Macross Political Climate

[RichterX]

I still wonder, why is it called Space War 1? isn't the use of the numeral indicative that there was a Space War 2? Like World War I wasn't called that until after World War II, if so during what type period was the Space War 2 and who fought in it?

[JB0]

I still wonder, why is it called Space War 1? isn't the use of the numeral indicative that there was a Space War 2? Like World War I wasn't called that until after World War II, if so during what type period was the Space War 2 and who fought in it?

409741[/snapback]

I assume just pessimism.

Space War 2 COULD be the Protodeviln war, though...

[sketchley]

Well that's now that's cast into question with the release of Mac Zero and SK's revision of the timeline.  Now if BW decided to re-do SDF Macross to have a solely owned version of the story, anything would be possible then.

The timeline mentions that the UN wars were over by 2007, yet the AUN had 38 units built and at Mayan Island (2008) there only appears to be 1 Squadron (8 fighters max) in that incident.  It appears a bit of a discrepancy may exist. If the war was over, why build 4 squadrons of SV-51s?

I'd expect that the story of the Unification War is not entirely over, maybe it's simply resting for the moment.

409699[/snapback]

I disagree that it is cast into question. The events of Macross Zero happen AFTER the 'defeat' of the Anti-UN, and the end of the UN Wars. The VF (both VF-0 and VF-1) finished development and begun production after the end of the UN War.

Fokker's flashback occurs during the UN War.

Thus, during the UN War, there is no contradiction that he flew the F-203 Dragon II. The only thing that is really contradicted, is Fokker's comment in one of the first episodes (of the TV series) where he says something along the lines of being two years since his last time in combat.

Keep in mind also that losing a war doesn't mean losing ones territory, nor the right to continue building weapons to protect one's territory/beliefs. There are too many examples in history of nation-states that went to war, lost, and later continued building an arsenal of war to use again in another war.

The Anti-UN lost the war, that's all we know for certain.

Speculating: the Anti-UN, in the ceasefire or peace treaty that concluded the war, may have stated that the UN can protect the rest of the world, and the Anti-UN will protect its own member territories. Thus a need for the development and manufacture of the SV-51 (the same role as the VF-1.) That, or the Anti-UN capitualted strategically, to give them time to rebuild, retrain, and wait until a better time to continue the war - so that they would come out as the winners.

[sketchley]

IMHO, SWI (Space War 1) is simply much easier to say than things like "Terrain-Zentraedi War of the Sol System."

Yes, it does imply that there was more than 1... maybe it's another untold story of the years between 2012 and 2045?

[GutsAndCasca]

They need to get on the ball and start coming out with massive amounts of macross series/movies. They have so much material to work with...

[briscojr84]

IMHO, SWI (Space War 1) is simply much easier to say than things like "Terrain-Zentraedi War of the Sol System."

Yes, it does imply that there was more than 1... maybe it's another untold story of the years between 2012 and 2045?

409776[/snapback]

Could there have possibly been large scale skirmishes between SDF and MPlus that just haven't been fleshed out yet in the actual timeline that could be considered SW2 to whatever.

[Zinjo]

Who ever said it was all of Israel or all of Sukhoi Industries? You are assuming that the Macross world follows the current world. It doesn't. We're all still waiting for that big ship to fall out of the sky for the past 8 years, the sky has been clear of large pieces of metal with big guns on them.

409719[/snapback]

You've seen how big Israel is right?

I disagree that it is cast into question.

I expected someone would...

The events of Macross Zero happen AFTER the 'defeat' of the Anti-UN, and the end of the UN Wars.  The VF (both VF-0 and VF-1) finished development and begun production after the end of the UN War.

Then how is it, that a defeated foe is allowed to build state of the art fighters using stolen technology, when such a thing hasn't been allowed to happen since WW1? That doesn't make sense to allow an agressive opponent the means to re-build their arms after a "victory"

Part of it may come down to what constitutes the "UN Wars"? Are they battles between the AUN and the UNG or are they the global national wars that took place after the crash of the ASS-1? SK could easily split the hair here and say that the "AUN War" was separate from the UN Wars. Since the timeline is fairly specific what the UN Wars were.

The UN War could have been the attempt to annex countries into one government, but all that resulted was a splintered world with territories where nations used to stand, some under the umbrella of the UNG and others as autonomous regions.

Fokker's flashback occurs during the UN War.

Thus, during the UN War, there is no contradiction that he flew the F-203 Dragon II.  The only thing that is really contradicted, is Fokker's comment in one of the first episodes (of the TV series) where he says something along the lines of being two years since his last time in combat.

I never said Roy didn't fly the Dragon, but you made my point in reference to how the changed timeline has created some contradictions.

Keep in mind also that losing a war doesn't mean losing ones territory, nor the right to continue building weapons to protect one's territory/beliefs.  There are too many examples in history of nation-states that went to war, lost, and later continued building an arsenal of war to use again in another war.

Prior to WW2, yes that did happen. Particularly with Germany.

Since then any victor in a war tends to either disarm or disband the losing army. I find it hard to believe such a thing would not happen again.

If indeed the UN Wars are about the battles between the AUN and the UNG, then I would reiterate what I stated earlier about allowing an agressive enemy to build state of the art variable aircraft and mecha after they lost. It doesn't make any sense to me, especially from a histroical perspective.

The Anti-UN lost the war, that's all we know for certain.

We used to know "for certain" that Roy hadn't flown in combat since 2007, but Macross Zero now contradicts that statement.

Speculating: the Anti-UN, in the ceasefire or peace treaty that concluded the war, may have stated that the UN can protect the rest of the world, and the Anti-UN will protect its own member territories.  Thus a need for the development and manufacture of the SV-51 (the same role as the VF-1.)  That, or the Anti-UN capitualted strategically, to give them time to rebuild, retrain, and wait until a better time to continue the war - so that they would come out as the winners.

409775[/snapback]

That is as reasonable a possibility as I've proposed. Both could be explored quite fully.

.

[Zinjo]

IMHO, SWI (Space War 1) is simply much easier to say than things like "Terrain-Zentraedi War of the Sol System."

Yes, it does imply that there was more than 1... maybe it's another untold story of the years between 2012 and 2045?

409776[/snapback]

Could there have possibly been large scale skirmishes between SDF and MPlus that just haven't been fleshed out yet in the actual timeline that could be considered SW2 to whatever.

409820[/snapback]

Wasn't the first space war between Spacy and the AUN Alliance?

Granted it wasn't large scale, but until the last month or so, neither was the Macross's "SW1"...

Edited June 22, 2006 by Zinjo

[GutsAndCasca]

Okay wait. So the AUN came up with a variable fighter before anyone else? Or at the same time? And did the AUN know about the looming Zentraedi threat? I'm perplexed about an AUN force that's so on the ball and able to "steal" technology and keep up production of some, I daresay wicked looking valks... yet when the SDF is out in space fighting a war, nobody on earth knows about it? I'd think the AUN would be blabbing it to the world. What's to shut them up?

[Zinjo]

Okay wait. So the AUN came up with a variable fighter before anyone else? Or at the same time? And did the AUN know about the looming Zentraedi threat? I'm perplexed about an AUN force that's so on the ball and able to "steal" technology and keep up production of some, I daresay wicked looking valks... yet when the SDF is out in space fighting a war, nobody on earth knows about it? I'd think the AUN would be blabbing it to the world. What's to shut them up?

410033[/snapback]

Spacy developed the OTEC technology for the fighter and the AUN stole the tech and developed their own design.

It is very likely the AUN knew of the Zent threat (they had many members who were former Spacy and OTEC personnel), which is why I like to speculate that the AUN were not actually against unification, but against the UNG's idea of unification.

They had a different ideology and the would fight for it. Both sides believed they were right and believed their way was for mankind's best interest.

Such things sparked wars and threats of wars during the Cold War era and even today.

[JB0]

Okay wait. So the AUN came up with a variable fighter before anyone else? Or at the same time? And did the AUN know about the looming Zentraedi threat? I'm perplexed about an AUN force that's so on the ball and able to "steal" technology and keep up production of some, I daresay wicked looking valks... yet when the SDF is out in space fighting a war, nobody on earth knows about it? I'd think the AUN would be blabbing it to the world. What's to shut them up?

410033[/snapback]

I'm kinda confused about how no one worked it out when Global started flying around the world going "Hey, we've got a hold full of dead people that are actually alive that we'd kinda like to unload plzkthx" on a general broadcast.

