How are mobile suits more effective in terrestrial/atmospheric settings than a jet or a tank?
If not for the square-cube law, mobility. The fact that you can also control it like your own body helps.
Easier to animate than tanks and easier to relate to than supersonic aircraft.
They aren't, Mobile Suits are more suited to space combat where the whole square-cube thing doesn't really matter.
If I'm not mistaken, the Zeeks and the Feddies only invested so much in MSs because they work both in Earth and space, so you'd need a lower amount of differential training and tools. Why Zeon decided to field every possible MS without any regards to parts compatibility is beyond me, though.
They're large 17m targets that are a lot slower than jets and can be taken out by fighters from long distance. I don't see any advantage to them terrestrially, especially at their size.
Why didn't the Feddies just use fighters to defeat Zeon's MS?
Because muh minovsky particles
Because they sell toys more easily.
How would minovsky particles be a problem for fighters like the F4?
To repel their Earth invasion? Probably because since the minovsky particles fucked radar pretty hard, there wasn't really anything like radar-guided missiles for them to engage at absurd ranges, they'd be restricted to doing gun runs and those really suck without air superiority, which is something you can't normally have in an all-out war. Even then, you'd have the problem of MANPADS (Or MSPADS if they really wanted to.)
Without radar, most modern fighters can't really do much aside from bomb runs or gun runs. Tech would go back to almost WW2-era dog fighting.
They look cooler. Originally though, from the Gundam 0079 books most of the story took place in space because Tomino thought it was dumb to have MS fighting on the ground.
Minovsky particles are the magical asspull explanation for basically everything dumb about UC Gundam (not sure if AUs even have Minovsky, which would make them 10x stupider than they already are).
I've got a much bigger issue with the paint schemes rather than the realism of giant robots, because they're not very rational in any scenario you just need to suspend disbelief (same reason why you'd be a tryhard ass for making a big stink about the realism/practicality of ships/combat in Star Wars). Anyway, one would think that because MS are designed for visual combat, that you wouldn't paint them in flamboyant colors, but rather camouflage would be more important than ever here. Flat pure black for space, any earth tones matching surroundings for ground. In real life, jets (at least US ones) are so concerned about stuff being too easy for enemies to see visually that navy/USAF markings are often grayed out to hardly visible. So to have bright white/red suits going up against bright purple suits etc for visual range combat is just pure "hurr gotta sell toys, kids like bight colors right?" retardation. If only the high-up aces painted their suits flashy colors as a show off thing (hence Char's suits) it'd be fine, but when the main Feddie color scheme is practically anti-camo, as are a good portion of Zeon (especially neo zeon) schemes, and the clown colors scheme on the RX-78 was never abandoned but just alternated around different parts on later gundams, that just gets to me.
What is TV-guidance for $100?
>radar guided missiles
Only for warships. GPS, Lasers, and TV (Photocontrast) are par for the course for PGMs.
Of limited utility against things that aren't helicopters or strafing.
I don't see many UC aircraft running with fusion engines. Also, you see them make guided missile attacks in IGLOO
>Dissing out red suits
Kid, if no one can even hit Char, why even bother with camouflage?
You can fly an F-4 without Radar. And it's not like a MS on land is fast enough to be superior to fighters doing bomb runs/gun runs.
What is reading comprehension? I said it makes sense only on fucking aces because they don't need camo.
Tons of grunt suits are painted the most stick-out colors imaginable. Marasais are orange, GMs are white/red (or rarely a variant like the GMIII), Jegans are bright mint-green, Gazas are fucking hot pink etc. For visual space combat black is the only color that makes sense. What annoys me most is that the Rick Dias was originally black but then later they all got painted red like Char's.
>not simply using exo-skeletons and cybernetics
Stronger, faster and more compact.
>How are mobile suits more effective in terrestrial/atmospheric settings than a jet or a tank?
When the tanks and jets are intentionally handicapped for the sake of making cool robots.
There efficient because all you need to do to pilot them is scream while shifting two joy sticks
Jets can't fight on the ground.
Tanks can't fight in the air.
I've never understood how the cockpit is supposed to make sense for terrestrial piloting. FMP! had an excellent system for controlling the arms but how are you supposed to control leg movements?
I'd imagine you just push forward on a joystick and it just starts walking forward on its own, and will adjust however necessary to different terrain/inclines etc. In space it just thrusts the leg thrusters/verniers.
I guess Char has a special button or trick to do the Char kick since I don't think know if I can recall ever seeing another MS do that or other fancy leg moves.
they did though, or did you miss every OYW part where they used planes. Hell they used planes in unicorn, or at least tried too.
Specialization, bitch, do you have any? That is the reason the F35 is shit, they tried to cram everything into a single frame so it can be used everywhere but now it can't do anything right.
But then how do you accurately control the arms? I think the best method would be the arm system from FMP! combined with tank like foot controls for leg movements and possibly another control for something that can be activated by your knees. Like a crouch toggle or a stomp or kick.
you can pretty much assume that 99% of all movement is controlled by mental links, and that the controls are nothing but a medium for the pilot to transmit into.
