direct soul transfusion. The latest experiments are using Pariahs, humans with 'negative' souls. (note, not missing, ie null, but actually negative). It is suggested this is done using cyborgisation* instead of soul transfusion.

One of the recurring themes of the Necrontyr and Ctan is they had no warp tech, and cannot even utilize it for benefit when it's available. They can repel and shut it down though (Gellar Fields and the pylons on Cadia, Medusa V ect.)

In the Expanded Universe, Star Wars has had many droid armies. Historically, the Warbots of Xim; the droids of the trade federation; some skeletal dudes with bow shaped energy weapons drop podded in and wiped out a jedi monastery; the behemoth tanks (auto-madon?); some warlord had his force of 'red devils/terrors', the Empire was experimenting with them post film 6 and a couple of others I can't remember off the top of my head.

In most cases, for the Star Wars universe, the cost of making the bots clever enough to win made them more expensive then equivalent squishy troops.


It should also be noted that in Sci-fi in general the majority of the forces really don't care about casualties, they are not democracies beholden to the populace. The forces that are tend also to have a horror of war being prosecuted by faceless machines.
The US are happy to use drones, but would they countenance full replacement of their armed forces with robots?

the only purely robotic forces i can think of turn up in http://www.thinkbot.co.uk/The%20Book.htm, which is 1) a very good book and 2) the entire point of the story, so for fiction it may be moot.

* I apologize, English Language

[Gandalf]

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.

Voyager had the Pralor & Cravic. They were two races of robots built by different people to fight their war against one another. When peace was to be declared, the robots interpreted that as a threat against their warmaking and thus wiped out their creators. The war continued with the creators dead.

Star Trek AI always turns on its creators. Like in Flesh & Blood with the Hirogen holograms.

[Ford Prefect]

Where single figure omnidirectional GT warheads are worth mentioning when Wars has triple figure GT DEW on Clone Wars era troop transports.

The hell does that have to do with building robots?

[Darth Fanboy]

Voyager had the (snip)

That already explains why I hadn't heard of the following examples.

Star Trek AI always turns on its creators. Like in Flesh & Blood with the Hirogen holograms.

You mean like Data and the EMH?

[Stofsk]

Data and EMH are exceptions to the rule. The androids we see in TOS ('What Are Little Girls Made Of?' and 'I, Mudd') were shown in the former case to have turned on their creators long ago, while in the latter case eventually turned on Harry Mudd. The M5 unit used in the Starfleet wargames in 'The Ultimate Computer' turned on everyone. Landru kept the society he was 'protecting' enslaved for centuries in 'Return of the Archons' and Vaal did something similar to the primitive inhabitants in 'The Apple'. 'The Doomsday Machine' also showed the perils of having powerful destructive automatons let loose in the galaxy. And this is just TOS.

TOS had a very secular humanist outlook. At best, AI and robots were portrayed with lots of scepticism in mind.

EDIT: TNG had Data, but TNG also had Lore, and the Borg. Also didn't we see some episodes of Voyager with the Doctor behaving evily if he were reprogrammed or something?

[Lord of the Abyss]

EDIT: TNG had Data, but TNG also had Lore, and the Borg. Also didn't we see some episodes of Voyager with the Doctor behaving evily if he were reprogrammed or something?

Yes. There were also at least 2 hostile AIs, an alien hologram that was a mass murderer, and a fleet of robots that wiped out their builders. And that was before I stopped watching.

[Gandalf]

Also didn't we see some episodes of Voyager with the Doctor behaving evily if he were reprogrammed or something?

The Darkling has him reprogramming his personality, with unforeseen violent consequences. Also, Equinox has his "ethical subroutines" being deleted, and then he does whatever he's ordered to do.

Star Trek AI always turns on its creators. Like in Flesh & Blood with the Hirogen holograms.

You mean like Data and the EMH?

The closest I can remember of Data turning was Brothers and Insurrection. He turns on those around him, because of deep seated stuff in his programming. Granted, these were extenuating circumstances, but it essentially portrays androids as one or two small incidents from turning. So he's super reliable until something in his programming triggers.

[Stofsk]

You forgot about 'Descent' gands.