Edited June 22, 2006 by JB0

[1/1 LowViz Lurker]

But the zentradi don't use power suits that way.

The NosGer has the big guns. The QRau has enough missiles to equip a moderately-sized air force.

It seems they give power suits to the people good enough that they never wind up in melee situations.

Of course. But if shooting at close range they would need a fast turn rate if they are going to be darting about at high speed. Something that can keep up with them. Rather than the other way around. (pilot that can't keep up with the machine ie like M+) In space there might not be any kind of cover and what if all the missiles were used up like what happened in DYRL where they have to use them up just to shoot thier opponents missiles but still have to deal with a zentradi (or human) rush tactic? (in cases where there are a LOT more of them than you? Get the picture? You can't assume it is always one-on-one or the environment even allows you to shoot from afar - eg firing the missiles indoors may damage the ship or the friendlies)

And the Spartan was the only one designed for a role where speed and melee were needed.

That's like griping because a hammer does a lousy job at cutting paper.

Well a spartan is still slower than a valk from getting from place to place. So relative to a lighter mech I put it in crapper tier. Maybe amoungst it's own class (mecha which are mainly for the ground) it is speedy. That doesn't negate the fact it has limits which aren't worth highlighting. If there were a macross RTS I might not find a need for fast ground mecha with chunky feet, and instead go the more expensive option of VF but hope I am getting good value. Personally I wouldn't mind if they made the variable spartan so it can emulate the variable glaug and variable monster and add some extra ability.

We have clocks and we have radios. We don't need clock-radios but the option is there for those who do want it, and for those who like to combine or save some space or for some other reason unique to thier situation. Why can't a clock be designed to tell the time but also designed to wake you up early the way a destroid be designed to fight on the ground up close as well as move quickly to get to a new location? If the spartan is slower at fighting other fighters then you wouldn't want the spartan fighting against something better than it. But that still doesn't mean spartan with extra abilities is somehow "useless" compared to one that only has 1 main ability, so I reason it is worth rating that ability compared to other mecha as a weak point.

Destroids = threatened overall by flood attacks from aliens who are more numerous and can rush forward in great number. Speed and agility might be preferable in that instance. So I mentioned destroids being cannon fodderish, (no speed?) but left some room for destroid that can fight and are fast for thier class, (ground mech) but still being limited. (can't fly away) Like mentioning that a clock radio (destroid with some ability of a valk) might have inferiour sound to a hifi(valk), but still being usefull compare to clocks with no radio. (destroid on the ground being generally slow because it has to walk to get everywhere eg MK II monster vs a VB6)

The arms and legs don't fit into the mech's arms and legs. I think the line art shows a conventional control panel(I know Yamato's toy does). Though it doesn't rule out leg-based controls, it DOES rule out just walking to walk.

Besides, motion tracking works really well for human actions, and a lot less well for non-human actions like flying through space or shooting missiles out of your shoulders.

The big advantage is the form-fitting cockpit reduces the mech volume and surface area. Reducing surface area in turn reduces armor needed.

Well to put it simply:

Imagine if you were to train yourself to use a valk and had to learn the flight controls, robot controls, and button combinations to execute a simple move? To an alien, they might see that as robotic and unnecesary. Preferring a more intuitive control. A dedicated suit with a form suitable for space eliminating the unecessary. The same way bruce lee saw many unecessary motions in other martial arts and incorporated the more efficient ones into his style?

In many games for example there might be an option to auto lock on to your enemy to shoot them. But wait! This doesn't account for things like being able to shoot your opponent in the eye or in the leg or some other part that the computer doesn't want you to lock onto because it decided it wanted to aim for the biggest part of the mech in the midsection.

For a true ace if they want to get really surgical with thier shooting they would want to have manual control over as many things as they can rather than rely too heavily on a preprgrammed move. It would be like the difference between a mouse + keyboard control in a first person shooter over a tomb radier-esque lock on (just aim in the general direction of the target).

One is precise and up to your own skill, the other is general and easy to use for a beginner (giving them less to think about) but also sacrifice some freedom.

A good example is in how hikaru locks onto minmay and tries to pick her up by locking onto her. A giant might think that is a sucky way to perform a simple action, and over generations and generations of experience fighting and picking up weapons using manual, be so much more used to the manual method that they can't unlearn to use control styles they've been taught.

In star wars (at the end of ep4 in the scene where luke fires that torpedo to destroy the deathstar) when luke decides he doesn't want to have the machine help him, and trust his own judegment he is able to factor in small changes to make the accurate shot and perhaps there is some small memory from when he did something from sheer practice and experience that makes the difference. When the machine says "ok shoot" and your eyes respond to it and "shoot" (based on what you see) there is a small delay between when it says ok and when you actually react and pull that trigger. If at blazingly fast speeds, maybe it is best to not wait for your own eyes to see it, but to "go with your gut" and press it extra early knowing that your eye will pick it up and your muscle will react too slowly? Sort of like in martial arts when the master drops the feather in front of the student and informs him how his fingers are just too slow to catch the falling feather due to this delay. (wisdom from experience knowing of your own body's limits of being slow, giving you an advantage, because you knew from the beginning that the delay between seeing "ok" and actually pressing that trigger is enough to miss the shot)

I think they even have that element of unpredictability in the end of street fighter III when Ryu tries to catch the falling feather (actually it is a leaf but reminds me of something I saw in a kung fu movie) but is too slow and misses, mentioning he is not really ready to give up fighting yet. There are just some things you can't trust (your eyes, your own reaction speed) and so you must "guess" where and when to close those fingers to catch the falling feather/leaf in order to succeed rather than wait for your eye to first see it, and then use the slow muscles to close them. (which will be too late as the information your eyes receive is updated and changes quicker than your fingers can close to match them. A human/alien might decide to take a shortcut like aim where they "think" a moving target might change direction to rather than going by any hard evidence that they will. One factor might simply be that the target is near an opening near the roof and it is a lucky guess to shoot above where it might jump to or that that the target thinks you like to aim for its legs so it might hop to play mind games)

Just on a sidenote:

I would also like to mention that just because you can fire at something from a long distance may not be advantageous to the pilot to do so. Weapon effecitveness might be weakened from a distance due to armor so you want to increase damage by going close, the target too fast and small so it takes a damn long time to shoot it down that way, the chance of you actually hitting them in a cirtical part is lessened etc

Plus there is always the "style" of fighting of the aliens: choosing to do as much damage in a little time as possible to save ammo by getting near, or to save time by getting at decent distance first to make sure each shot counts, or to ensure the thing you shot is dead. (pilot as well as machine)

There is also psychological effect of showing the enemy you are better at dodging then they are at shooting you so you play with them by getting to a close distance to scare them knowing they can't run to a "safe" distance to avoid. At some upper limit armor might not help. The strength of a close range melee attack might be more than worth the time it takes to close the distance. (destroid for example might have a slow turn rate so getting close might make it hell on the pilot trying to defend because you are out of his field of vision. Would you take on a monster from afar?)

Edited June 22, 2006 by 1/1 LowViz Lurker

[sketchley]

Then how is it, that a defeated foe is allowed to build state of the art fighters using stolen technology, when such a thing hasn't been allowed to happen since WW1?  That doesn't make sense to allow an agressive opponent the means to re-build their arms after a "victory"

410002[/snapback]

*cough* Germany, pre-WWII *cough* Japan, post WWII *cough*

- one must study more history... I think you are misunderstanding 'defeated foe' as being sunonimous with 'ending a war.'

I rechecked the compendium, and it doesn't say anything other than 'conclusion of the UN Wars.' Conclusion? Peace Treaty? Both sides were at a standstill and neither side was defeated? Who knows. What is know is that the Anti-UN are defeated is NOT said.

You also mentioned using STOLEN technology. As in, they made the fighters AFTER the war. In the case of clear victors and losers, it could have occured while war reperations were either being payed, about to be paid, or having already been paid. A la Germany, pre-WWII, post-WWI.

Edited June 22, 2006 by sketchley

[Radd]

Then how is it, that a defeated foe is allowed to build state of the art fighters using stolen technology, when such a thing hasn't been allowed to happen since WW1?  That doesn't make sense to allow an agressive opponent the means to re-build their arms after a "victory"

Part of it may come down to what constitutes the "UN Wars"?  Are they battles between the AUN and the UNG or are they the global national wars that took place after the crash of the ASS-1?  SK could easily split the hair here and say that the "AUN War" was separate from the UN Wars.  Since the timeline is fairly specific what the UN Wars were. 