The main reason the F35 is shit is because American military companies have turned to complete shit. It certainly doesn't help that they wanted it to be multi-role everything, though.
But the ships have problems communicating between themselves with video and even audio at times, wouldn't the reliability of a TV-guided missile vary wildly, from area to area?
Pretty sure satellites were one of the first ones to go on a Zeon vs EFDF conflict.
>Lasers, and TV (Photocontrast) are par for the course for PGMs.
Yeah, but they would require the plane to stay still until it impacts the target, no? Unless you are running a two-seater, then I agree.
Yeah, because that's what they would need to do. High Altitude Bombing suffers from inherent inaccuracy and since radio would be pretty shit in a minovsky-rich environment, I don't think they would be able to coordinate well-timed bombings on anything that isn't a fixed position. Bombings right outside of MANPADS range would be feasible, I think.
>Also, you see them make guided missile attacks in IGLOO
Interesting, I guess I should really get around to watching it.
But in terms of tanks the name of the game has been Multi-role everything since the Centurion and T-55.
in Tomino's timeline, there were basically 2 reasons:
-Mobile suits allowed for shifting a craft's center of mass in a way humans easily understood, allowing for extremely exact maneuvering that gave mobile suits an edge in space combat.
-Minovsky particles blocked radar and other normal means of locating enemies, making long range combat used by jets far less feasible.
So basically: MS were general purpose space tanks needed in a world where magical particle required tanks in land battles again.
Wired missiles. Also PGMs have their own inertial guidance systems in addition to GPS. Targeting pods on fighters do all the work for you, and you can always have someone on the ground paint the target. The newer glide bombs have their own thrusters to increase range and are pretty much fire and forget but can have ranges of over 100 nm.
I wish that more /ak/ shit had jokes relevant to the vehicle or weapon part rather than jokes based on how cute or tsundere the girl is. Flight Highschool has amazing jokes usually making fun of the f-35.
Programmable moves. Basically you program in a movement you would like the MS to do, such as a kick, and you tie it to a button. At least that's what I think.
This is just like my mmos
they're not, zeon use colony drops bull shit tactics to secure there place on earth
MINOVSKY PARTICLES NIGGA
also nice repetitive number there, anon
Ah, that's interesting. Thanks.
Yeah, they do that in Gundam (I think) and MuvLuv.
Those are great against stationary targets and saturating an area, but I doubt it'll be useful against something as mobile as MS.
I laughed harder than I should have been allowed to.
What is strategic bombing? What is air to surface missiles?
Yeah basically macros, and I assume most are already programmed.
The federations fight on earth with tanks and planes was going pretty well, they weren't really loosing. It was the space theatre where the federation was losing. The funny thing is that if zeon just sued for peace rather than invade earth, the war might have gone better for them because they would not have to lose so much personnel and material in a ground war. Though on the other hand the federation would develop the GM anyways and probably end up winning. The GM is the huge turning point of the OYW, which I consider to be amazing for an anime written in the late 1970s, where normally the MC would be the factor that wins the war.
You mean those extremely gimped jets that they used?
Exactly what I thought
>tfw I have a mouse with 15 programmable buttons
God damn it I really did not need to spend the next hour planning our a mech OS and control scheme.
They're not, unless you're fighting Kaiju
I'm talking about on earth.
What's the point of discussing the applications of real-world weaponry to MS's if you're going to accept the ridiculous premises that make MS's viable? Large humanoid armor would have little mobility advantage, no armor advantage, and no firepower advantage over mechanized infantry.
They win because mecha-fags think MS are cooler than everything else.
>muh minovsky particles
>muh radar immune
>muh guidance immune
>muh LOS AT weapons immune
At the end of it the show is still based on the Second World War, and the GM is the analog to the generic medium tanks on the allied side--reliable, relatively easy to upgrade and mass-produced. Later Zeon stuff like the Gelgoog easily outclass them, but they're just not produced on a scale large enough to matter by that point.
Hmmmm, MS's are not limited to terrain, which is a huge mobility advantage, as demonstrated by Metal Gear Rex, As usual , armor and firepower advantage is reliant on what it will be outfitted with
Really now, if the technology somehow allows it, MG Rex is probably the answer to all the problems of ground armor, not Gundam.
If they can make super strong legs for the thing, then adding on some rollerblades so it can sprint on open ground will not be a problem.
It's all about legs being better suited for more environments than wheels, but even then, having a humanoid torso becomes stupid.
>video games are real life
and I'm out. Can't even get into it with /m/erds.
Oh wait, MG Revengeance already did it
>The main reason the F35 is shit is because American military companies have turned to complete shit
Oh look, little kiddies who read articles from sources that thrive on clickbait and think they know what they are talking about.
Question: do the particles influence the IR spectrum preventing the use of Heat Seeking platforms? I've only watched a couple of the series and I don't remember it begin discussed. It would probably be a good engagement weapon for aircraft due to the amount of heat a suit would create in a combat situation.
Did some one say knightmare frames?
This is beautiful. Saved.
