JB0

I very seriously doubt it will be a GBA Mk. 3. The things that can me made for under a hundred dollars go well beyond the GBA's capabilities. I'd expect something similar to China's iQue, which was a portable N64, except in the portable system style isntead of the pad-famiclone style. ... Well, I would if it weren't for the fact that Nintendo likes backwards-compatibility on the Gameboy. I jsut hope it's not another half-assed kludge like the last 2 hardware upgrades(GameBoy Color, GameBoy Advance. The SP is the same hardware in a new box).

The spandex suits ALWAYS made sense. ... But only on the girls. If only that were true - you know how it goes, usually the ones wearing it have no business wearing it... Ah, but this is animation. There's never a girl that's not fit for it.

The spandex suits ALWAYS made sense. ... But only on the girls.

I'd use a vector from the starting point, personally. Only need one set of co-ordinates that way.

And you took it almost a decade ago. I didn't think SEED was even out in '95.

Ummm.... Voltron and a VF-1 tag-teaming a few Zentradi? </recovery?>

And at what speed, cause the mech have to move faster than the turret tracking it and the mach 5 projectile fired at it? I was just saying they're more maneuverable, hypothetically. And I have ALREADY acknowledged that I briefly forgot about tank turrets. We're talking in circles here.

Presumably budget concerns. Macross Plus was a high-budget production(for Macross). They had the time and money to pull out all the stops, and threw every last spiffy trick in there. Macross 7 was a lower budget production. And on a tighter schedule, too. And the original SDF Macross was a notoriously cheap show, if I recall. IMO = in my opinion. IMHO = in my humble opinion. IMNSHO = in my not-so-humble opinion.

You're a good man.

Like a human sidestepping or by pivoting the torso to face one way and the legs another? Like a human sidestepping. Kinda of irrelevent you have to take into account the turret, which will keep track of the mech regardless of direction it is moving in. The mech's still more maneuverable. ... And yes, I did forget about rotating turrets when I initially said that.

Your usage of afront raped my childhood.

Again what with the assumption only the mech would be moving during the engagement? No. Not really. Conventional vehicles can go forwards/backwards. They arc this line in a turn. They CANNOT move sideways. A mech has forward, back, left, and right. And all combinations thereof. It has full 2D motion. Hence a mech is more maneuverable than a tank.

Against older un-upgraded generation tank that would be correct, But with the advent of top-attack weapons, modern tanks been upgraded to remove the vulnerabiliity against those weapons. Last I heard tanks were still less-heavily armored on top than on the front face. Prey tell how is a giant biped robot more manueverable then a tank or any other armor vehicle? Sidestep = 2 axes of motion VS 1 axis of motion.