The UN War could have been the attempt to annex countries into one government, but all that resulted was a splintered world with territories where nations used to stand, some under the umbrella of the UNG and others as autonomous regions.

What constitutes the "end" of a war? There are real world examples of a war "ending", yet the fighting continues. It could be that the major part of the war was over, the A.U.N.'s back was broken, their major lands occupied or having worked out treaties to the satisfaction of the U.N. Yet, small groups refuse to give up the fight, and continue to wage a guerilla war against the U.N., striking then dissapearing again.

It's possible that SV-51 was developed in some part of the world that the U.N. had not yet stomped into the ground, or had been completed much earlier, but late enough that they could not be put into a combat role while the war was officially still on.

[briscojr84]

IMHO, SWI (Space War 1) is simply much easier to say than things like "Terrain-Zentraedi War of the Sol System."

Yes, it does imply that there was more than 1... maybe it's another untold story of the years between 2012 and 2045?

409776[/snapback]

Could there have possibly been large scale skirmishes between SDF and MPlus that just haven't been fleshed out yet in the actual timeline that could be considered SW2 to whatever.

409820[/snapback]

Wasn't the first space war between Spacy and the AUN Alliance?

Granted it wasn't large scale, but until the last month or so, neither was the Macross's "SW1"...

410003[/snapback]

Yes and no, it pretty much amounted to the AUN hijacking a destroyer blowing up the Mars base convoy and then getting blown up themselves from what I remember.

[Zinjo]

Then how is it, that a defeated foe is allowed to build state of the art fighters using stolen technology, when such a thing hasn't been allowed to happen since WW1?  That doesn't make sense to allow an agressive opponent the means to re-build their arms after a "victory"

410002[/snapback]

*cough* Germany, pre-WWII *cough* Japan, post WWII *cough*

- one must study more history... I think you are misunderstanding 'defeated foe' as being sunonimous with 'ending a war.'

Exactly my point, with the exception of Japan.

Japan was allowed to build a self defense force under close scrutiny of the US. In fact Japan doesn't have a traditional military, it is seen more as a civil service than a tour of duty, hence how often anime commanders comment on worries about being "fired" as opposed to demoted for failing a mission.

I rechecked the compendium, and it doesn't say anything other than 'conclusion of the UN Wars.'  Conclusion?  Peace Treaty?  Both sides were at a standstill and neither side was defeated?  Who knows.  What is know is that the Anti-UN are defeated is NOT said.

Very true, I concede that point. It is very vague as to any particulars.

You also mentioned using STOLEN technology.  As in, they made the fighters AFTER the war.  In the case of clear victors and losers, it could have occured while war reperations were either being payed, about to be paid, or having already been paid.  A la Germany, pre-WWII, post-WWI.

410149[/snapback]

Well that is equally vague. A side would steal technology if they are not allowed access due to an on going conflict. It isn't necessarily because it happened during a post war period. We've already established that the chronology is vague as to the nature of the "conclusion" of the UN Wars.

It has not really been established what the UN Wars were either. My reasoning for this point is this

"July ( 2000 )

Outbreak of dispute in People's Republic of Garalia in the Middle East. The frequent disputes and internal conflicts occurring hereafter in all areas of the world become collectively known as the U.N. Wars."

No where are the AUN organization mentioned.

The first time an AUN force is mentioned is:

"July (2002)

First Defensive Battle for South Ataria Island against an Anti-U.N. Army attack."

The question I pose is: Is there room for the UN Wars and a separate AUN conflict or should we assume the two are the same. Mac Zero tends to imply the first of the two questions may be more accurate.

.

Edited June 22, 2006 by Zinjo

[JB0]

In space there might not be any kind of cover and what if all the missiles were used up like what happened in DYRL where they have to use them up just to shoot thier opponents missiles but still have to deal with a zentradi (or human) rush tactic? (in cases where there are a LOT more of them than you? Get the picture? You can't assume it is always one-on-one or the environment even allows you to shoot from afar - eg firing the missiles indoors may damage the ship or the friendlies)

QRaus have laser guns in the forearms. Anyone you're in a position to punch can be perforated just as easily.

Though there IS a certain stylistic flair in lunging at someone with a fist, only to stop at the last second and unload a burst of high-energy photons into their face at point-blank range.

NosGers have handguns, presumably with their own self-contained ammo stores. LAME.

They also have a plasma cannon in their chest, though.

The QRau has "impact cannons" in the chest, and the NosGer's shoulder cannon is also an impact cannon.

While what an impact cannon actually IS isn't stated, I can't see a way for these to be projectile weapons as there's very limited space for ammunition and a feed mechanism, especially given the NosGer's cannon is mounted on a swivel.

Ammo shouldn't be a concern, as both mechs are loaded with integral energy weapons.

And the Spartan was the only one designed for a role where speed and melee were needed.

That's like griping because a hammer does a lousy job at cutting paper.

Well a spartan is still slower than a valk from getting from place to place. So relative to a lighter mech I put it in crapper tier. Maybe amoungst it's own class (mecha which are mainly for the ground) it is speedy. That doesn't negate the fact it has limits which aren't worth highlighting.

What about the Valkyrie's limits? It's very lightly armed and armored.

The GBP makes a Valk into a passable Spartan substitute, but not a great one. There's still a signifigant armor disparity, and the VF-1's hands and feet still aren't built for melee. And all that extra mass is going to greatly reduce it's speed advantage.

And while the GBP-1 has far more missiles/grenades than the Spartan, it lacks the other integrated weapons, most notably anti-infantry gear.

The Spartan is built for an entirely diffrent mission than the Valk, and is infinitely better-suited to said mission. Sure it makes a crappy Valkyrie, but the Valkyrie makes a crappy Spartan too.

If there were a macross RTS I might not find a need for fast ground mecha with chunky feet, and instead go the more expensive option of VF but hope I am getting good value. Personally I wouldn't mind if they made the variable spartan so it can emulate the variable glaug and variable monster and add some extra ability.

And the cost of a variable spartan would be... armor.

The variable Monster isn't a big issue. A Monster isn't supposed to BE in direct conflict, and if the enemy is landing hits on it, you've probably already lost. The relatively rapid deployment(it's still subsonic) of the variable design greatly outweigh the durability of a fixed-mode vehicle for the Monster.

But for a Spartan, which is designed EXPLICITLY to wade right into the thick of things and take hits, a loss of armor is a very serious shortcoming.

We have clocks and we have radios. We don't need clock-radios but the option is there for those who do want it, and for those who like to combine or save some space or for some other reason unique to thier situation. Why can't a clock be designed to tell the time but also designed to wake you up early the way a destroid be designed to fight on the ground up close as well as move quickly to get to a new location?

Because a clock-radio, while capable of functioning as a radio, doesn't do a very good job of it. That's why they never REPLACED dedicated audio systems.

The clock radio is a Valkyrie, the stereo system is a Spartan.

If the spartan is slower at fighting other fighters then you wouldn't want the spartan fighting against something better than it.

Better is a relative term.

If you deploy a Valkyrie into a situation where it WILL take damage, it WILL be destroyed.

If you deploy a Spartan or Tomahawk into a situation where it WILL take damage, it has the armor to shrug it off and come back home later.

There's less chinks in the armor because there's no variable-mode joints, many of the joints that ARE there have thick armor skirts or sleeves, and the solid parts are ALSO far more heavily armored.

Destroids = threatened overall by flood attacks from aliens who are more numerous and can rush forward in great number. Speed and agility might be preferable in that instance.

Actually, that's exactly where you WANT a frontline combat destroid.

If you've been rushed, then there's too many guns for a Valk to be safe, and way too many targets for it's gunpod to deal with.

Remember, the Valkyrie is very lightly armored and very lightly armed.

So I mentioned destroids being cannon fodderish, (no speed?) but left some room for destroid that can fight and are fast for thier class, (ground mech) but still being limited. (can't fly away)

Again, it's a tradeoff. Durability is NOT something you can just ignore because "my army can run away if people start shooting."

End part 1 of 2.

Edited June 22, 2006 by JB0

[JB0]

Like mentioning that a clock radio (destroid with some ability of a valk) might have inferiour sound to a hifi(valk), but still being usefull compare to clocks with no radio. (destroid on the ground being generally slow because it has to walk to get everywhere eg MK II monster vs a VB6)

But you got it backwards.