Did someone say Wanzers?
While it's actually shaping up to be a half decent fighter, if they had made the B it's own project, it would have been better off. There were some compromises for the STOVL version that limits performance in the A and C.
Keep crying realism-fag. Your shitty tanks and planes are useless if the giant robot snipes you with lasers from beyond your engagement range.
>But you can strap those on planes too
And then you get screwed over because your powerplant isn't big enough to handle the jet engine, fancy sensor package for the laser, and the laser itself and are forced to either get a weaker laser or drop your precious stealth design.
did someone say AT
Knightmare frames make a little more sense but still almost nothing, since they can only really go fast on terrain that a tank would be better suited for anyway.
Yes large Minovski Particle concentrations will even block out visible light. For that reason, MS have to rely on image enhancing techniques which allowed dummy balloons to become a feasible tactic.
There is one thing that a leg platform will be worse at that current platforms, maintenance.
Here is some hours of work required to maintain aircraft per hour of flight
Got these from the Air & Space magazine January 2008:
Early F-117..- 113 to 1
Concorde.....- 18 to 1
Here's the compilation from this thread so far:
Saab Draken.- 50 to 1
Eurofighter....- 9 to 1
F-14............. - 24 to 1
F-18E/F........- 6 to 1
F-18E/F........- 15 to 1 (different source)
Saab Gripen..- 10 to 1
C-17.............- 20 to 1
F-15A/B........- 32.3 here thru f117 stats from (HaveBlue and the F-117A by David Aronstein)
F-117...........- 150 (pre 1989)
F-117...........- 45 (after improvements, post 1989)
CH-46E........- 19.6 in 1995 GlobalSecurity.org
CH-46E........- 27.2 in 2000
CH-53D........- 24.8 in 1995
CH-53D........- 27.9 in 2000
F-20.............- 5.6 (http://www.f20a.com/f20maint.htm)
A-6E............- 51.9 DMMH/FH (http://yarchive.net/mil/fa18_vs_a6.html)
F/A-18C.......- 19.1 DMMH/FH
"The actual B-2 maintenance man-hours per flying hour at Whiteman Air Force Base averaged 124 hours over 12 months ending in March 1997."
Mirage 2000..- 10 Dash 5 (http://www.mirage-jet.com/AIRFRAME/MAINTE_1/mainte_1.htm)
Gripen..........- 12 (http://www.mirage-jet.com/AIRFRAME/MAINTE_1/mainte_1.htm)
That is just for flying, I'd hate to see numbers of theoretical time for maintaining these platforms after an hour of active maneuvering... not to mention transportation to and from battlefields.
>Your shitty tanks and planes are useless if the giant robot snipes you with lasers from beyond your engagement range.
This is a perfect example of tanks and planes being handicapped to make robots cool. Why do the tanks and planes not have access to the same weaponry as giant robots.
By the time we can fashion the robots, we probably have better maintenance tools and modular procedures.
That is one issue that one can have with these concepts. The same tech that could help make mechs an achievable idea could probably be used to make all current war fighting platforms tougher, stronger, lighter, cheaper, or easier to maintain/use.
Beat me to it.
Rollerblade mecha are best mecha.
>It's all about legs being better suited for more environments than wheels
which is where you have to start handwaving away realism because any environment where legs would be better than wheels would not support the weight/ground pressure of a large legged machine, unless we are talking about other planets/moons where the gravity is lower
Zekes are that green color. That isn't anti camo.
Now really, I hope all this discussion is in the context of the phantasy universe that is gundam. If anybody thinks walking vehicles make any sense in real life, you should learn a bit about physics and actual warfare. Walking robots might be viable, but not vehicles.
I mentioned why it wouldn't work on planes though. Tanks are even easier since lasers don't follow the curvature of the Earth, meaning a low-profile vehicle is a terrible choice for a ground laser platform. Gundam did give planes beam weapons too, but the Core Booster's just weren't as useful since Zeon is space based where MS combat is truly dominant.
Damn Tomino is one ugly piece of shit. Just compare Anno to him. Anno-sama with his beard is so sexy.
Of course. Nobody is advocating for walking mechs in real life without some bullshit like Minovsky reactors or something.
NUH MUH LAZORS ON MECHA.
Hmm what about the GEKKO design?
If we can't have the legs support the body and itself, why don't we just make the legs the body of the thing?
At least it's a stopgap until better tech and reality bending powers arrive
>not using treads
I think at most you might see an infantry suit to increase protection to that aspect of combat.
Why do Mobile Suits need heads when they can operate fine without them?
And why do they need legs in space?
1. Procure pseudoscience reactor
2. Put it into helicopter
4. Dead feddies and zekes.
And by doing so, you make it clear you know absolutely nothing about military tech or airplanes or tanks, or anything you're trying to talk about.
>Tanks are even easier since lasers don't follow the curvature of the Earth, meaning a low-profile vehicle is a terrible choice for a ground laser platform.
In the scale of the curvature of the Earth, the small height advantage of a MS is negligible and is a poor justification to handicap tanks.
