JB0

I thought he was referring to the VF-X PS1 game.

I've still got an original gray brick and a yellow GBColor. And screw the SP. I've never found it a comfortable device to use, and have stuck to the standard GBA. It is a bit strange after the previous gameboys, but like a new controller you get used to it. Trust me, the benefits FAR outweigh the disadvantages. Well, the layout is back to the vertical orientation of everything else. Which disappointed me as the GB series has always felt a tad crowded to me. The GBColor was too small to play comfortably. Why would I want something smaller yet? I've never had a problem with lighting. Exception: Circle of the Moon. Dammit Konami, test your games on a real system before you release them! My GBA has a rechargable battery. 2 NiMH AA batteries. And these can be replaced when they go bad. That LiIon will be deceased in a few years, and you won't be able to get replacements because LiIon degrades from manufacture, instead of just with use. I have. Uncomfortable to hold, no headphone jack, and the "big improvements" are non-issues for me. I want a non-SP GBA with the SP's d-pad. Wait a second... that's the DS.

I've still got an original gray brick and a yellow GBColor. And screw the SP. I've never found it a comfortable device to use, and have stuck to the standard GBA.

But with it as it is now, they at least have to acknowledge tha tit was the YF-19 carrying live ammo, and Guld had no interest in giving Isamu live ammo. Combined with the fact that ISamu INITIATED HIOSTILITIES, it makes for a very convincing case. If Guld's gun was the one loaded with live ammo, then the whole "Isamu tried to kill me" defense goes right out the window. Not really. It shows Guld would relish the opportunity, and that very likely the only thing stopping him was legal issues. He was grinning his head off at the idea of crushing Isamu's body into a bloody pulp under his VF's wreckage. Where is the logic in that? It's just more if the retarded fanboy fantasies you spew at every opportunity, most of which are completely unworkable.

Same here. So I nominate myself as G1 Megatron, for purposes of political incorrectness. WHEE! LOOK AT ME, I'M A TOY HANDGUN!

Last I'd heard Sony America wasn't letting Viewtiful Joe anything touch American soil on the PS2. Guess they changed their minds again. And has it escaped your attention that, SNK bundles excepted, EVERY ONE OF THE TITLES YOU LISTED has been launched with a bargain bin pricetag, or is set for one when it does come out? Remember, this is a complaint with SCEA, not Sony as a whole. The japanese and european game divisions are a lot better about letting good, but not so impressive graphically, games get released. I'm not making arguments up out of nowhere. I've seen the interviews. Top executives at SNK, producers at Capcom, and what originally drew my attention to the problem, a producer at Agetec. All of them have ranted about SCEA's licensing system. None so vehemently as SNK, since their games invariably look a tad dated. As a sidenote... SNK didn't WANT to do Metal Slug and KoF as bundles. It was just the only way they could get the license. BTW, according to both EB and Gamestop, SVC Chaos is an XBox exclusive in the States. Not that I consider them great news outlets, but they ARE in the business of selling games. If they can list Duke Nukem Forever(with a release date), surely they can list SVC Chaos PS2. Right? Some of the titles that come out in Japan, then get bounced for US releases just boggle the mind. And it can't POSSIBLY have anything to do with Sony denying licenses to perfectly good games while giving them to crap titles. The modern graphics whore didn't exist before the Playstation. Sure people LIKED nice looking games, but you would be hard-pressed to find someone that thought whether or not a game looked nice was MORE IMPORTANT than how well it played. This is what Sony America has done for the industry. BTW, you're ignoring something... 3rd party games are still licensed. They can deny licenses to games they don't like. The console makers have the ulitmate authority over what graces and disgraces their systems. If a lot of crap gets released, it's because the console manufacturers let it. And in my opinion, the PlayStation series has a long-standing problem with very large quantities of crap in it's library. Yes, I'm sure it has a tiny plastic shutter with all the structural integrity of a 3.5" floppy. Which isn't exactly impressive. BTW, better sound and image quality isn't really relevant to the media, unless you're using redbook audio on a CD-based game. If you don't believe me, compare a Super Nintendo or NeoGeo to a SegaCD. Rumors that I can almost guarantee are bullshit. Allowing you to save to the same media that your game is on is an accident waiting to happen(ROM carts use a seperate battery-backed RAM or FlashRAM chip for saving). And given the status with PS2 BIOS updates(or lack thereof), I'm betting Sony won't risk it on the games either. It'd be NICE if they imbedded a FlashRAM chip in the casing, but we know it's not going to happen. YAY! I thought it was supposed to be better with movies and (especially) MP3 playback, since most of the hardware was disabled for those. That's actually one of the things that disappoints me. I'm as likely to pop out Qix or Tetris as I am Circle of the Moon or Konami Arcade(the current busiest carts in my GBO and GBA libraries).