The destroid is the device that does one task and does it well.

The VF is the device that CAN do another device's task, but at greatly-reduced effectiveness. The clock is a fighter plane, the radio is a battroid.

Well to put it simply:

Imagine if you were to train yourself to use a valk  and had to learn the flight controls, robot controls, and button combinations to execute a simple move? To an alien, they might see that as robotic and unnecesary. Preferring a more intuitive control. A dedicated suit with a form suitable for space eliminating the unecessary. The same way bruce lee saw many unecessary motions in other martial arts and incorporated the more efficient ones into his style?

In many games for example there might be an option to auto lock on to your enemy to shoot them. But wait! This doesn't account for things like being able to shoot your opponent in the eye or in the leg or some other part that the computer doesn't want you to lock onto because it decided it wanted to aim for the biggest part of the mech in the midsection.

For a true ace if they want to get really surgical with thier shooting they would want to have manual control over as many things as they can rather than rely too heavily on a preprgrammed move. It would be like the difference between a mouse + keyboard control in a first person shooter over a tomb radier-esque lock on (just aim in the general direction of the target).

One is precise and up to your own skill, the other is general and easy to use for a beginner (giving them less to think about) but also sacrifice some freedom.

Neither requires powered armor as we know it, though.

You could make a VF with similar controls.

In fact, we KNOW Glaugs have quite flexible control schemes, as they're capable of using their arm cannons as melee weapons, which was almost certainly NOT part of the designer's intent.

Like I said, the big advantage is that the QRau and NosGer are less massive vehicles.

Just on a sidenote:

I would also like to mention that just because you can fire at something from a long distance may not be advantageous to the pilot to do so. Weapon effecitveness might be weakened from a distance due to armor so you want to increase damage by going close, the target too fast and small so it takes a damn long time to shoot it down that way, the chance of you actually hitting them in a cirtical part is lessened etc

In space combat, the issue will be more the incredible lead times than power dropoff.

There's no atmosphere to scatter beams or slow down projectiles, so a long-range shot should still be as powerful as a close-range one(except for imperfect beam focus, which appears to be minimal for overtech weapons).

But since you have such incredible visibility and range, you can start shooting at each other while still light-seconds, or even light-minutes, apart. For a projectile weapon, this means you WILL miss, because the enemy can see it coming ages before it gets there and change directions.

This is likely why the zentradi use energy weapons and missiles exclusively. One arrives much closer to when the initial firing is visible(at the same time if they're using lasers), the other can adjust for evasive maneuvers.

Plus there is always the "style" of fighting of the aliens: choosing to do as much damage in a little time as possible to save ammo by getting near, or to save time by getting at decent distance first to make sure each shot counts, or to ensure the thing you shot is dead. (pilot as well as machine)

Saving ammo is likely a foreign concept to the zentradi, as they use energy weapons, and overtech thermonuclear generators fit massive fuel stores into very small spaces.

It's like not using your car's turn signals to save gas.

Sure it affects things, but not enough to worry about.

The humans are the ones that have to worry about saving ammo, because they use predominantly projectile weapons and the VF's gunpods and missile racks have very small ammo capacities, with the exception of hardpoint micromissile pods and the FAST pack "backpack".

The GBP-1 can be ignored as it isn't really intended for space combat, and is a very poor design for such.

There is also psychological effect of showing the enemy you are better at dodging then they are at shooting you so you play with them by getting to a close distance to scare them knowing they can't run to a "safe" distance to avoid.

That's Milia-style combat.

She wasn't engaging in safe and rational combat , she was treating it as a game.

Most zentradi just shoot stuff.

At some upper limit armor might not help. The strength of a close range melee attack might be more than worth the time it takes to close the distance.

A melee attack is likely a joke compared to the other weaponry available. It's very massive, sure, but it's also very slow, and inflicts damage on BOTH vehicles. Only half of the energy in a puch goes into the point of impact on the target. The other goes right back into the fist and down the arm.

QRau arms are also rather poorly designed for melee combat. There's signifigant risk of damage to the laser guns from either a missed punch or debris released during the attack. Any pilot engaging in such activities would have to take special care to ensure the lasers were kept out of harm's way.

(destroid for example might have a slow turn rate so getting close might make it hell on the pilot trying to defend because you are out of his field of vision.

The ONLY destroid intended to deal with aerial combat is the Defender. And it was designed to do it at long range.

If there's QRaus in the area, there's Valkyries scrambled to deal with them. Because that's what they were designed for.

You would NEVER see a one-on-one Spartan VS QRau in an actual combat zone. The Spartans and Tomahawks would be blasting at grounded mecha while the VFs handled airborne ones. And generally in groups, because these are combat mecha, not Texas Rangers.

The entire anti-destroid argument assumes that armor and firepower are worthless, and that the intended role of all vehicles is that of fighter plane.

There's a reason that most real-world nations still own and operate tanks. The fighter plane is NOT the perfect tool for every job.

Would you take on a monster from afar?)

I'd probably have to, given that the Monster would have a signifigant defensive force between me and it on both land and air.

Remember, the Monster isn't a macho guy that runs into fights unprotected. There will be Spartans, Tomahawks, and Defenders* on the ground around it, and Valkyries in the skies above it.

So if I come at this Monster from the ground, I've got to wade through Tomahawks and Spartans shooting at me while other Spartans are trying to beat me to death.

If I come at it from the air, I've got Defenders and Valks trying to shoot me down.

And the Monster is STILL lobbing artillery shells at my base while this is going on.

* I was mistaken in calling the Defender a jury-rigged hack. It was developed on Earth. Only the Phalanx was developed on the Macross.

End part 2 of 2

[sketchley]

Good points above.

If one considers that the battroid mode of the Valkyries is like the infantry, and the destroids are the tanks, it starts making more sense.*

Gerwalk mode could equal (attack) helicopters, and jet mode is, well, the jet.

Both VFs and Destroids serve vital functions on the Macross battlefield - along with conventional vehicles as well. The problem we are facing is that the producers of Macross animations focus on VFs above all else. So... other stuff probably exists. Probably...

... though in this day-and-age, of jet fighters being optimized for multiple roles, but not really the master of any, it makes sense for the VFs to do likewise.

*As I know it, infantry are mobile, difficult to hit, and able to hide in the terrain. However, they are easily eliminated with low-power weapons. Tanks are less-mobile, easier to hit (bigger sizes, slow moving), and are only able to hide behind the larger structures on the battlefield.

[1/1 LowViz Lurker]

QRaus have laser guns in the forearms. Anyone you're in a position to punch can be perforated just as easily.

Though there IS a certain stylistic flair in lunging at someone with a fist, only to stop at the last second and unload a burst of high-energy photons into their face at point-blank range.

NosGers have handguns, presumably with their own self-contained ammo stores. LAME.

They also have a plasma cannon in their chest, though.

The QRau has "impact cannons" in the chest, and the NosGer's shoulder cannon is also an impact cannon.

While what an impact cannon actually IS isn't stated, I can't see a way for these to be projectile weapons as there's very limited space for ammunition and a feed mechanism, especially given the NosGer's cannon is mounted on a swivel.

Ammo shouldn't be a concern, as both mechs are loaded with integral energy weapons.

But whether or not it would be safe in the open to only shoot those weapons from a long range is another thing.

The point is: Destroids are so vulnerable because they can barely move or survive. Mobility takes precedance over armor. So why not (if you have better speed - take my bubble gum crsis anaglogy into consideration where the robots reach a certain limit that they can' even lay a finger on the smaller and faster Knight Sabers' powered armor) attack them from the sides where you have a positional advantage and in a range where you can actualy see what the hell it is you are shooting? (as opposed to fighting front on and in the open)

The zentradi have superior numbers so why should they just play the weaker side in a defensive posture? If you have superior numbers you don't want to waste time and give the opponent time to do other things like recharge the SDF1 main gun for new (free) shots. It might be that the aliens like to do things as quickly and efficiently at a higher level and not care about loss of life since they have so many. The longer you wait, and draw the fight out, the more chance the weaker side has to prepare and the more they can kill by taking them on one-by-one in a sequential manner.

There is no need for an alien race to line up to fight, just attack all at once in a rush manner. As the destroid defend a certain "zone", the ones that slip through the cracks get onborad to better positions to fire from (where they can avoid heavy fire and do more damage) and disable the defenses or take out the leader. They actualy tried it in DYRL when the zentradi create a diversion and the only thing fast enough to cover great distance in time was the valk. In gundam if a mobile suit can take a nice focused shot at the bridge then the people onboard giving the commands are history. It could determine who wins or loses.