There are people who actually think this
But Anno doesn't have a manga about him
>that whole manga
Can tanks climb up walls or jump from helicopter like Knightmare frame?
Three would be "shot down by beam rifle"
Four remains the same.
The whole Zabi Family segment was pretty great too
We have walking robots. In fact, the robots we have are in the original sense of the word. They perform most of their own maintenance and can utilize local energy sources basically anywhere on the planet.
Mobile suits that are 15m tall is stupid.
This image never ceases to amuse me.
Can a knightmare frame exist?
Also yes. Except the tank doesn't have to jump over the wall. It just destroys it.
Again yes, though there's almost never a reason to airdrop extremely expensive, logistically demanding armor.
Go ahead and explain to me what a 'beam rifle' is and how it operates.
That's for sure. Even autonomous, man-sized robots are dumb, merely tools for politicians to dissemble with. We've seen it with airborne drones; the ability to murder without risk of casualties is an enormously useful political tool for the sociopaths in government.
The AT's in Votoms had movement macros. There's a distinct scene in the Kummen arc where Chirico changes them around externally to counter and better keep up with Ypsilon.
>Take fantasy technology out of the setting
Every work of fiction ever. This is a terrible thread
Zoids make more sense then Mobile Suits
It's hilarious, because mobile suits are retarded, even in their settings.
Eh, what? War is just a part of politics. Also don't you dare talk shit about man-sized robots. In a few decades, they will become common in many advanced armies.
Scopedogs are the best grunts.
What if we are the ones in a setting that makes mobile suits stupid?
I always wondered, what is the purpose of the assault rifles in VOTOMS? I mean, they're probably weaker than 105mm HEAT rounds, so they can't be too effective against tanks, and against infantry, it's overkill.
Inb4 for destroying other mechas.
Because side to side movement.
So? They can dodge projectiles by moving to the side? Tanks can also move sideways, just turn them 90 degrees
Damn you, Jojo!
Who needs legs when your tank covers the whole terrain?
Bolos have continental siege artillery.
Continental Siege Artillery.
They are artificially intelligent superheavy tanks so they can lay to rest for centuries waiting for the enemy. And they can adapt to feed off almost any form of energy you throw at them.
Even if you manage to damage them they will just wait until their repair systems can compensate and then continue attacking.
And you know, Continental Siege Artillery.
Who exactly is going to be killed by these robots? Probably civilians and guerrillas in proxy wars. Why robots and not soldiers? Because using soldiers would put someones family in harms way and that would have produce political backlash against the politicians who use these conflicts to support jingoist policies.
As I said, this is already occurring. UAV's have allowed the US to murder many people without little to no effect on domestic opinion, because civilians and soldiers are insulated from combat.
Tanks can't quickly use cover for their protection. No vehicle can actively use cover like a mech could.
I've got news for you. If a tanks armor won't stop or slow something, neither will a building.
>only buildings provide cover
And your proposition that mechs are agile is fucking stupid.
>oh look at this plot convenient rock outcropping for me to hide behind
The OP is talking about GUNDAMS.. Where do you think you are? Idiot.
In Gundam's case they are you fucking retard.
And your point is?
That mechs are fluff, not weapons platforms.
A tank and a Gundam are on a 'perfectly' flat plain. The Gundam is moving sideways at a constant rate. The tank, obviously, is stationary.
Which is harder to hit?
Which can actively use cover?
Which can move any direction at any given moment?
Modern tanks cant.
If technology was available to make agile mechs, then that technology surely could be applied to helicopters and tanks in a much more intelligent way.
Like for example hover tanks. Or tanks with articulated arms instead of turrets so they can poke around corners. Or maybe spider tanks with wheels on the legs, like the ones from GiTS. Or a combination of all those ideas.
If mechs were possible, surely we'd think of a better form factor to apply those technologies than a humanoid shape.
>Gundams have special snowflake tech
Oh look we are back to the handicapping to make robots look cool.
the standard GAT-22 rifle fires 30mm explosive rounds, extremely effective against all kinds of light armor, soft targets, and heavy cover (the kind that would be in urban environments)
If it's good enough for the GAU-8 its goddamn good enough for you
1. Spam Saber Fish
2. Shoot Zakus
4. Stall enough time to mass produce your own MS to win the OYW
Problem is Feds copied the Zeeks and AE was jewing everyone with buy MS from us.
is this nigger serious?
No shit, who said anything about that mechs are feasible in real life in this thread?
>The tank, obviously, is stationary.
How is that obvious? Even modern tanks can fire on the move with excellent accuracy.
A reasonably flat terrain is the worst place for a gundam to engage a tank, since a gundam is tall and easy to hit while a tank is low to the ground and heavily armored, thus even a small hill will provide adequate cover for the tank, while a gundam would need to find a huge rock.
Does it fire them out of a gatling gun and follow it up with Mavericks, though?
I thought the Gundam and GM were original designs.
You might start by reading it.
>feasible in real life
They're not even feasible within their own universes.