I've always viewed it as the Macross was desperate. A lot of their fighters werefrom the Prometheus, but they didn't get any pilots for them. And then there was attrition as the pilots they DID ahve started getting killed off. They needed every hand they could get, so they weren't really in a position to turn good pilots away because they didn't have perfect eyesight.

So you can trade speed for agility as needed. And the coolness. Everyone knows that your odds of dying are inversely proportiional to how cool a vehicle you're driving.

More fragile too. Which is my only gripe with sticking it in a portable system. You can't just stuff a few games in your pocket, because they'll get scratched, bent, oir otherwise damaged. Though I have loved the GBA library because it's kept a certain old-school attitude long after everythign else moved on. I LIKE sidescrollers. Which have become the exclusive domain of the GBA. Once the DS comes out, it'll probably become a completely dead genre

SegaCD? Saturn? 3D0? My gripe with Sony America is that they are refusing to license good games ebcause they don't match the graphical standard they want to project. And licensing total crap because it looks nice. They've gotten to the point where not even people in the industry can stand them(I've seen exasperated rants from employees of multiple game companies about their licensing system). And the market can only take so much crap before it collapses on itself. It's a bit late. But the display isn't high enough resolution to make any real use of the graphics hardware whatsoever. As for disks... they are FAR too sensitive to damage for them to be a viable portable media in my opinion. I'm dealing solely with the memory card equivalent aspect. My POINT is that you have to juggle memory sticks around to find your saves. As much as I dislike memory cards on home systems, it's a tolerable annoyance(and it's not like I wouldn't own a few a tthis point if my system DID have interal SRAM). But juggling them in a portable is just not feasable. I've always used books for that. Or a walkman. If I'm gonna watch a movie, it's not gonna be on a palm-sized screen. Especially not since you'll have to buy custom versions of any movies you want to watch on your PSP. That's really a pathetic use. While it' dbe less pathetic in a modern RPG-style Castlevania title, it's still a poor use of the hardware. There's just so much more that can be done with it. A basic example can be seen in the old Game&Watch game Oil Panic, where one screen showed indoor activity while the other showed outdoor activity, enabling the gamer to track 2 diffrent playfields at once. It's a simple use, but it's a style of game that hasn't been done since, because there just IS NO WAY to watch 2 playfields at once. I'm having more trouble seeing a real use for the touch-sensitive aspect. That seems more like it was thrown in because they had it available. I'm gonna give them the benefit of the doubt on that one, but I'll be surprised if mroe than about 3 titles make any signifigant use of it.

*barf* really you dont like the PSP? I like it. What dont you liek about it? Anyway the only decent game I saw at E3 was teh first person shooter Prime Hunters. Which utilizes teh stylus as mouselook for normal FPS PC games. Onyl issue is that at teh time buttons cannot be remapped, it was difficult to jump and the stylus kinda gets int eh way. oh yeah you have to tap the screen to fire Aside froma general distaste for Sony Computer Entertainment America's business practices, which I feel are completely ruining the video game industry and placing it in immient danger of a second crash? Crappy battery life. Estimated at 2 hours BY SONY. Needless to say, that means it's an upper limit. Overpowered graphics hardware on a screen that's too low resolution to make use of it. Disk-based media. Dumbest idea ever for a portable system. MemoryStick-based saves. Second-dumbest idea for a portable system. No known games. The last E3 featured it running movie trailers. I'm sorry, but I don't buy game consoles to watch movies. I buy them to PLAY GAMES. This is not a good situation for a system slated to launch early next year. The DS, aside from being a far better concieved system, is actualy bringing something new to the table. The PSP is just more of the same from a company that's more concerned with how games look than how they play.