I often wonder why they just didn't send all thier millions of ships to earth to destroy it in the beginning. Would have ended space war I quicker.

Destroid = tank, Valk = beats tank, (because it can attack from as many positions it wants playing both defence and offense at the same time) Qrau = beats valk. (just my asumption from tv series. Maybe it was just so that milia can have a dramatic entrance)

In martial arts when you see those flowing motions, they are done that way to save energy and move efficiently. There is an ebb and flow to save time and increase response times. If you can be both defensive and ofense in one smooth move, it takes less effort, less risky and tries to do two things to put you in a position to both avoid your opponents attacks (lessening the damage to you) while making it harder for them to avoid yours. (getting as many people within a position to surround the important targets and do enough damage before reinforcements get there or giving time to repair - although the aliens can't do this )

Now I know the destroid may have other advantages because of thier design, but generally you can agree that a valk in gerwalk firing its gunpod while strafing around at high speed it much more effective (more valuable to me who has to plan the attack) because it is a more efficient way of killing stuff. Once you get within a certain range of the slower mecha, thier slow turning rate becomes an issue. I assume that Qraus move like a ninja (sorta like the bubble gum crisis powered armor vs the slower and much heavier police use mecha) due to being for elite pilots who can handle the machine at those speeds, while the destroids although conveniently lined up as a defensive weapon in rows, would be limited in where they can attack from.

If I can attack you from the sky, the ground, from the sides, and choose my line but you can't, (because you are weighed down) I am more free in my options. Macross Zero shows this beautifully when you see Nora dodge all the fire from the cheyenne anti-air fire, circle around then get to close range enough range to take those slower vehicles out. (you got to make sharp turns at that distance, no different from why a bmx bicycle is more suited to sharp cornering than a racer is because the bmx has a smaller turning circle and make more efficient movement, or how in a FPS if you have your mouse set to high sensitivity you can generally perform MUCH better than people who use a keyboard and slow controls with slow turning rate, as proven in tournaments.)

A good analogy might be those AT-AT in star wars. They move like poo, have heavy armor but also a bigger target and slower to attack the flying targets. The flying vehicles can manuever to attack from various postions beyond the line of the main weapons. (sorta like why mobile suits in gundam are so effective in taking out ships and they need other mobile suit to defend against them)

It is much much harder to hit many small fast moving targets that keep changing thier formations and splitting your attention by attack from wide angles simultaneously than it is to have a group of them all bunched up. If I have an anti warship equiped valk that can attack you in a position where the destroid are too slow to cover the distance because they have so much armor, my valk is a huge threat just from speed alone. So to adapt to that maybe a variable destroid would fill a gap.

In space combat, the issue will be more the incredible lead times than power dropoff.

There's no atmosphere to scatter beams or slow down projectiles, so a long-range shot should still be as powerful as a close-range one(except for imperfect beam focus, which appears to be minimal for overtech weapons).

But since you have such incredible visibility and range, you can start shooting at each other while still light-seconds, or even light-minutes, apart. For a projectile weapon, this means you WILL miss, because the enemy can see it coming ages before it gets there and change directions.

This is likely why the zentradi use energy weapons and missiles exclusively. One arrives much closer to when the initial firing is visible(at the same time if they're using lasers), the other can adjust for evasive maneuvers.

Well I figure that range is important because not all humans can focus on moving targets from massive distances as easily as they can if they close in and try to get a better shot. Which is why max could take out the zentradi with his markmanship skills and choose to not damage the enemy by going for parts of the legs. Just because your weapon can shoot that far doesn't mean all pilots have a steady enough hand to be able to make an accurate shot.

So I reason that less skilled pilots are going to close in to a distance where they can pepper the enemy where they have a high hit ratio. These are not sitting ducks. Perhaps the zentradi enjoy seeing the enemy before firing or thier laser overheat like the head turret laser on the VF1 if they miss too often? (leaving them open for a short while?)

Just because you have great range on a weapon doesn't mean you can kill a target in less time than if you get a little closer and focus those shots onto a single target to eliminate one whole enemy. (and not just damage them, but kill one so it can't fight back) In macross Zero, shin could barely lock on to nora so it's not like they are going to make the task easy for your machines and weapons to do all the work for you.

What about the Valkyrie's limits? It's very lightly armed and armored.

The GBP makes a Valk into a passable Spartan substitute, but not a great one. There's still a signifigant armor disparity, and the VF-1's hands and feet still aren't built for melee. And all that extra mass is going to greatly reduce it's speed advantage.

And while the GBP-1 has far more missiles/grenades than the Spartan, it lacks the other integrated weapons, most notably anti-infantry gear.

The Spartan is built for an entirely diffrent mission than the Valk, and is infinitely better-suited to said mission. Sure it makes a crappy Valkyrie, but the Valkyrie makes a crappy Spartan too.

I agree it is better suited to that specific role. But how useful was the role to begin with if:

-the enemy has a weapon that can outmanuever it

-can attack it from whereever it wants

-the enemy doesn't need heavy armor because its speed allows it to get beyond the range of the weapons and thier hits do more damage any, negating some of the advantages of the armor (ie the only reason we could kill a few of the zentradi ships in the rain of death was thanks to the grand cannon and that was a surprise attack: its all about range and speed, and reaction times.)

If you are the weaker side with less numbers, you need to be more agile and quick with better skills to fight an enemy bigger or more numerous than you or you will lose. It's the same reason the powered suits in bubble gum crisis could do all those acrobatic moves and be such a threat. It is a case of putting a lot of power in a small space and having weapons that can be enough to beat that armor. Tanks are not invincible. Valks are not invincible but they look like they can survive longer so long as the pilot is good. (same with Qrau grunts)

Maybe I got it wrong and the destroid pilots were just unskilled and cannon fodderish. But until the creators make a macross series like what they did for gundam with 8th msteam we'll never know.

And the cost of a variable spartan would be... armor.

The variable Monster isn't a big issue. A Monster isn't supposed to BE in direct conflict, and if the enemy is landing hits on it, you've probably already lost. The relatively rapid deployment(it's still subsonic) of the variable design greatly outweigh the durability of a fixed-mode vehicle for the Monster.

But for a Spartan, which is designed EXPLICITLY to wade right into the thick of things and take hits, a loss of armor is a very serious shortcoming.

Well you used the hammer being crap at cutting paper analogy. I was just saying there are tiers of usefullness.

1. Clock = destroid spartan (dedicated to one function, function not necessarily proving superior in usefullness to the next tier)

2. clock radio = destroid which is variable like the monster which can be transported easily with advances in technology. The clock radio can also tell the time like the clock. The clock is not superior than the clock radio at telling the time just because it is dedicated to telling the time.

3. Hifi = valk (can fly as dedicated fighter. It's dedicated fighter would mean it can out manuever the variable destroid)

Better is a relative term.

If you deploy a Valkyrie into a situation where it WILL take damage, it WILL be destroyed.

If you deploy a Spartan or Tomahawk into a situation where it WILL take damage, it has the armor to shrug it off and come back home later.

There's less chinks in the armor because there's no variable-mode joints, many of the joints that ARE there have thick armor skirts or sleeves, and the solid parts are ALSO far more heavily armored.

Fair enough, but the question is: will that role be as useful as often? When the znetradi use the powered armor (which I assume is more suited to giants) they get the advantage of the mecha and thier own body size. Destroids are pretty small and the zentradi are pretty big. In DYRL when kamjin punches the valk I assume a zent with a hand carried gun, plus a mech to ride in, means they have advantages over humans running around as little mice in slow moving robots which can't jump around and stuff like the regult could. At one point a regult was seen running at the same speed a valk was hovering in gerwalk. So being giant with giant control might be more suitable to thier style of attack because they feel more of thier own manual dexterity is involved in the control of the machine.

Ok so there is not much difference between the control of the power suit and valk. But from what I gateher in macross plus, having your own brain control stuff or having as fast a control system as possible is better than computer assisted stuff like locking onto a target to pick the thing up. I tried to link the difference in controls between Tomb Raider (which is very mechanical) to mouse+keyboard controls in a FPS.

The latter is infinately superior because the user has full manual control over what it is they are shooting or aiming at. Meaning you can take out a machine's legs, aim at a weak unarmored point in the target, go for a head shot to disable the head turret (headshot for FPS) if you so choose.