The only reason they have a chance to exist within their own universes is because all the engineers everywhere were simultaneously hit by a virus that makes it impossible to design reasonable weapons platforms.
Okay. Both are moving sideways at a constant rate.
Which one can turn at a 90 degree angle at a given moment?
>while a tank is low to the ground and heavily armored
because only the mech is heavily armored
>oh look, the thread's talking about mobile suits
>let's ignore the tech that makes mobile suits work in that setting
You mean the tech that could apply to any other weapon and make it better than MS's?
Why can't gundamfags just accept that their setting is pants on head retarded.
I read it, why don't you point me to the thread that said mobile suits/mechs are feasible in real world?
>Which one can turn at a 90 degree angle at a given moment?
The tank, because the gundam is heavy and has low surface contact area, so when it attempted to make a turn, it would slip on the earth and slide.
If you don't believe me, go ahead and go to a sandy beach (because to a gundam, all the earth would be like a sandy beach), run at full speed and try to make a tight turn, see how that goes.
are you ignoring the person who is arguing, right now, that MS are better than tanks?
>why do people watch any anime/movies, read any fiction literature whatsoever?
What is Suspension of disbelief?
>it would slip on the earth and slide.
>explaining physics to an english major
>What is Suspension of disbelief?
Mech shows that try to pass off mechs as in any way plausible or realistic strain my suspension of disbelief past it's breaking point.
I have no problem with super robot shows and other shows that claim rule of cool and in no way try to pretend to be plausible.
Of all the anime that exists, gundam is the one that irks you? Not Eva, those shitty LNs, mahou shoujo shows, macross etc.
You slew that strawman.
>"S-So guys... I was thinking. I mean, mobile suits have legs, right? And those tanks are just sitting around being useless... why don't we... hey guys, guys.. hey.. listen.. no, seriously.. what if we, guys... what if we put the mobile suit legs, yeah the legs.. the legs on the.. yeah.. the legs on the tanks! Oh god the legs would be the most beneficial part to put on a tank! I mean.. the only thing that makes mobile suits useful are its legs, right? Guys? ...G-Guys?"
>not using that tech to improve fighter jets, tanks and make new superior weapon platforms than 17 meter robots
The points are already addressed in this thread, I do not wish to argue endlessly on this subject, but since you insist. In Gundam, MS are better than tanks for mobility adaptability, and armaments.
>implying they haven't been improved
I can play this game too
Gundam, Macross, Code Geass, Muv-Luv, and the rest are all shows that break suspension of disbelief by being incredibly stupid while trying to pass off as having plausible and realistic combat.
Evangelion is stupid for other reasons.
>mobile suits weigh enough to turn hard packed earth into slippery mud
>In Gundam, MS are better than tanks for mobility adaptability, and armaments.
No, in Gundam MS are better than tanks and other alternatives because the writers wanted to but didn't bother to provide a plausible explanation.
Thus, making Gundam a terrible show with a shit premise.
>implying legs are the only tech being denied to tanks
Yes, legs are clearly the thing that separates Gundam from reality. Not superhumans or novel energy sources or materials science.
clearly they have not
>muh beam rifle
>muh curvature of the earth
Since when did any of those shows try to pass off being realistic? Even Patlabor doesn't do that. Please enlighten me. In a show where a guy can push off an asteroid with brain power, and cause the Big O to stop moving because of dead girls, I don't think it ever claimed to be realistic.
I... you haven't spent any time playing a field sport, ever have you?
I mean, I'm on /a/, so I can assume that every other person hasn't even seen a field in a few years.
I think Muv Luv did an ok job, though.
>Let's build mechs that can't even walk.
Are you trying to argue with me that if the world used mechs as a military weapon, they wouldn't even be able to run/walk on the ground?
And here we go again, back to square one again.
>Since when did any of those shows try to pass off being realistic
Learn the difference between "plausible" and "realistic."
All those shows tried to pass off mechs as plausible weapons for warfare (actually, the best possible weapons) while keeping their technology within reasonably realistic constraints as far as sci-fi goes.
I have no problem with Big O.
Just accept that mechs are stupid and go back to enjoying your show about them.
Just accept that mechs work in that setting and stop shitposting.
I don't understand where the idea that something is implausible means that a cartoon show about them is bad? No one honestly thinks that mechs like gundam or whatnot would work in real life not even on /m/. But in shows they work because they are shown to work, just like newtype magic works, or minvosky particles work or what have you. You just take things way too seriously.
>reasonably realistic constraints
They are obviously reasonable enough for enough people for Gundam to be one of the biggest and most successful series out there.
>No one honestly thinks that mechs like gundam or whatnot would work in real life
The problem is that they wouldn't really work even within their own settings, and the flimsy justifications the writers come up with only make the flaws more glaring.
So yes, cartoon shows about mechs are bad, generally. The only decent show about mechs that I've seen was FLAG.
Super robot shows are ok, though.
Many people enjoy shitty things, yes.
Mech shows are the teen popstars of anime.
And they wouldn't they wouldn't work within their own settings because you say so?
>Super robot shows are ok, though.