*barf*

Advance games only, as far as anyone knows. And I think it's another damn proprietary LiIon pack. Definately only GBA and DS games. No older GameBoy games. Reason is, as far as I know, the GBA has a seperate processor for older Gameboy games, and Nintendo I guess just didn't feel like cramming three processors into the DS. Oh, and yeah... lithium ion battery. GBA hardware is physically diffrent in GBC mode. The cart holds down a switch that actually changes what's on and how it's wired. Skipping 8-bit compatibility saved them a z80 clone and a switch. The DS hardware uses the same chip as the GBA CPU for one of it's processors, so no extra parts there.

Advance games only, as far as anyone knows. And I think it's another damn proprietary LiIon pack.

I've found that it's not whether or not they'll do anything. It's whether or not people THINK they will. Scariest dog we ever had was elderly, arthritic, lost an eye to cancer, and had bad teeth. She scared people far worse then than she ever did in her prime, when she might have actually hurt them. People fear large dogs. A friendly large dog is better security than a mean small dog. ... Of course, right now we have the best combo. A friendly(and cowardly) large dog to draw their attention while the mean small dog draws their blood.

If it was, you may be the guy that changed his life. Scared him straight, so to speak. That would make you a DOUBLE hero!

"It was self-defense! He came right at me!" Who're the cops gonna believe, you or some punk kid that broke into your house and was stuffing your stuff into his pants? Of course, it sopunds like just getting caught was bad enough for him. He was probably anticipating a rightous ass-kicking, and figures the cops are the only thing that let him live to see tomorrow. Good work getting that punk off the streets.

YF-21 doesn't require FAST Packs to attach his gunpods, but in the scene I think they were missing. I didn't note that. It would be strange that YF-19 had paintballs and YF-21 had nothing it was allowed to shoot with, though. Well, it's been really long time since I watched Macross Plus. FV IT had it's energy weapons, turned down to a non-dangerous power level.

Bah. I've got a NON-SP GBA. Aside from a somewhat imprecise d-pad, it's the best incarnation ever of the GameBoy. Anyways, I want a DS. Badly. This just makes it moreso.

Right. That's how Guld managed to accuse the YF-19 team of attempted murder during the hearings afterwards? Because the YF-21's gun was loaded with live ammo? That's not how you play the innocent vicitm card, which is what he was doing. He said Isamu was trying to kill him, and that's where the live ammo came from. And that the computers had no record of it being loaded because the YF-19 team had a master hacker. It was a believable story, because the YF-19's gunpod had the live ammo, not the YF-21's. And what Keith said.