It's not known that zentradi used any form of defensive overtechnology. And Valks VS destroids? Only instance I can think of is MacPlus, which was an exotic weapon to start with. But I intend to leap to the defense of the oft-slandered destroid here anyways. On the contrary, not only must Zentradi mecha use some form of defensive technology (what sane military would build top-tier hardware with no more protection than your average Jeep), but a Zentradi mecha was shown partially resisting fire from a GU-11 gunpod (Max vs Milia). Mmm, forgot that sequence. I always figured Max just missed the important bits. As for it being insane to not use defensive tech... it assumes they have it. Remember, our barrier system completely mystified them. They were SURE the omnidirectional barrier was some sort of weapon. While we're on the subject... The zentradi reguld platoons seem to operate on the principle of overwhelming numbers. I'm not entirely sure it's top-tier equipment. Let's keep the irrelevant parts to a minimum please. I'm not talking barriers, I'm talking armor and have not deviated. The point stands. SWAG isn't in the same category? The Cheyenne is also based on a diffrent design than the Phalanx, Tomahawk, and Defender, which all share a common leg/body assembly. And it DOES look far more lightly armored, based on the animation. It's a commom theme. But these 2 statements: "Destroids have been shown as no match for a Valkyrie (even the mighty Monster), " And "Comparing conventional mecha of the Macross era, the Destroids have been shown as no match for a Valkyrie (even the mighty Monster), so as it stands the Valkyrie sits comfortably on top of the military hardware food chain in the Macross universe." DO imply the valk is massively superior. I didn't say that. What I DID say is that they do damage diffrent ways, and that armor is built to resist the commonly-used weapon. A society that used nothing but lasers would have mirrored armor that, while incredibly effective against lasers, would be next to worthless against a bullet. Our own real-world bllet-proof vests do quite respectably against bullets. But can be easily penetrated by an icepick(fortunately for the wearer, they usually never get that close). Yes. But it's roughly like saying that "An Abrams with nukes can beat a A-10". It's not a point, because it is completely irrelevant. I'm not questioning the physics. Just the relevance. In PRACTICE the 105mm cannon will always fire a larger projectile. And a faster one too. It's like me saying "Yeah, a marshmellow travelling at .7c could rip a hole through a battleship, so a kid with a bowl of Lucky Charms can beat up the US navy." It's hypothetically true, but the kid isn't going to pur his breakfast into a railgun, is he? Only stated for the VF-0, which is limited in power. If they have more armor at the beginning, then they end with more armor. And you can tell JUST BY LOOKING that most destroids are more heavily-armored than most VFs. 1+1<2+1. I'm assuming that being able to survive a nuclear blast at close range means "can take forces that would destroy any other mech around." I acknowledge that as it is focused, it requires less power to deal the same damage. I propose that it is self-powered, and hypothesize that it uses a supercapacitor for said power. That would enable a very high energy density in a very small weapon, but leave you with a limited-fire device. I'm debating that it "sits comfortably on top of the military hardware food chain in the Macross universe." And I propose to augment the woefully inadequate official specs with reasonable assumptions. It IS a reasonable assumption that SWAG armor was incorporated into everything possible after it was invented. And it IS a reasonable assumption to assume that a VF with more power may have SWAG engaged in more modes. I apply basic physics to deduce that the VF-0 has more power available in battroid mdoe than GERWALK or fighter because the jet engine isn't forced to propel the mech forward, so more of the energy can be harnessed to generate electricity. Hence why SWAG is only available in that mode. The other modes don't have enough surplus energy. The Cheyenne being lightly armored is a reasonable assumption. It is shown moving much faster than other destroids, which implies that it was intended to be faster. Which implies a sacrifice in mass. Or right, depending on where you look. The facts being that a Cheyenne is blown up by an SV-51 gun, but the more modern Spartan isn't damaged signifigantly by a VF-1 gun of similar caliber? That seems to support my supposition that the Cheyenne is more lightly-armored than other destroids. How much do we see of the base? One shot of the hanger? Much like Hikaru's barracks in the original series, that was protected by a battroid. Of course, destroids were used for other purposes in the original series. Like protecting other bases, or the ship itself. And the Macross itself? It's had anti-aircraft guns added to it. No need for it to have destroids Furthermore, with Sharon Apple having brainwashed the city and taken over the computer network there's no one to pilot the destroids, and anyone that could is locked out. I wouldn't trust her brainwashed zombies to pilot a mech. They had enough trouble aiming rifles. We'll cut Yang some slack. Bad angle, not a military officer. But those troops that were sent to kill Myung have no excuse. As I said, the vast majority of the show took place in space. Having a proper fleet for defense, there is no need to march destroids out onto the surface of the ship. The planetary fight segments pay very little attention to anything where a destroid could be. They keep Basara front+center. And he doesn't fly very low, or near to home, which is where anti-aircraft mechs would be marched out(only ones we'd be likely to see, as the protodeviln were only shown using VFs in the animation). Millia didn't say the Monster was too antiquated to help defend the city when it was dragged out. Just that it was too big to be firing inside the city. And there ARE a lot of destroids in the GameBoy Color Mac7 game. Which is recent enough that Kawamori's been heavily involved in the games, to the extent that original game stories are now considered canon extensions of the universe. If destroids weren't still in use, I would assume he'd've vetoed that feature. They weren't seen very much in the original show either, except for those 3 that got blown up over and over and over on the SDF's skin.