The problem is that they wouldn't really work even within their own settings, and the flimsy justifications the writers come up with only make the flaws more glaring.
You don't understand how legged things work. Go out in a field. Run at top speed in a direction. Now try to "turn at a 90 degree angle at a given moment". See what happens. Make sure the field is soft, I wouldn't want you to hurt yourself.
Shitty according to you. Have it occurred to you that you have the shit taste here?
It's already been explained, at length in this thread, why it would take colossal incompetence from the engineers and military commanders to make them viable.
Clearly they haven't. In fact in many ways they look like they've gotten worse.
saved. but what the fuck does it mean actually
I agree with you, but those mechs usually have boosters to aid them in their maneuvers.
Metal Gear Rising, lyrics are based of Rules of Nature, while the fight is the first one against a metal gear Ray.
You see, that doesn't work because unlike Mech shows, writers of Super Robot shows don't come up with flimsy justifications for their existence and ride it out only on the rule of cool and nothing else.
This is the main difference that makes Mech shows terrible and Super Robot shows tolerable at their worst and entertaining at their best.
Nah, I'm pretty sure you and the other fans of mechs are the ones with a shit taste.
Super robot shows are mecha shows dude.
Is there a point to judging future technology by current standards?
I mean, hiring gamers to pilot drones to kill terrorists sure sounded dumb as hell in 2000, but look at reality.
Maybe it's reasonable a few hundred years from now.
>implying their aren't extremely competent to be able to make mechs viable in their settings and outperform tanks
on earth, the square-cube law takes place, basically, a MS is too heavy to actually stand on the ground. if they can make the MS floats or hover on earth much like the sengoku astray, then they'll probably be useful
Yes I know, I just don't want to type "realistic mecha" or whatever it is that shows like Gundam and Code Geass are called these days.
>implying a mech wouldn't walk circles around that thing
I have no idea what that is, but it looks like an SPG and not a tank.
Joke's on you, I don't even watch mech shows.
Your taste is shit.
>Now try to "turn at a 90 degree angle at a given moment"
Your still arguing about that? That was like an hour ago. I think you took that phrase a little too seriously, pal. How about running in a curve? Nearly just as effective. Wouldn't slip on the squishy earth that way either ;^)
Its all just mecha, nobody claims to be realistic. Some are more realistic than others.
is there any?
It has a top speed of 110km/h and took out six zakus single-handedly.
No, there's a clear divide. On one side there are shows like Code Geass or Macross that claim to be a plausible depiction of futuristic warfare, and on the other side there are shows where the protagonist wins through manly yelling.
I guess Gundam is somewhere in the middle, depending on which one you're watching.
>15 seconds in
>complete spinning 360
All of my nope.
>The uploader has not made this video available in your country.
Fuck the uploader and fuck youtube for implementing this bullshit.
It has treads powered by kojima particles.
In the future wars are all gonna be fought with long-range missiles, satellites and drones. Whats the point of a mobile suit when a drone can blow it the fuck up? Or a laser platform in orbit over earth.
Where the hell do you live? It's even available in Australia.
Anyway, go watch MS IGLOO. Despite questionable CGI for part one it's one of the better Gundam series.
I watched two episodes of it, I don't remember that tank. Are there more?
because the setting made it so.
There's three parts, each with three episodes. Hidden One Year War and Apocalypse 0079 follow the same Zeon team. The Hildolfr is in episode 2 of Gravity Front, which has much better CGI and follows the feddies.
Becuase those shows don't take place in the real world? I know this is hard to believe but not all anime does.
Ahh, boosters. So, what is a booster? They do seem remarkably effective, but what are they? They can't be electrical propulsion, because they produce far too much force. They certainly aren't solid fuel affairs. Are gundams all stuffed full of rocket fuel, in addition to their munitons, and power sources for ambulatory motion?
Why can't tanks mount boosters? Because they don't have access to rule of cool in these settings.
The reality in which UAV's are still aircraft and way too expensive to put in the hands of a retarded codkiddie?
The competence to be so competent at incompetence that your competence just makes you a little incompetent.
cuz beam rifle, duh.
He isn't very overrated when not too many people have heard of him.
>They can't be electrical propulsion, because they produce far too much force.
Did you know that electric cars have more torque than gasoline engine cars? I bet you didn't. Because if you did you wouldn't say stuff you know nothing about.
>Code Geass or Macross that claim
when have they made this claim? its mostly western fans reading too much into srw classes
No, it's you ignoring the writer's intentions because they don't explicitly state something.
It's pretty clear from the tone of the shows and the technology depicted that they're meant to be taken as sci-fi and not as fantasy. Fairly hard sci-fi at that. And as hard sci-fi they're subject to scrutiny from their watchers. You can't just ignore bad writing because something is fiction.
None of the shows are hard sci fi. Planetes would be an example of hard sci fi, Gundam or Macross would not be.
>implying electic propulsion means electric motors
Look up ion thrusters.
>they don't even explain how the mechs in CG can fly, they just can because
I can understand macross since it was old school sci fi nerds working on that, but I don't believe the writers ever intended for geass to be taken as realistic anything.