[lordofchange13]

Where single figure omnidirectional GT warheads are worth mentioning when Wars has triple figure GT DEW on Clone Wars era troop transports.

Comparing weapon yields has nothing to do with this thread, this thread is about robots not why one universe would loose to a star wars transport!

and Halo.

Oh please. Spacewise, Halo can MAYBE stand up to Trek.[/quote]
of cource if you knew anything about halo, then you'd know that the only race with robotic military would be the forerunners. And if i weir to compare them: I would say that because the Covenant have slipstream dives that go at 912 light years per day, against the warp drive goes at around 2 per day. but since this also has nothing to do with the point with the thread. the point is: what are some none ethical reasons behind not using robots for your entire military and workforce.

[lordofchange13]

I thought the Necrons used uploaded 'brain patterns' or something like that, rather then direct soul transfusion. The latest experiments are using Pariahs, humans with 'negative' souls. (note, not missing, ie null, but actually negative). It is suggested this is done using cyborgisation* instead of soul transfusion.

One of the recurring themes of the Necrontyr and Ctan is they had no warp tech, and cannot even utilize it for benefit when it's available. They can repel and shut it down though (Gellar Fields and the pylons on Cadia, Medusa V ect.)

The Necron codex says there "life-essence was encased in living metal bodies", so it can be assumed that there souls are transported. The Pariahs are said to bleed when damaged, so there not entirely robot/zombie but more like super advance cyborgs. They don't have negative souls: they just negate psychic energy(the Warp).

[adam_grif]

The standard excuse in SciFi is that the robots might rebel against you for whatever reason. In 40k the men of iron were corrupted by chaos (iirc), in Dune they took over, Mass Effect's Geth nearly obliterated their creators, Terminator is another obvious one. A.I. is usually banned or controlled to such a degree that they aren't a major part of things. Sometimes they have Strong A.I. as a routine part of things... and just kind of ignore the implications. Another way to handle it is say there's something special about regular organic life that robots can't ever have because they are "just machines".

This is a conscious decision on the part of the creators so they can write about things which more closely relate to modern human society so we can empathize and they don't have to work too hard to come up with original plotlines and characters that take all of the implications of an A.I. driven society into account.

If you can guarantee the friendliness of your robots, no, there is no compelling reason why your military and workforce wouldn't be entirely made up of robots. Realistically they will want humans (or posthumans) to be "in the loop" in terms of command, but there's no reason why ground pounders would be necessary when robots can do it better.

[Coyote]

The lack of (or only modest use of) robotic armies in SF is usually done for literary purposes-- it is hard to have a "horrors of war" type storyline when the soldiers do not feel horror. The exception, of course, is when you are either demonstrating the cold, mechanical ruthlessness of a robo-war, or, the story involves robots developing awareness and having ethical reactions to the war... in which case the story isn't so much about the war itself, but is simply using the robot warriors as a metaphor.

But in reality, there should be a good reason why robot warriors wouldn't be used more often; there are a lot of advantages-- casualties are no longer a factor in your political process, for example, making it attractive for political leadership. And of course the usual cost-saving measures such as the lack of need for food, heated or cooled living space, beds, etc for them.

Weaknesses would include things like single-point-of-failure vulnerabilities-- a virus or some other sort of program can be standardized to easily effect every single one of the droids, either shutting them down or turning them on their masters. Plus combat tactics & strategies will eventually fall into programmed and predictable patterns more readily. A certain level of inflexibility seems to be implied with robot forces. Also, robots won't have that interactive/intuitive sense of just "knowing that something is wrong" with a situation. They can't read the psychological or social terrain of an area they are entering and won't pick up on subconscious clues that the villagers are acting strange, or the informant doesn't seem to be telling the whole story, etc.

But the thing we've seen with robot forces in science fiction is that they're easy to defeat once their standard weakness is found and exploited, so their cost-saving benefit becomes moot.

[Lord of the Abyss]

You could make the argument that you'd want a largely human/posthuman military because they would be more likely to resist if ordered to back a coup or genocide half the population of their own nation. And while yes you can program in safeguards, presumably the people in charge can simply remove those safeguards.

[Norade]

First of all you are in constant violation of BR1.