So the aces get the machines that allow this freedom and don't want thier control systems to be screwed with because they were trained to use these for genreations upon generations. (no more than you want me changing your OS settings by forcing you to use your mouse at a different sensitivity) So I make this assumption that maybe powered suits still have this advantage over valks in that the ace pilots might be better with thier own unique controls that match thier own muscles, or custom fit for thier hands and don't want to give up the superior manueverability in space combat. (seeing milia strafe so easily and reverse thrust at the exact distance must have taken practice.)

I think the idea is that if you can spin on a dime with ease you have more time to react to something in an open environment therefore you can take on more targts at any one time as you are not limited by slowness of the machine itself. Generally the Qrau moves very quickly in space but it also can stop very quickly. It might be that the Qrau is the equivalent to what Char's Red Zaku was to the normal green Zaku. Part skill of the pilot but also it scrifice some armor to do more work in less time if it means lighter overall frame.

Better is a relative term.

If you deploy a Valkyrie into a situation where it WILL take damage, it WILL be destroyed.

If you deploy a Spartan or Tomahawk into a situation where it WILL take damage, it has the armor to shrug it off and come back home later.

There's less chinks in the armor because there's no variable-mode joints, many of the joints that ARE there have thick armor skirts or sleeves, and the solid parts are ALSO far more heavily armored.

I know but I am assuming the armor become less relevant if the thing just stands still and the enemy gets close enough to tip it over or do something like shoot a leg or get it from a funny angle that makes the pilot spend lots of time trying to see what it is attacking. That's why I mention buble gum crisis. In that the police use these chunky and bulky mechs but the boomers are like really fast and organic and humanoidish in appearance. So the powered suit allows the knight sabers an advantage in this situation where speed and agility give them an advantage. Again it might just be the skill of the Qrau pilots but they seemed to move about quick even for the valks in the tv series. (maybe until the fast pack came along, but so did char in gundam until the gundam came along)

Actually, that's exactly where you WANT a frontline combat destroid.

If you've been rushed, then there's too many guns for a Valk to be safe, and way too many targets for it's gunpod to deal with.

Remember, the Valkyrie is very lightly armored and very lightly armed.

Ok but getting there to defend is important to seal up any cracks. Destroid move like poo and can't fly like valks. See the opening scene to DYRL for example.

Again, it's a tradeoff. Durability is NOT something you can just ignore because "my army can run away if people start shooting."

But the best pilots need to go into the hairest situations and rescue at the last moment (like the cavalry) so they need a fast moving machine with enough power to do those crazy aerobatic maneuvers. (see the last sequence in DYRL where hikaru dodges all those shots) Anything that improves efficiency (like lighter frame) can't hurt. (not everything can be solved with brute force) This is why max can still kick people's ass even though he is some skinny weak guy. I admit though that because the valk is the "hero mecha of choice" it has to be portrayed as the savior of the day, but that's how I like it! A sportcar is just much sexier than a truck. They are both powerful but one is just more aesthetically pleasing to me to watch and has the power in its speed.

If you like wrestling watch the destroid slug it out. If you like kung fu where the people move fast enough to disarm the people using guns then watch kung fu movie. I guess it is best to have a good balance (pinpoint barrier punch, plus speed to get that close) and be good at all, which is why I think valks can be mulitpurpose and serve just as well as destroid in thier dedicated role. (its just a matter of skill since valk pilots need to learn to fly a plane too. But the investment is worth it: flying a valk and letting loose a reaction missile and running away like a sissy is more effective than waiting for the enemy to get in range of your guns while they sneak behind your back and side to stab you to death slowly)

Saying a spartan is the only one good at close range fighting is like saying short stocky guys are the only good fighters because they can take a punch. It just might be that like Max or Kaifun they chose a more efficient way of dealing with the opponent that doesn't require as much muscle or weight. IE borrow the opponents energy and use it against them.

In fact it was max that was able to get behind Britai and restrain him long enough to throw him out into space. Without speed, maybe he would not have been able to get into this situation? It might just be a case of leverage being more advantageous. Although we have hammers to smash stuff, we also have sword to cut, but the hammer unlike the sword cant be used to defend, as the sword can deflect a blow even though using a shield would be more effective. But the shield comes with its own costs like carrying extra weight and slowing the person down so they take longer to get from point A to point B to defend or attack. Because the newer valks have sheilds and pin point barrier punch, a combination of methods is always better than one. Fast speed, powerful attack, good defense etc in a single thing.

Edited June 24, 2006 by 1/1 LowViz Lurker

[JB0]

But whether or not it would be safe in the open to only shoot those weapons from a long range is another thing.

Why not shoot at short range too? There IS something besides "sniper" and "boxer."

The point is: Destroids are so vulnerable because they can barely move or survive. Mobility takes precedance over armor.

Which is why the Army has retired tanks for HUMVEEs?

And the destroids that NEED to move CAN move. A spartan is relatively nimble. Not as much as a battroid or GERWALK, but again, it's built for a diffrent role(tank VS HUMVEE).

So why not (if you have better speed - take my bubble gum crsis anaglogy into consideration where the robots reach a certain limit that they can' even lay a finger on the smaller and faster Knight Sabers' powered armor) attack them from the sides where you have a positional advantage and in a range where you can actualy see what the hell it is you are shooting? (as opposed to fighting front on and in the open)

Because they have guys to the side too?

You're still thinking 1-on-1, which is NOT realistic.

And you can see what you're shooting at from quite a distance thanks to amazing overtechnology inventions like telescopes.

We already fight at extreme ranges now, and technology is INCREASING, not decreasing, the effective range of everything other than melee weapons.

The zentradi have superior numbers so why should they just play the weaker side in a defensive posture? If you have superior numbers you don't want to waste time and give the opponent time to do other things like recharge the SDF1 main gun for new (free) shots. It might be that the aliens like to do things as quickly and efficiently at a higher level and not care about loss of life since they have so many. The longer you wait, and draw the fight out, the more chance the weaker side has to prepare and the more they can kill by taking them on one-by-one in a sequential manner. There is no need for an alien race to line up to fight, just attack all at once in a rush manner.

NEITHER SIDE would take ANYONE on one-by-one. A platoon of Tomahawks would be taking potshots at a platoon of Regults from the moment they were visible.

I don't think I've said a single word about ANYBODY lining up to do a single-file charge.

As the destroid defend a certain "zone", the ones that slip through the cracks get onborad to better positions to fire from

So the zentradi will rush the Tomahawks, losing signifigant men and machines in the process. They will penetrate the Tomahawk lines, to be greeted by... the Spartans built and equipped to deal with a close-combat situation.

(where they can avoid heavy fire and do more damage)

Or could if there weren't more destroids behind the line they just penetrated.

They actualy tried it in DYRL when the zentradi create a diversion and the only thing fast enough to cover great distance in time was the valk.

Don't forget when Millia chased Max into Macross City.

Neither situation involves destroids in their natural habitat. In fact, both situations involved all ship's defenses being baited away from the area in advance.

And of course, there was the reversed Daedalus Attack, in which most of the ship's destroid compliment was decimated by a surprise attack by an overwhelming force, and the few remaining for the defense of Macross City were hopelessly outnumbered.

Macross has had very little ground combat. Most if it was during reconstruction, where a shattered infrastructure left surprisingly little in the way of military bases, and the high speed of a Valkyrie was a necessity for rapid response to uprisings.

But when they attacked protected facilities, like the airport, they were met with... destroids.

[JB0]

In gundam if a mobile suit can take a nice focused shot at the bridge then the people onboard giving the commands are history. It could determine who wins or loses.

It COULD, if it was a viable strategy.

But there's usually anti-mecha defenses, and lacking the sensor-jamming magic of minovsky particles, rushing the bridge is pretty much suicide for the zentradi.

The Phalanxes and Defenders aren't marched out onto the hull for fun. They exist solely to pick off anyone that gets too close.

In fact, the anti-aircraft Defenders were the vast majority of the Macross' mecha compliment, outnumbering the Valks 2:1 and every other destroid by much larger margin.

The Macross had no shortage of anti-mecha defenses, and rest assured they were concentrated around the ship's vital areas. The thing had roughly a square kilometer of surface area, and there were five hundred anti-aircraft turrets running around on it. While the shape of attack mode makes defense far more complicated(the bridge is no longer on a major face of the vessel), they DO make a point of showing destroids stationed around the bridge. So we know the defense of other areas of the ship was sacrificed for the bridge, as in attack mode bridge defenses aren't useful for other areas.

http://macross.anime.net/mecha/united_nati...ross/index.html

I often wonder why they just didn't send all thier millions of ships to earth to destroy it in the beginning. Would have ended space war I quicker.