Humans fighting aliens through the power of music.
Magic eye powers
I don't think you know what hard sci-fi is.
Soft and hard sci-fi is not a one or the other proposition. It's more of a continuous scale.
Macross and Gundam are obviously hard sci-fi er than stuff like Big O. That's why I said "fairly hard" instead of "hard"
Nonsense, they have shiny magic energy feathers that blow up the surrounding gravity.
Boy, you'd look a lot smarter if you were actually smart.
You pull a fun fact about electric motors out of your ass, even though it's completely irrelevant.
I am, as was very obvious, talking about electrical propulsion using thrust, which is completely, totally different. Electrical propulsion is a classification for certain rocket engines that use electricity to generate thrust. These system require very high energy inputs for relatively low forces.
But please, continue to act like the smartest guy in the room. It amuses me to cut arrogant teenagers down to size.
It's fusion reactor. The MS have it because guess what? They primarily fight in space. The tanks don't because you can have this >>101007138 instead.
But they are still soft compared to anything that resembles being hard. Japan doesn't care too much about hard scifi.
No arguing that, but they're still harder than some. They're just hard enough to be stupid.
If they were softer I wouldn't be complaining.
watch them and you would see how soft they are, I mean they have fucking newtypes.
>Ahh, boosters. So, what is a booster?
I'm not the guy you're arguing with, but every time something is not explained in the Gundam universe, the answer is "Minovsky particles."
It's one of the reasons Gundam is particularly bad as far as mech shows go.
>You can't just ignore bad writing because something is fiction.
Sure I can. I just enjoy that shit.
I did watch them.
The first Code Geass was a lot harder sci-fi than the second one, thus it was a lot harder to watch. As soon as they went pants-on-head retarded, Code Geass became tolerable.
This is true of every mech show out there. The more seriously it tries to take mechs, the worse it is. And this is my main point.
I guess I could have said Macross and Muv Luv to make my point better, but I didn't actually get that far into Muv Luv because it was just not enjoyable.
That's nice. It takes 250 kW to generate 2.5 Newtons of force, using the Dual-Stage 4-Grid.
2.5 Newtons is a little more than half a pound. Not what I would want to use for a maneuverable weapon.
As long as you don't claim that it's good writing just because you enjoy it then it's fine.
Dude. Minovsky particles.
gundam 08th ms team is as real as it gets
>what is patlabor
Too bad the story itself was shit.
That would be Flag.
VOTOMS is about as close as you can get.
Muv-Luv Alternative did a great job of pointing out how ridiculously impractical mechas were. Far more than MS Gundam did even with Minovsky Particles.
It took a really specific, contrived, fucked up scenario to justify a reasonable use of mecha, and even within that universe, people still wanted to use bombs and planes way more.
I think I found my litmus test for awful, awful fluff.
Liquid fuel motors then.
>say something wrong
>say something completely different
It's worse for you, thus your main point is moot. We know that mechs are unrealistic, but it does not break our suspension of disbelieve.
It's not like military vehicles haven't been painted in ridiculous paint schemes in the past.
Visibility is a two-way street; if your enemy can't see you, it's likely that your wingman can't either.
Can't you people just enjoy giant robots because they're cool? Damn it.
nuclear thermal rocket
If it makes you feel better about your ignorance, believe that. You clearly can't into context. What relationship could electrical motors have to thrusters? Did you think I was talking about propellers?
Is there a HD torrent of Flag?
Post more tanks.
That's an adequate explanation. The MS's still need to be stuffed with a propellant though.
Once again you're missing the point and why mechs break suspension of disbelief.
It's not about realism.
The problem with mech shows is not that they're unrealistic. It's that they're illogical. They're not reasonable. Thus, a show that tries to be reasonable about its mechs only serves to point out how unreasonable they are, while a show that goes over-the-top and doesn't try to be logical or reasonable is fine.
Suspension of disbelief doesn't break because something is unrealistic, realism has nothing to do with.
Suspension of disbelief breaks because something is unreasonable. For example, if a character who is supposed to be smart does something clearly stupid for no reason, that can break your suspension of disbelief, and it doesn't matter if that character is a human detective in a noir film or a pink unicorn riding a crystal dragon in a fantasy book.
Same thing with mechs, it breaks my suspension of disbelief when they try to convince me that smart men, engineers and generals, came together and got all this great technology (and whatever magic the setting uses to justify mechs), and a stupid humanoid mech is the best thing they could come up with, when there are clearly better options around. This doesn't matter so much when the characters are shown to operate by yelling at things, but if they try to pretend that characters act anything like intelligent human beings, that's when they fuck up.
If you mean BD release, then no.
Also, I wouldn't recommend watching FLAG for the mecha, as they don't get as much screentime as you'd think.
>The fact that you can also control it like your own body helps.
Not really. Humans have the capacity to control all manner of machines as if it were their body. See skilled operator of cars, airplanes, agricultural machines, cranes, etc.
