Phyrox

edit: Just me babbling in bewilderment at this kind of behavior from an adult. Nothing you wanted to read.

...or someone who wants to imply he is referring to all the recognized/authoritative works on a subject, but wants to be consice...

Yah, that's the same one. I don't have it in a larger size, and I think I deleted the cleaned up images I used in it. I could try to make another one...but the mechs would be about the same size. I would just use this as a wallpaper with a white screen. Sorry. If you really want it bigger I COULD give it another try.

Back weapon...EXPENDABLE?! Maybe since I've been using quads since day one...but those are my bread and butter.

To encourage involvment I will go first. And I will try to be exhaustive. Head: CHD-09-OXI (light weight, good radar and mapping) Core: MCM-MX/002 (good EO, good weight, good lookin') Arms: CAM-11-SOL (basic medium arms) Legs: CLF-D2-ROG (best quads, good weight and move, look nice) Boost: MBT-OX/E9 (good performance for the drain) FCS: PLS-SRA02 (horizontal for ease of strafing) Gen: KGP-ZSV (good performance for the weight) Rad: RMR-ICICLE (works for me) Ext: CSS-IA-64S (switch this for a light anti-missle if situation calls for it) BackR: MM-AD/20 BackL: CWC-CNG-300 (I owe the game to this beauty...couldn't live w/o) ArmR: CWG-B2-25 (there is a better light bazooka, but this one looks best) ArmL: KWG-FTL450 (great range and damage, I FAR prefer this to a blade) This AC is my basic "do-it-all" design. As I posted earlier I used this to beat the majority of the missions in Silent Line and some early arena opponents (I use a totally different AC for most of the arena). Some of the parts I listed aren't available initially but most of them are, and the ones that aren't were not too hard to get. WHY...: ...NO BLADE? First off I don't like the forward rush that accompanies blade use. Secondly I find the damage and heat inflicted by the flamer is quite respectable. Thridly, I am garbage with a blade. ...QUADS? Good stability, the ability to fire back weapons while on the move, and they look the best. ...NO ENERGY WEAPON? Quad legs use a lot of energy. So does boosting. So does my EO part. I don't have the extra weight capacity to equip a generator that could give me enough power for all these essential tasks plus an energy rifle. ...NO MISSLES? In most missions I find that missles miss more often than not. Either the enemy is too agile, or the missles hit the ceiling/wall/pillar. Plus they are too slow against weak enemies. An MT might get an extra shot or two off while the missle is in the air (not a problem with the Chain Gun or Bazooka). ...NO INSIDES? I find the added weapon to cycle through during heavy combat more of a hindrence than any advantage a floating mine or some such device will give me. However on some missions and against some enemies a missle decoy might find its way into my AC. How I use it: I don't do a lot of jumping or boosting. Slow and methodical is how I use this AC. The back Chain Gun is invaluable, and I don't know of a better anti-aircraft weapon in the game. It's accurate and does a lot of damage (and heat). In really long/enemy intensive missions I will use the bazooka initially, to save the CGs ammo. The flamethrower is for destroying non-enemies (boxes, doorlocks, etc), and for quickly dispatching MTs that sit in doorways waiting for you to open them. Use the EOs. I usually deploy them before entering rooms with either multiple enemies or one really nasty enemy (depending on my energy situation). After a few seconds/shots I usually turn them off to insure I have enrgy to boost. On at least one mission I remember the fact that they hover above you proved of great help. Think of a periscope that can kill. Against a particularly hard target (i.e. enemy AC or boss-type) I find that circle-strafing with the Chain Gun and the EO deployed (watching out not to boost too much. thereby limiting the use of my EOs) works wonders. Not much can put up with the Chain Guns and the EOs for long. To insure continous lock during these engagements, try to stay 200+ away from the target, and raise your view so the bottom of your sight lock is about level with the horizon (so as to minimize the chances of his jumping above your lock). I think that covers it... Let us know how it works for you.

How about some of us post some of our AC designs. Describe its role (mission, arena, both, or specialized) Describe how you use it, your tactics. Then some of the rest of us can give 'em a shot and we can post our findings here. Could be a good way for some of us to fine-tune our ACs, or get ideas on how to get more bang for the buck.