Indeed.

But we didn't seem to be a serious issue at first. Do YOU regularly employ high-explosives against house flies?

The main fleet wasn't considered a necessity until the defection of Britai's fleet. At which point we ceased to be an amusing prey and became a genuine threat.

Destroid = tank, Valk = beats tank, (because it can attack from as many positions it wants playing both defence and offense at the same time)

The VF-1 has a teleporter and drones now?

Jets don't replace tanks. They fill completely diffrent roles.

I would feel very insecure in a nation with you as head of defense.

Qrau = beats valk. (just my asumption from tv series. Maybe it was just so that milia can have a dramatic entrance)

The QRau is quite likely better than any battroid or GERWALK. Fighter mode... the QRau seems to make up for it's fundamentally broken aerodynamics with raw engine power.

It's weapons loadout is more omnidirectional. The missiles don't all point in one direction, nor do the forearm guns.

A VF in GERWALK or battroid has similar versatility of the gunpod, but there's only one vs the QRau's 2 forearm guns, and it's very limited on ammo.

In martial arts when you see those flowing motions, they are done that way to save energy and move efficiently. There is an ebb and flow to save time and increase response times. If you can be both defensive and ofense in one smooth move, it takes less effort, less risky and tries to do two things to put you in a position to both avoid your opponents attacks (lessening the damage to you) while making it harder for them to avoid yours. (getting as many people within a position to surround the important targets and do enough damage before reinforcements get there or giving time to repair - although the aliens can't do this )

And if you can point and laugh when they hit you, you can pummel them with impunity.

That's the design principle behind both a tank and a front-line destroid.

The fact is, in any crowded combat zone, you WILL get hit.

People tend to forget this because the US military grossly outclasses every other military on Earth. More and better equipment means that we can pretty much strike with impunity until the time comes to send in the infantry.

Now I know the destroid may have other advantages because of thier design, but generally you can agree that a valk in gerwalk firing its gunpod while strafing around at high speed it much more effective (more valuable to me who has to plan the attack) because it is a more efficient way of killing stuff.

Effective in what way? It's very light on ammo and very light on armor. But it IS fast.

Once you get within a certain range of the slower mecha, thier slow turning rate becomes an issue.

You mean the ones firing at you from long range, with a far greater ammo capacity, while you pelt them with rounds designed to take out lightly-armored aircraft?

Good luck with that.

I assume that Qraus move like a ninja (sorta like the bubble gum crisis powered armor vs the slower and much heavier police use mecha) due to being for elite  pilots who can handle the machine at those speeds, while the destroids although conveniently lined up as a defensive weapon in rows, would be limited in where they can attack from. 

Again, the QRau has to deal with anti-aircraft fire as well as, well, aircraft. It does NOT have a straight run into the middle of the destroid formation.

Your ENTIRE strategy assumes that the enemy has no defenses.

[JB0]

Meh, screw it...

Edited June 24, 2006 by JB0

[sketchley]

Uhm... what was the topic of this thread?

[KingNor]

Low Viz, your logic makes my brain hurt. JBO nice try :-)

[1/1 LowViz Lurker]

Look he was the one that mentioned that I should not have included spartans in my assessment of the destroids being slower than valks. (Assumsing I'm ignorant that the spartans are the fastests of thier class)

My point was only that:

If you are in a destroid, forced to walk on the ground and can't follow me when I fly behind some mountains and pelt you to death with gunpod fire and use my flying abilty and speed to fly circles around you, then it stands to reason I have more options in how I fight.

I don't care that the destroid are "dedicated ground fighters". Specialising in fighting up close doesn't change the fact that valks have more mobility the way the powered suit has more mobility and speed over the police use mecha in bubble gum crisis.

If I can out fly you, and get to such a speed that you can't even get within range to shoot at me, while I can catch up to you easily then I have massive advantages.

Tanks are not invincible just because they have more armor. Valks are not invincible because they have more speed.

But that speed makes a huge difference because I means you can survive those hairy situations longer and get more done and cover great distances in short time. (by the time I have finished up and used up my ammo I can go back to reload and refuel and be back for more action)

He tells me that a hammer is not used for cutting paper and tries to negate the advantage that there are machine that can do several tasks.

As if a spartan, because it is specialised for close combat, then that automatically means a valk can't beat a spartan in close combat "since it is not dedicated"

I countered with: we have a clock radio which has a clock and a radio in one. The clock in the clock-radio doesn't suddenly make the clock worse in telling the time that the dedicated clock does, right?

Similar thing here: A valk can use its speed to fight up close the same way a sportscar can be used to avoidbeing crushed by a well-armored truck. The truck might be heavier, but it might also be less efficient in how it uses itself in a fight. It can haul a heavy load, but it is also bigger and easier to hit. But while in a truck, you don't feel like you have that freedom that a fast moving machine has because the weight hampers how fast you can kill targets spread out from point to point.

When a valk transforms into a battroid it has increased armor. But it still manages to cover great distances (thanks to fighter mode) that can allow for faster responses to get there.

Maybe this is why the better pilot might shed some armor because he knows he is too good to get hit and wants the speed to fight more offensively? (kill more things)

It's part of fighting too to avoid your opponents blows! He looked at it from a oversimpolified viewpoint.

Now if they had variable destroids these would be the equivalanet of the Clock-radio. (it can do the tasks the dedicated version could just as well, but it has the bonus of flight and speed, meaning it can get to from point A to point B easily and incorporate this ability into how it fights. Get your butt to the location, fight, then go to the next area. Time is a factor in a battle too. So I mention the ebb and flow of combat. You might be able to punch your opponent in the head, but while doing so, (with a heavy weapon) it might ALSO leave you open too while punching(so the opponent might recover quickly and punish with a counter that does even more damage than you did to him - this is why I mention the zentradi in a way that suggests they are the Goliath and we the humans as the "David" who have to have speed or some way of avoiding a blow. You can't fight a giant like you are a giant yourself)

A good analogy to this is in the last fight in samurai champloo against the opponent who had no openings. (perfect defense) The hero needed to win the match by allowing himself to be open on purpose and taking a free hit, just to leave his opponent open (while he is attacking the opening the hero made for him on purpose) to do a blow on the opponent that would end in victory. The point is: while a person is striking they are leaving themselves open to attack at that moment in time when they are not blocking (reason being you can't block and strike at the same time, your arms can only be in one place at a time). A destroid is a bit like a boxer refusing to admit his armor will fail, and that his punches might be too slow for him to retract his arm back in time to block again. In macross there are no full barriers, (well for mecha that small) so you can only block in one direction. Sometimes it might be better to avoid the hit altogether and strike only at the moment when the opponent strikes and misses (when they can't block because they've left themselves open) Many instances of this when the Qrau launches the micromissiles for example. It is better to avoid the blow altogehter. (seek cover, or dodge. Not stand and eat the damage)

If you are out in the open and face insurmountable odds, the chances of getting out alive increase if you can haul butt from the fight. But if you stand there and can't fly away, you are as good as dead. So yes running away can be important if you have less numbers. The feeling I got was that the aliens outnumbered the humans but had to hold back.

I think he makes some good points, but I make some good ones too. Armor won't protect you forever! Because the enemy has bigger numbers they can fight more offensively and surround you. It's why the newer valks with shields and PPB and ability to fly would outclass a dedicated ground mecha any time. Because they are not limited to fighting just on the ground. The fact you have better armor just means it will take a little longer for my gunpod to slice through it, but the fact that you can't fly, means I can choose when and where to fight you. That is all I'm saying.

I wasn't trying to say that tanks are not useful, but that for this particular world a valk can just do more things (thanks to variable modes) so it is a better investment. It can both sneak around to terrain that ground vehicles can't get to as well as transform and hide and use cover like an destroid would. The penalty for having less armor means you die from getting hit, but the speed leaves you less open to being hit.

Anyway this all began when someone asked why use powered armor over valks. I was just mentioning that perhaps the aliens elite LIKE weapons they are more familiar with the same way some like to use manual vs auto transmission. The suit migh offer a comfort that the aliens don't feel when using human weapons because they spent so much of thier practice in a giant sized machine.

Edited June 26, 2006 by 1/1 LowViz Lurker

[KingNor]

Truely astounding.