>See skilled operator of cars
Not even that skilled. Almost anyone who's been driving for more than a year can instinctively "feel" their can and know if they're going to fit in that gap or if they're going to make that turn or hit that post they can't even see anymore.
I was the one who recommended FLAG originally and I agree, the mecha aren't really the focus.
Still it's one of the better attempts at making reasonable mecha out there, without going into power armor territory.
Threads like this are the reason that I never tire of /a/.
No, YOU are missing the point. People have different level of acceptance, just because you find it hard to believe that mechs are viable in that setting doesn't mean others don't find it reasonable. Hell, shows don't even need to be reasonable to be enjoyable. In mecha, the mechs work and are the best possible option, because they ARE the setting. If you cannot accept the setting, well too fucking bad, boohoo.
Your life would be a lot easier if you just believe in the magic that is minovsky particles.
Yes I agree, some people just don't see it when the writing is bad. That's why suspension of disbelief breaks for everyone at different levels.
And that's exactly my point, mech shows have bad writing, beyond the level of bad writing that I can tolerate. Maybe your standards are significantly lower, and I guess that's okay too.
Didn't Macross give an explanation as to why they had Valkyries?
more to the point, humans don't normally intuit where their center of mass or how to move in free fall. Granted, humans who spend most of their lives in space and using personal thrust devices would probably develop such intuition, but it's certainly not an instinctual thing.
Another sticking point is visible in a thought experiment. Imagine your body is a giant robot and you're a little guy controlling him with joysticks and pedals and stuff. How do you perform the incredibly elegant and refined motions using a bunch of widgets? The fact that even a little bit of clumsiness can make someone a complete klutz is telling.
And why would it be any easier to manipulate your machines orientation as a human than as a ball or cube with thruster groups scattered around it. As in Ender's Game, 'The gate is down'; orientation of gravity doesn't matter. Orientation of your weapons and thrusters does.
battloid mode exists so they could engage with Zentradi in hand to hand combat/be infantry fighting giant wars. You'll notice that in Macross (especially SDF) that most of the time they're in
MS are shit. They look cool but they are implausible and impractical.
I think it's more of a matter of knowledge with that poster. Most people don't know shit about actual warfare, myself included, and probably think that giant robots are the next step in weaponry or are at least superior in theory to the types of weaponry we have today.
In my case, I've heard a thousand times that mechs are not practical weapons, but I wouldn't at all be able to explain why if I happened to challenge someone who is arguing the opposite. I don't really care to find out either.
Speaking of Macross, all things considered the Zentradi are a much more stupid concept than any mechs the show has.
>settings I don't like
Ok, so the story itself is shit too eh? It doesn't matter how poignant the MC's struggling is, it doesn't matter how meaningful the messages are, if it's mecha, it's shit.
Engineering problems, mostly. You can get around almost any physical problem if your engineering is good enough. The problem is that most weapons systems need to be rugged and reliable and highly complex systems do not lend themselves to reliability, a la Rube Goldberg machines.
Common sense problems, too.
The trend in general with weapons systems is to make it as small and possible while still being effective.
The far future is nanomachines, not giant robots.
>Mechs are dumb and will never work in war
They said the same thing about airplanes.
How did that work out?
>They said the same thing about airplanes.
No they didn't. The potential of airplanes was seen the second something thought of the idea.
The only thing under discussion was their place in warfare, but nobody ever doubted that they would have a significant place.
Dah. I'm hoping I live long enough to become a nanobot cloud.
right? People were using unpowered balloons for warfare before planes came along and alongside them.
Cirno is sad, you happy now?
Is /a/ going to be spamming gets until we pass 11111111?
This is true.
>Cirno is sad
Yes, very happy.
Muv Luv specifically points out how most BETA are killed by tank/artillery.
Because all of the high power reactors in gundam release a particle that basically snubs most radio wavelengths to the point of fogging up visible light.
Because satellites were the first to go since the fights started in space and a satellites is basically just a chunk of metal with a predictable orbit and no means of defense
Beam weapons require reactors to big to put on earth bound jets
Mobile suits are a fantastic terror weapon that are capable of holding ground, something that jets and helicopters cant do without having near by airfields or carriers, a good deal of which were destroyed in the opening attacks and efficient communications which now have to be wired in order to avoid interference
A big thing about tanks is while their lower profile is definitely a big point in their favor they can only aim so high which is a huge problem when your fighting machines that tower over you in extreme close range combat that fighting tends to devolve into in gundam. Another big factor is that if you want to put beam weapons on the tanks you have to build in a reactor, which tend to go critical and explode with the force of a small nuke, with moble suits you can at least destroy the legs, or the arms without straying twords the reactor, this is less of a deal in space but then again you aren't going to be fielding tanks in space, except for the guntank because fuck the lack of gravity
Tanks and Jets still find their uses in the Gundam universe, heck the largest earth side battle was won using tanks and jets primaraly with only minimal mobile suit support, the main problem is that Mobile suits are both highly mobile and can be used both in space and areas with gravity. A jet is going to have a hard time blasting its way into a colony from the out side then holding ground, this is something that mobile suits do well