Use Proper English. This is an English language forum, and we expect a decent attempt at proper English. This means decent spelling, grammar, punctuation, etc. In particular, do not use annoying SMS-speak such as "ur" instead of "you are" or "b4" instead of "before". We understand that not everyone has English as a first language and we can make allowances for that, but you should at least make the effort.

That means proper caps and a spell checking program that deals with English.

of cource Of course if you knew anything about halo Halo, then than you'd know that the only race with a robotic military would be the forerunners. And if i weir , and if I were to compare them: ; I would say that because the Covenant have slipstream dives that go at 912 light years per day, against the warp drive goes at around 2 per day. I would say that they have faster FTL than Star Trek. but However, since this also has nothing to do with the point with the thread. the point is: , which is; what are some none some of the non ethical reasons behind not using robots for your entire military and workforce.

The forerunners are extinct as a viable galactic power and possibly as a species and their technology is mostly out of commission. I have already smacked down Halo firepower and shown it to be in the low megaton range at the very highest and tens of kilotons at the average, these calculations apply to the forerunners as well and show that they're still a very low tier sci-fi race with laughably stupid leaders and a military with an IQ less than that of a lump of mud.

As for reasons not to use robots, you've been given plenty you annoying sack of shit but here are a few:

-Low effectiveness compared to a human soldier (ie: B1 battledroids)
-Lack of production facilities and no funding to build them
-Lack of AI to even start making autonomous warriors
-Lack of need for robotic soldiers (Robots aren't peacekeepers)
-No desire to remove humans from the battlefield
-Cultural reasons
-Fear of wars escalating due to low soldier casualties
-No need due to ground combat being near obsolete (Modern war between nuclear powers, Star Wars BDZ or Death Star)
-Lack of available resources or technology (Modern earth lacking in power sources)
-Less safeguards
-Easier to trick with simple tactics
-Less flexible in strategies they can carry out
-The people of a nation won't support a robotic army and thus any attempts to build one aren't politically viable
-It doesn't suit the story

Take your pick.

EDIT: I also corrected your unreadable post to make it better.

[Ellindsey]

The recent issues that Iran is having with the Stuxnet worm in their uranium enrichment plants suggests one more reason why a civilization might be hesitant to employ an all-robot army. When you consider the staggering complexity of the software that's going to go into every one of those robot soldiers, it becomes very difficult to be certain that some spy or saboteur didn't slip a buried command in there that will one day cause your robotic soldiers to shut down, or change sides, or maybe just make them randomly miss their targets half of the time. It doesn't even have to be intentional sabotage, as even an unintentional software bug that slips through testing and then only shows up under some obscure condition that turns out to not be so obscure after all when you deploy your robots can ruin your day.

[Razor One]

The primary problem with robotic armies is that, in my humble opinion at least, War is a fundamentally Human endeavour.

So what happens when you take Humans out of the equation and start building robots to crush, kill and destroy your enemy?

You need to make the Robot intelligent enough to be able to fight on par with Humans. That means it needs to recognise friends and foes, make independent decisions, develop strategy, be cognisant of a constantly changing situation and be capable of learning to deal with novel situations in addition to being able to use its environment to its advantage.

When you make a robot this intelligent, either the robot sees itself as superior and feels no need to obey its human masters, or it sees war for the illogical inefficient waste of time and resources that it is. Or both.

In any of those cases it effectively neutralises itself as the killing machine you want it to be. This is why we see so few robotic armies in fiction.

[Metahive]

Do Total Annihilation and Supreme Commander count? Two universes that almost entirely rely on robotic armies to fight their wars.

[lordofchange13]

The forerunners are extinct as a viable galactic power and possibly as a species and their technology is mostly out of commission. I have already smacked down Halo firepower and shown it to be in the low megaton range at the very highest and tens of kilotons at the average, these calculations apply to the forerunners as well and show that they're still a very low tier sci-fi race with laughably stupid leaders and a military with an IQ less than that of a lump of mud.

Weir did you get the information to make a weapons calc for the Forerunners? By my knowledge the only Forerunner weapon ever fired was The Line Installation 1-4(the Halo's them selves can not be counted)