A mob of mecha is one of the easiest things to hit from distance, and when a mecha blows it shrapnels nearest things. That's why mecha can't be concentrated in a single point. Besides, usually they must guard several objectives at the same time. When you blow the weakest point you can advance between enemy lines which now must care from friendly fire. Now the Monster can't shoot anymore. My only response to this is that you have no concept of tactics at all. No military int eh world would deploy one unit, and have everything standing alone by itself. It's what's known as "really stupid." Radar is hardly the only sensor package available. Visible light and infrared are 2 really good ones. And what you say applies to ANY mech. Valkyries use targettings ensors as much as everyone else. No pistons or gears. Fluid pulse actuators, they work with magnetic fields influencing fluids. It doesn't really matter what the drive system is. And that's only spec'ed as the actual transformation mechanism driver. You're totally ignoring the point. Actually, it is master of speed among mecha. Documented. Also, it has the most powerful engines, saved the Monster. Fine. It's fast. As I've stated, the engine power is not directly relevant, since the variable design incorporates losses at several points, as well as overly complex actuators for the systems. Not spec'ed on VF-1. If we assume the VF-1 has it, we can assume destroids have it. Maybe not. I think that's why destroids are cheaper. They were already sturdy enough. Besides, they wouldn't have enough power for it. Not proven, or even implied. This is little more than rampant speculation to shore up a shoddy argument. In general does not mean always. And note that it does not say "but not destroids". ALSO NOTE that if a VF-0, running on JET ENGINES, has surplus power, than you can be damn sure that a destroid, with its fusion generators, has surplus power. These are not energy shields, otherwise you would have seen them. They are internal. I believe they exploit the same energy which runs through the joints. Not all energy emits gobs of visible light. And if it was internal, it wouldn't be very useful, as it couldn't protect the exterior. Which is a vital part of a vehicle. I have the impression that it's a "force field" projected immediatly on top of the external surfaces of the vehicle. Magnetic fields? I'd love to hear how that works. *rolls eyes* After seeing those scene I still think the PPB has punch on its own. Mecha hit with PPB seemed to fly farther than with a normal punch. That was due to the use of propulsion systems. Essentially the diffrence between a straight punch and a running tackle. Therefore there wouldn't be any load on the arm. I said that. In fact, I believe I stated that the REASON for the pinpoint barrier punch was to avoid damage to the hand. Since Destroids have 5 times less power, if they had energy converting amor it would be 5 times less powerful than that installed on VFs. Except that a Valk is several times less efficent than a destroid. The actual design style on sequels and prequels is taken from DYRL?. Micromissile pods are official. I acknowledge that they exist. I just don't see them as the standard loadout. So? The spartan was BUILT to do such tasks. Close combat is EXPLICITLY STATED in the mech description. Its hands are cited as armament, for Pete's sake! A valk can carry a gun. Big deal. The spartan's got one too, it's just internal. So it's clearly capable of lugging the mass around. It's the same difference between carrying a big weight on your back or in your hand. Your arm will get tired faster than your back. Tired is not a cocnept that applies to machines. IF it can lift it once, it can lift it over and over untill it runs out of gas. Perhaps not. I have doubts that the Spartan's larger hands can fit a VF-1's gunpod. If it could, or has it's own dedicated gun, I imagine it could make a go at it. Though its design goals probably don't leave it with the proper sensor/input packages for shooting down missiles. You'd probably want a mecha-scale shotgun to do it with a Spartan. True. Flexiblity combined with firepower is the Tomahawk's gig. It has arm-mounted firearm assemblies as I recall, and as far as agility goes, it's considered good enough for policing full-size zentradi in an urban setting(strikes me as overkill, but whatever...). That requires a fair degree of dexterity. Jet propulsion and transformation only require power while they are used, not after. The generation of energy is constant, it's a thermonuclear reactor after all (and it employs anti-matter!). Thermonuclear = fusion. You can't have fusion with antimatter. Now then... While it is true that those systems only actively draw power while in use, that's only half the story. The transformation mechanism requires serious structural changes in the rest of the system. Many of these changes will serve no purpose but to reduce the effeciency of the system. The jet propulsion system a heat exchanger to draw