Its just obvious that there are a ton of spineless members who use em. I mean I get detailed PMs and emails from handles that just signed up earlier that day. You'd be surprised how many people will fire off nasty-grams immediatly after registering. I've been on the receiving end before, though admittedly not here. On one board I'm at, the viewing of all off-topic sections was disabled for non-members because people kept signing up just to verbally abuse people in the news and politics section(which is where most of the ... shall we say, abrasive... posts wind up).

I would disagree, but I hope I've provided enough evidence in my previous post to give you some food for thought. I've always felt the advantage of the Destroid over the Valkyrie lies in weapons diversity, far greater ammunition payload, and economy of design. Even in the original SDFM, the Destroids were far more numerous than the Valkyries. Although it seems that the UN Spacy abandoned destroids years later (probably because construction of Valkyries were perfected and engineering methods were refined), they do have a place as a more dedicated ground/surface unit. I've mentioned the SV-51 against destroids above and I agree. There may be some "unknowns" that would describe why the Cheyenne was easily toppled by the SV-51, but that's too much speculation. I prefer to work from as many knowns and examples in the actual animes as possible...and they don't prove favourable for the destroids. Working solely from animation is an uncomfortable standpoint, as the animation has ALWAYS focused on VFs. And hero VFs, no less. We barely ever see cannon fodders, unless they're exploding. We don't really KNOW that UN Spacy has abandoned destroids. We've not seen a situation where they're really appropriate since SDF Macross. Mac7 is mostly space battle, with properly-equipped ships(the big diffrence between SDF and 7 is that clause there). Mac+ is a test flight program. It's like expecting to see the Abrams figure prominently in a movie about the F-22 development. MacZero's only really practical destroid moments were used by the Cheyenne(new mech, poor performance) and Monster(which performed as devastatingly well as the fans expected it to). The manufacturing techniques that ALLEGEDLY make Valks better could all be applied with equal effectiveness to next-gen destroids.

It's not known that zentradi used any form of defensive overtechnology. And Valks VS destroids? Only instance I can think of is MacPlus, which was an exotic weapon to start with. But I intend to leap to the defense of the oft-slandered destroid here anyways. On the contrary, not only must Zentradi mecha use some form of defensive technology (what sane military would build top-tier hardware with no more protection than your average Jeep), but a Zentradi mecha was shown partially resisting fire from a GU-11 gunpod (Max vs Milia). Mmm, forgot that sequence. I always figured Max just missed the important bits. As for it being insane to not use defensive tech... it assumes they have it. Remember, our barrier system completely mystified them. They were SURE the omnidirectional barrier was some sort of weapon. While we're on the subject... The zentradi reguld platoons seem to operate on the principle of overwhelming numbers. I'm not entirely sure it's top-tier equipment. The Cheyenne is an oddity. It has a massively diffrent design style than the SDF destroids do. We've discussed this one already. To recap: SDF destroids are built slower and bulkier. The Cheyenne is believed to have sacrified much of the armor of the HWR series for greater speed(heck, it has WHEELS). And Valks. Which is what I was saying to start with. The Valk isn't massively superior to the destroid. Armor and weapons tech evolve alongside each other. Basically, the zentradi mecha were built to resist beams. Not metal slugs flying at them. I would bet the zentradi armor would've worked a lot better against beam weaponry, because that's what they and (presumably) the supervision army use nearly exclusively. Zentradi missiles are far less common, and slug weapons are non-existent as near as I can tell. Front face of an Abrams is essentially, if I recall. Exotic = non-standard and uncommon in this case. I would file a GBP as exotic, too. The animation presents the appearance of a beam weapon to me. It's clearly not standard equipment, as Isamu isn't lugging it around the whole show, and it makes no future appearances. The closest relative I am aware of is Gamlin's Mac7 gunpod beam adapter, which is used as a single-shot device. I thought I just said that. Heck, I put the numbers up earlier. Usually in space. The rules of modern combat fly out the window for space combat. No wind resistance, no gravity(or at least vastly diffrent gravity). I cited that. SWAG is very likely the REASON valks can be crashed through bridges, rammed into the ground, etc. So it DOES need to be brought into the equation. And I assumed destroids have similar defensive tech to Valkyries. Again, you missed that I assumed destroids have similar defensive tech to Valkyries. And the Monster is designed to take close-range nuke blasts. There's no evidence a Valk can take anything near that sort of damage. And barring reaction missiles or what appear to be single-shot beam weapons, both exotic loadouts(and the beam adapter is only available on much later-gen VFs), a Valk can't DISH OUT that kind of damage, either. Stormtroopers ... I assume have poorly-calibrated weapons. Empire apparently doesn't want to spend the cash for accuracy when they can use superior numbers.