Yah, I saw that other site...quite nice. Uh, I continually update this image with new stuff...when I find it. The hard part is finding decent scematics of sci-fi mecha. I have the other destroids, but I figured one would to for a size chart. I would like to put up some gundam stuff, but have no side views. Regarding the comments about the Q-rau vs. VF-1 sizes: I agree there is a slight problem, which I think arose from my confusion as to whether or not to include the VF head laser and the Q-Rau antenna in the hieght. I think I didn't with the VF but did with the Q-Rau (which was probably a mistake), which has led to them looking similar in height. I will post just this one more image, which I use as my wallpaper from time to time:

Well, first off let me say I am no artist. I am not bad at building models, but drawing (either on paper or with a PC) is not one of my talents. That said, after seeing various sci-fi charts on the internet I decided to put one of my own together between book-reading sessions (damn grad-school). I put some Macross stuff along with various other things I was curious about in this image...I hope some of you out there find it a little interesting. I didn't create any of the images used here...just modified ones I already had on my computer.

Another thing, anyone know how they determine your AC rank (not mission rank, but the rank "title" they gine on the page with your AC's statistics)? It seems to be based solely on speed, AP, and damage/shot. A huge mech with nothing but a linear back cannon and a blade will get a GREAT rank...and in my hands it would have a hard time beating any mission, let alone an arena opponent. My mech always has a FAIR rank. But it has decent move/rising ability, not too shabby AP, great damage/time, and has staying power/ammo. Why must my designs (which are actually quite good and very practical) get shoddy rank while a bone-head mech gets better. It is meaningless in the game, but it's a pride thing. Long live quad-legs!

Well, I've been playing AC since "master of the arena," and I have no complaints yet. It doesn't control like halo, or robotech, or ZOE...but if I wanted control like that I would play those games. In a huge mech like in AC I appreciate the realism of slow movement and somewhat awkward control. The challenge for me is always to approach the situation intelligently so as to minimise those problems. If I wanted to build a light mech and run around guns blazing I guess it would lessen my fun, but as it is...like I said no complaints. I also thought the parts list was a bit sparce for Silent Line, but after you unlock the rest of the garage and start earning secret parts it isn't too bad. And to all the veteran ACers out there: why is it that most AC "aces" seem to use medium legs and energy rifles? the only advantage I have ever seen with energy rifles is that they don't cost you anything to rearm, but the tremendous cost in energy is a huge problem when I am circle-strafing/boosting around a nimble foe. And medium legs (without the super-cheap OP-I, which I never ever use) liekwise make no sence. The AC setup I use on virtually every mission (and most of the low-rankers in the arena): quad legs, chain gun, extra ammo, light bazooka, flamethrower. It always seems like the best of all worlds to me, and fits my playing style perfectly. Is it just that I have a unique playing style, or that I lake the skills to bring out the best of med. humanoid legs? Seriously. In closing, either you like AC or you don't. I do. I am suprised that some former fans are now renouncing their love of AC. I may be alone here, but I rahter like the lack of real "evolution" in the series. For some games evolution works (Gran Tourismo, Super Mario), for some it doesn't (Smash Bros, Mario Cart)

If the comics are canon - as some here suggest - how do you work out inconsistancies. In the Dark Horse "Aliens vs. Predator" series aliens hatch from huge snakes (issue #0), giant cow/rhino beasts (issue#1), and humans...and they all look the same. Personally, I found that a few of the early comics were interesting, but they seemed to get increasingly lame as time went on. I also refuse to accept Alien 3 or Ressurection. Alien, Aliens, AvP comic...that's really all I need.

The only Alien representations to include the human skull design are those based on Giger's work for the original movie. The slightly "redesigned" Aliens for the second movie did away with this, and the other movies (if you insist that they really do exist) have followed suit. The alien-skull in Predator 2 doesn't have a human-skull element because it is based on the aliens of the sequels. The reason? I imagine it is the same reason why the original alien's head is a replica of a penis, or that that the eggs are "supposed" to resemble vaginas...Giger is twisted. Twisted and nasty.