heat out of the thermonuclear reactor and transfer it to combustion chambers.. This doesn't just go away when the engines are shut down. You have to keep cooling the heat exchanger, or risk it being damaged. So you're constantly pulling heat out of hte reactor, and that heat will go to waste.if the engines aren't in use. On the up side, since the fusion reactors are in the legs along with the (primary) combustion chambers, you don't have a lot of fancy couplings and long pipe runs to reduce your heat exchanger's effeciency. So you aren't pulling out much more than the engines need. Those missiles in Spartan's and Tomahawk's shoulders seem short range micro-missiles. The AMMs should have more range and destructive power because they are bigger. And valkyries kill mroe stuff with their gunpods than anything else anyways. Errr... what's wrong with the 32mm machine gun? Seems pretty equivalent to me. And the 32mm machine gun. And the micromissiles. And the "laser gun". Maybe even the anti-aircraft lasers, depending on how heavy the target is. Neither package is a standard loadout. I think they are actually called "standard", somewhere. Maybe not under the word "equipment" but still standard. Yes. I grant the gunpod and 12 missiles as standard equipment. It's fired them before. And the launchers ARE integral. If you think 80/100 micro-missiles against 24 micro-missiles are nearly equal or only slightly better we have a problem. You forgot the guns the Valk doesn't have. The extra missiles of a GBP are compensating for less options. And the FAST packs... ALL they add is missiles. And the backpack and leg attachments are filled with fuel, so they are essentially tiny little bombs just waiting to take a hit and blow up. They may be considered expansion, but they are standard. That's why each Valkyrie type is shown with its own gunpod. Anyway, let's say you need long-range missiles. They won't fit into Spartan's shoulders, while VFs' hard points can hold them. This is versatility. You could give a Spartan a mech-scale bazooka. Though it's not in the mech's planned use. The Defender and Monster are your long-range weapons. So tehre was likely never long-range weaponry designed for the Spartan. Monster has liquid-cooled cannons, VB-6 has railguns. Mfft. I thought they were rail-cannons. My mistake. Note that a railgun can be liquid-cooled too. De-specializing adds weakness too, and that's what you don't get. Nothing is perfect for everything. The VF-1 fills the role of a modern day fighter plane. The destroids fill the role of your ground-based forces. Well, originally the question started because one was talking about behemoths fighting battle pods. I laughed at that. Ah. Since Valkyries are the main mecha, the one that is seen most of the time, it shouldn't be weird. According to screen time Destroids were worse, though. Not if you count the Daedalus Attack team. No one in their right mind would build a battle tank and a jet plane out of the same alloys. Planes, which is clearly what the VF-1 is first and foremost, are made of light materials. Not really armor at all, just a skin to keep everything inside and keep the plane aerodynamic.. And then you do a fast turn and you start thinking you need a stiffer plane. The Blackbird couldn't be so fast if it weren't made entirely of titanium. True, but not for the reason you think. The Blackbirds weren't very agile vehicles. Solid titanium was just the only thing that would hold up to the thermal stresses while still being light enough to fly. And even then it needed the black paint on the leading edges. But had they started doing much more than straight-line runs at Mach 3, the wings would've sheared right off. Tanks are allowed to carry more armor than planes, but mostly they are made of cheeper steel. They simply have thicker armor. BAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Tank armor is actually layers of several diffrent materials. Reason being that if they stick to one kind, people build projectiles intended to pierce that one kind. But layering diffrent materials lets them mess multiple types of projectiles up. And the front face of the Abrams is one of the most heavily-armored surfaces on any vehicle in the world. Steel isn't even an element. It's an alloy. And you're confusing strength/weight ratio with overall strength. A chunk of steel is stronger than an equivalently-sized chunk of titanium. It's also a lot heavier, which means more to a plane than to a ground vehicle. Your transformation nonsense. A valkyrie needs more powerful engines because it has to fly, but the engines remain powerful even during ground combat. Sad fact of physics. Increased complexity = decreased efficiency. A Valk in battroid has a far more complex actuation system than a destroid. While on Mars it was deployed for ground combat but in all the series I don't recall it hitting a Regult ever. Besides, what else could it do in space? Aircrafts are too fast for him. It wasn't intended for space combat to begin