Heh, you're gonna want those 20 some odd hours of your life back if you find out that Macross 7 sucks goat testicles. Or he might be one of the people that likes it.

Oooh, I hadn't even thought of overtech thermocouples... Overtech might even provide a device that uses just heat, instead of diffrence between heat and cold. That answers the question. Pretty much how I'd guessed they worked too. Except I figured electricity was on a diffrent loop. Batteries/supercapacitors is a good idea. And the dual-source electrical system ... wish I'd thought of it earlier. They use .... thermonuclear diesel engines! Yes, I'm aware of the absurdity of that statement.

And it's only 100-something people out of a 2000+ member population. you know i always wonder how many are accualy active and not a multi-account. with 2600 members+ registered we should have atleast 300 members on at any time. You need to keep in mind all of the double accounts that the pussies have. They like to hide behind another name and send me nasty PMs, then block me from responding. What's with your obsession with multiple accounts?

If the model is just theory, I'm of the opinion that seperate electrical and propulsion systems makes more sense. Spinning turbines IS, however, the traditional way to get electrical power from nuclear reactors. If by model you mean the cutaway diagram I've seen posted a few times, you COULD have a more-or-less transparent electrical generator. Thermocouples in the reactor vessel skin would do it. Though not as efficient as other mechanisms, it's one of the simpler, and more reliable, arrangements. In the real world, NASA uses thermocouples around a lump of radioactive material to power their probes if solar power isn't an option, and they last for decades untill neutron bombardment damages them too far to be useful. If the valk burns a clean fusion formula(like the He-3 reaction used in Gundam), there's no neutron radiation to worry about, and the reactor and electrical system should last essentially forever. Another, bigger, problem... constant use of reaction mass in space(remember, VF-1 is a space fighter too, even if it's not a particularly great one). You have to have something to stick in your engine. Otherwise, nothing expands with heat, the turbine doesn't spin, and nothing happens. In an atmosphere, that something is air. In a vacuum, that something is your onboard reaction mass. Constantly spraying reaction mass out the engines is going to drastically cut your practical flight time, as well as making your valk hard to control(constant thrust = constant acceleration in space). And when you run out of reaction mass, the whole valk will shut down because you can't spin the turbine anymore. Comm systems, weapons, running lights, life support, everything. And yes, I DO realize this is how the show animates things. Virtually every space show ever made uses the constant thrust = constant speed fallacy, at least for visuals. It's what people expect to see. If the engines aren't firing, it looks like they're off, and we can't have our fighter powered down in mid-dogfight. Some take it a step farther, and show vessels coasting to a stop when the engines die. These shows exist to be mocked. I don't consider the animation of constant engine thrust to be representative of the actual engine operation any more than I consider the sounds of gunfire and explosions to imply that space isn't a vacuum in the Macross universe. It's an artistic liberty taken to make the show more appealing to the average viewer(who doesn't think too hard about the physics involved).

I'll take the V, take the o, and add a -ltron. ... Oh, come on. You KNOW you want a mech girl combiner.

I was thinking more a Tomahawk or Spartan. Point taken, though.

I'd just like to second what everyone else has said. An invaluable resource for idiotic fanboys arguing which mech would win in a fight(me, sadly), as well as the more rational people that just want some of the details that aren't animated.