with. They were making the best of a bad situation. If you recall, the Macross was stranded without much of it's weapons(which were mounted on the ARMD 1 and 2) and mech compliment(ALSO in the ARMD 1 and 2).FAST packs were created for a similar purpose. The VF-1 sucked for space combat, but it was what most of the Macross's flyable mechs were(undoubtedly owing to the assimilation of the Prometheus). It lacked a lot of the maneuvering jets it needed, as well as adequate firepower for running battles with the Zentradi. Which DOESN'T directly translate to strength. Horse power is measured on how much weight someone can lift up a meter in a second. Tell me what else strength could be. You're ignoring all the intermediaries between teh engine and the arms and legs. Nothing in a Valk is direct-drive. Therefore, power output doesn't directly translate to strength. While Hikaru was defeated, the VF-1 itself showed it was able to easily throw Britai, which by the way is not the average Zentradi (he survived an explosion and open space). And I'd expect a 6-foot robot to be able to throw Arnold. I would NOT expect Arnold to be able to throw it around just as easily, then rip it apart by hand. Enhanced or not, Britai was still just flesh and bone(aside from his forehead). The fact that he COULD beat up a Valk does not bode well for mecha melee. (I THINK I recall a Glaug giving a VF the smackdown with it's gunarms once, but I'm not sure) Yes. The jet kick, for example(which should be useless against mechs). That was a cool move. Which means what exactly? That's just a bunch of gibberish. It's an energy shield. Which energy? Charged particles or atomic interations? I have learned magnetism, gravity and inertia are the same force. I still have the feeling PPB repels thing that can be repelled, and trash the others. Errr... Under physics as it curently stands, magnetism, gravity, and inertia are DIFFRENT things. There is no working unified field theory. And I see the PPB as more like a wall than anything else. Though we DO know that it "bounces" a bit. They've showed several times that when a barrier disk is shot, it dissipates for a moment, then reforms. True, but in SDF Macross a Spartan punched a Nousjadel-Ger, and then the Nousjadel-Ger got up undamaged and shot the Spartan. Anyway, even the Spartan is supposed to be damaged if it punches anything. Look at how thin the arm is between shoulder and elbow. That point would be stressed. Yes. But I was dealing primarily with the weakest link. That's the hand, due to the large # of small actuators. Joints give way first, as a general rule. And smaller joints bust easier. Thereby losing a fair bit of leverage. If you are a mecha it doesnt' matter. Besides, I think it is not proven a Spartan can kick Leverage DOES matter. It ALWAYS matters. The leg is a lever. When you swing it forward, the part right at the hip will hit with almost no force. The further down you go, the more power you have in your kick. This is basic physics. And I would be very surprised if a Spartan can't kick, given it was explicitly designed for melee combat. Throws are more defensive in my book. And what does a NosGer have to do with ANYTHING? Oh, wait, let me guess... it proves destroids are underpowered because they don't stay magically glued to the ground! The Nousjadel Ger has an engine more powerful than that of a Spartan. Actually, I think it's more powerful even than the one of a VF, even if actual power output is not stated (2.4 GGV = 2.4 GW class). The easiness of smashing the Spartan showed by the Nousjadel-Ger was awesome. And what in the HELL does engine power have to do with how easy you are to throw? Mass and momenteum is all that matters. And it's really to be expected that zentradi equipment has more power than human equipment. Aside from the larger size, it's a much more advanced design. Dunno if the NosGer is true powered armor, or a hybrid QRau-style design. I'm betting hybrid, but... Yes. So can punching it, kicking it, shooting it, or anything else that imparts a sudden change in velocity. Kawamori didn't mention Destroids. He didn't specify the VF-1 either. And not mentioning them doesn't mean they don't have it. It just means "no one cares about destroids, so I'm not talking about them." Same reason there's no specs for most of the ships, and no detailed specs for anything but the VFs that have been animated. The destroids have a pleasnalty large amount of detail, but nowhere NEAR what the VFs get. I would bet you're insane.Particularly with the propulsion pack in the back, the missile compartment in the chest, and the naked upper arms. Three points where the Spartan surely is no better, everything else is added armor to a humanoid tank. The Spartan's chest and back are pretty solid. And it's upper arms, while scrawny, are made of the higher-grade armor used in destroids. Not lightweight aircraft alloys. And I wash my hands of this now. I'm bored, and we're clearly not going to get anywhere. Edit: THERE! Working now.

Figures. Ah well, at least it doesn't just totally crash any time there's mroe than one set of quote tags... Nope. Someone didn't close a tag. Look for this line: Thanks. I DID go over it several times. Missed that little slash.

Figures. Ah well, at least it doesn't just totally crash any time there's mroe than one set of quote tags...

Cuz someone forgot to close a tag...Use "Preview post " if you're gonna make a long reply. But, but... I already ran through it. The tags all match.

http://www.anime.net/macross/mecha/united_.../vf1/index.html DESIGN FEATURES: four times the mobility of the Destroid Spartan It's actually "mobility" more than "agility". It makes more sense. I can't find anymore the reference about the agility of the Tomahawk. Maybe it was changed and become unofficial. The Compendium has erased all records of the SV-52, too. Mobility and agility aren't synonomous. That could just mean it can be deployed faster owing to it's fighter mode. Yeah, well they were never intended to be deployed alone. They're always gonna have support when used properly. Which means that if enemy is faster than supports it would easily crush them. I think that's how low tech armies win battles today. And if they can overrun the pack of spartans, tomhawks, phalanxes, conventional vehicles and good ol-fashioned infantry around that Monster, they EARNED the kill. What mechanisms? Fluid pulse actuators inefficient? http://www.ecu.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/new/kick.htm I don't see what that link has to do with anything. What I'm saying is that a Valkyrie's systems aren't optimised because the transformation system adds a lot of loss into the equation. There's tons of couplings, gears, pistons, etc. that don't need to be there in any given mode. The Valk hardware is jack of all trades, master of none. You forget energy converting armor, which triples VF-1's armor up to the tip of fingers. Not spec'ed on VF-1. If we assume the VF-1 has it, we can assume destroids have it. FURTHERMORE, energy shields won't do jack squat for joint strength. It STILL has to be able to support whatever forces it's exerting. Which means joints will still fail, gears will still strip, lines will still burst, etc. when it exceeds the design limits of it's internal structure. Energy shields are only good for actual armor. Even something like Mac+'s pinpoint barrier punch. The barrier floats out ahead of the hand, which protects it from shock. The force of the punch is still transferred somewhere according to the 3rd law of motion. It's just going to the shield disk, which absorbs the shock before the hand ever hits anything. But as far as I know, a pin-point barrier is only good for momentary force, not continuous. And really, force should probably be exerted back to the barrier generator, which is responsible for the creation and location of the barrier disk. As I stated, if we assume the VF-1 has energy armor, we assume the destroids have it. I pulled my missile loadouts from Macross Compendium. I guessed at standard loadout based on what I saw planes carrying most often in SDF Macross(which was NEVER micromissile pods). So? The spartan was BUILT to do such tasks. Close combat is EXPLICITLY STATED in the mech description. Its hands are cited as armament, for Pete's sake! A valk can carry a gun. Big deal. The spartan's got one too, it's just internal. So it's clearly capable of lugging the mass around. Pferde Staerken (PS) means "horse power" in German (measures differ though, like meters and feet). Even watts could express horse power. So that's what that means.Okay... I still maintain that most of that is eaten up in all the additional couplings needed for the transformation mechanism, as well as the jet propulsion. And I would consider foolish send my men without weapons, just to see what they could do. What you say is irrelevant. My original statement was a naked Valk was less well-armed than a naked destroid. Which is still true. But EVEN WITH A COMPLETE STANDARD LOADOUT the VF-1 is less well-armed than most destroids. Correction: robots can't be properly "naked". You could say an armed Destroid is more heavily armed than an unarmed Valkyrie. Can you see what would be the point of it? I thoguht "naked" would be understood to mean "without external attachments". Or it could just mean "without optional packages that are not standard equipment". FAST packs and GBPs are the only way to get a VF-1 armed equal to or better than a destroid. The GBP is, as near as I can tell, the only way to get it equivalent armor. A Valk with the GBP package is essentially a Spartan with less guns and more missiles. May I ask what versatility is lost by having weapons built-in instead of by requiring optional, non-standard expansion packages to add them? Didn't stop anyone from building the monster. It did stop people from building a monster with 178 cm railguns, like the ones SDF-1 has, "just because someone else has it". The monster's guns are still signifigantly longer than it's body, which you stated as the reason a VF-1 would never carry a Monster's railgun. The Monster is essentially a giant shock absorber for the guns. A lightweight vehcile like the Valk would be slung around like a rag doll from recoil. The monster is a full 20 times more massive, and I'd bet the crew STILL feels the kick. Your mass limits what you can field, due to the 3rd law of motion. If you can't absorb the recoil, you can't shoot the gun. Now, don't get me wrong on this: the Monster deserved to be called behemoth for its sheer size, but it is clearly not made for close combat, and the fire rate and turning speed negate any hope against fast moving targets, therefore a Monster wouldn't be useful to fight battle pods. Actually, I recall seeing a Regult destroying a Monster. What's your point? I've already said the Monster is an artillery piece, not a close-combat mech. You're just restating what I already stated. And I recall seing Regults destroy a LOT of Valks. Destroids are cheaper for several reasons, one of that is that the engines are underpowered. Actually, maybe the armor of the VF-1 costs more than that of a Destroid. It could be wrong assume they are made of the same alloys. No one in their right mind would build a battle tank and a jet plane out of the same alloys. Planes, which is clearly what the VF-1 is first and foremost, are made of light materials. Not really armor at all, just a skin to keep everything inside and keep the plane aerodynamic.. Tanks, which is more like the role destroids fill, are built with much heavier, but much stronger, armor. And Destroid engines aren't underpowered. They have no need to go through elaborate transformation mechanisms, so they don't HAVE to be as powerful. Hmm? You give pilots the mech they trained with. If someone was trained for heavy artillery work, they drive a Monster. If they were trained for high-speed dogfights in transformable vehicles, they get Valks. If they were trained for close-in ground combat, they get a Spartan. And best is a situation-specific term. If you need the big guns, your best mech is a Monster. If you need supersonic speed, it's a Valkyrie. You don't drive an Abrams into a situation where you need a Jeep any more than you fly a Raptor into a situation where you need an Abrams. The monster is NOT an anti-ship mech! Agan, document said claim. 17,680 PS translates into about 13 MW (or about 17,438 HP/BHP/SHP). Which DOESN'T directly translate to strength. Valkyries have been proven they can. Only real melee action I ever saw was when they were on Britai's ship. And he beat Hikaru senseless. It's never been shown that a Valk can adequately hold it's own in melee combat. Animation proves you wrong. http://home.primus.ca/~trevor.worthy/macross/mac11.jpg Also, the PPB is not simply a shield. It hurts. I think it is made of superdimensional energy confined in a super magnetic field. Which means what exactly? That's just a bunch of gibberish. It's an energy shield. And that punch, assuming he landed it with the fist, did a LOT of damage to the hand mechanism. And you will note that it failed to pierce said Regult's armor. As near as I can tell, that's still a fully functional mech. Animations says mecha kick with shins, not with feet (there are several examples of this), Thereby losing a fair bit of leverage. Throws are more defensive in my book. And what does a NosGer have to do with ANYTHING? Oh, wait, let me guess... it proves destroids are underpowered because they don't stay magically glued to the ground! Correction: a Valkyrie in Battroid has the same armor of a tank, due to energy converting armor. It is perfectly comparable to a Destroid. Again, a VF-1 is not spec'ed as having energy armor, and if we start putting energy armor on it, we may as well put it on destroids too. I would bet a VF-1 with GBP-1S has more armor than a Spartan. I would bet you're insane.Particularly with the propulsion pack in the back, the missile compartment in the chest, and the naked upper arms. ... Okay, why aren't these quote tags working right?