[1/1 LowViz Lurker]

Again, the QRau has to deal with anti-aircraft fire as well as, well, aircraft. It does NOT have a straight run into the middle of the destroid formation.

Your ENTIRE strategy assumes that the enemy has no defenses.

Not none. Just that speed and time is what makes the offensive strategy important. The aliens with thier superior numbers, can leaving the main defense for thier main attack force, while the faster ones rush forward and slip through the cracks. Meanwhile the valks rush to the areas of importance to defend against these guys. If these guys can get far enough its over. You can't stop what you can't chase. The destroids can only be in one place at a time while a valk can take advantage of its ablity to fly to where it needs to, transform and fight where ever.

You only thinking in terms of aliens when they hold back thier forces. We aren't supposed to be able to hold out indefinately is all I'm saying. So speed and agility and survival is impportant. After we shot the zentradi with the grand cannon we should have expected to die from a blow from a giant. (superior numbers, more guns, more ships etc) Agility might be needed more. (we fly in, nuke those phuckers, then fly out of range or fold our butt out of there)

And as for the point about zooming in to fight from a distance: in the movie that didn't happen. Just because you have zoom does not mean it is easy to hit a tiny targt from a long distance with that zoom. Any tiny sudden movement of the machine can put you off-target by heaps. So your hit percentage is low. And by blowing up an image, any tiny movement they make means you got to zoom back out just to see what it is you are looking at and where they moved. While you are trying to hit a zigzagging moving target, (blown up on your monitor with movements that are very jittery) that target might be slowly closing in or ready to fire its missiles on you. So its now time for the sniper to dance if it wants to live. The sniper now has to keep moving to avoid hits from the enemy, and cancel maximum zoom because there is no more cheap hits from a distance. While your moving to avoid, chances are you will be fighting at medium-short range if there are many targets! (That is to say, while you are busy trying to aim at one enemy, there are 5 others rushing forward to close the distance at maximum speed to surround you to make it harder for you to get all of them - not all pilots are max jenuis accuracy!)

Instead what we do is hide behind cover and make ourselves hard to hit (go prone) or by constantly moving (out in an open space - but this requires a good turn rate and light frame, right? Destroids move like crap, but gerwalks can hover) or closing in to get a better shot (where a target is easier for us to hit like in a small corridor)

This is why I think max had better chance to beat milia in the mech fight because milia had a bigger machine, and they were in a confined space.

It might be that both fly at such fast speed, that they don't get a chance to lock on long enough to keep the gunsight steady enough to get a good shot. Destroids don't even fly so they would have even less chance. And aliens with energy weapons may have unlimited shots but they are force to guide those shots if they want to move onto new targets and kill more things before the time is up. So closing in and fighting up close might be "faster" because aliens might have an easier shot and can kill more targets in a shorter time than if they had sat back at long distance. So even if a destroid has more ammo, and specialised in anti air, the fact it can't move makes it a sitting duck. Valks can at least move in a situation where they are swarmed.

So overall I put it at a lower level of ranking to other mecha.

-Spartans being weak for not being able to fly

-anti air destroid not good at close range.

-monster being weighed down by armor (too specialised to move around unlike the variable version which is more threatening)

-Valks being good at various tasks while not being too weak at what it is not dedicated to. (so you can still fight reasonable well in close as you can in the air or against long and medium ranges. Thier weak armor being made up for by mobility, faster turning speed, less chunky body parts etc)

Edited June 26, 2006 by 1/1 LowViz Lurker

[sketchley]

I see a lot of talk on armour, destroids, VFs, and combat tactics... question: how does it relate to the POLITICAL CLIMATE OF MACROSS???

[1/1 LowViz Lurker]

The anti un stole the un designs, and it has got to be able to happen the same way it can happen in gundam: somebody defects. Someone jacks the secret weapons and sell it to other enemies, or the arms dealers create conflicts to make the selling of weapons easier helping one side if it looks like it is about to lose. (you can't sell anything in times of peace)

Ie anti un are allowed to exist to make an example of why we need stronger defense and more funding for more powerful weapons. The titans did it, and letting gato get far enough allowed them to create the earth equivalent of what happened to zeon (zabi family takes over so they can have a dictatorship and then go and conquer the rest of the world) when char's family was assasinated. (was it his dad that was killed?)

The anti-un, like gato, are probably used by the UN as the scape goat for any kind of terror. Because there is so much secrecy over aliens, they need an opponent to justify spending all this money on weapons so the public doesn't get suspicious. (giant robots had to be kept secret - "but why humanoid in shape" the press would wonder) So I think they created the "unification wars" both to get everyone united in reverse engineering the alien tech in secrecy, but also to allow for the advances you see as both sides compete for the technology and refine thier weapons. (similar to macross plus where both must compete for the contract) They need a war that will result in the best that earth can come up with to stand a chance against whatever it was that might come back to retrieve the ship and the technology. You can't accurately tell if you have the best unless both sides are fighting in realistic levels of danger so that is the true "purpose" of that war.

The struggle for power was real, but why not use the enemy to your advantage in finding answers for you? (let the AUN progress just a little then crush them after they come up with a fighter using the stolen tech, all the while having eyes and ears within thier hidden bases?)

Edited June 26, 2006 by 1/1 LowViz Lurker

[sketchley]

Eh? If it is similar to Macross Plus, then why the need for fighting? Competitions for the nth generation of high tech weapon of war can occur peacefully. (JSF, YF-22 vs. YF-23, etc., but to name a few.)

I do agree that wars and fighting allow for a real situation to test out new weapons and technology. HOWEVER, the causes of the UN Wars are different.

Note that the compendium does state warS, implying that there is more than one (yes, it could be the same groups fighting a series of small wars that end, and then flare up again a few months or weeks later; akin to the brushfire wars. Though that is doubtful.)

Please keep in mind that both the (real world) UN, and Japan don't support the ideological paradigm of the 'military industrial complex,' like the USA does. In fact, a number of anime have deliberately critiqued it (Patlabour II, GiTS SAC 2nd Gig, etc.).

I will keep your theory in mind, but as I see it, there is a big hole in it: the loss of military equipment, and trained personnel. Both of which are needed in the massive arms build up to counter the (at the time perceived) alien threat. Also, IMHO, I believe there are other things going on - things that other members posted earlier in this thread.

Edited June 26, 2006 by sketchley

[1/1 LowViz Lurker]

I will keep your theory in mind, but as I see it, there is a big hole in it: the loss of military equipment, and trained personnel. Both of which are needed in the massive arms build up to counter the (at the time perceived) alien threat. Also, IMHO, I believe there are other things going on - things that other members posted earlier in this thread.

The aliens might not have been a threat to some groups. Like when sara predicts great destruction coming as a result of war, it could be viewed that the aliens were here to punish the evil do-ers and like the people in "V", (scared of them) thought they could escape with them from earth by allying themselves or making a deal with them. Loss of military equipment may have been necessary or preferable if they wanted a new world order that they could control under the permission of the aliens if they helped them "punish" the people they saw as evil here on earth.

If people are going to fight wars: why not give them a war so horrific, so terrible and so risky (that is you have to suffer to gain, and there is no garuantee you will gain even if you win) that they wold be too scared to fight another one ever again?

By having weapons, you could at least use these as a backup for when the aliens refuse to ally themselves to you. (I am assuming some humans knew the aliens were coming from the beginning but unsure if this god of thiers would be appeased even if they begged on thier knees)

Edited June 26, 2006 by 1/1 LowViz Lurker

[sketchley]

That's reaching...

[1/1 LowViz Lurker]

Well considering that Sara is more likely to sympathise with the bird human in macross zero, I dunno..

Like indiana jones there could be some people who specialise in the study of these people. Knowing about thier secret abilities and believing whatever ancient prophecies they read about in anticipation of a big event.

In independance day they had a group of people who stood on top of buildings thinking the aliens would be friendly and had a party for them. The aliens were hostile but it was too late to do anything after that point. So maybe the people who know about the aliens or have theories about these aliens from stories handed to them from generation to generation and the priestesses with the levitation ability, develop some kind of backup plan for when the aliens don't want to be nice? (the point being how can we pay people to study this stuff without money. Where does the money come from if not from profits through war? Kill two birds with 1 stone. 1. create wars so horrific that people will get sick of them and stop fighting and remember the horror of it 2. make way for the coming invaders and worship them as god or help them like the people in "V". And .....if it goes all horribly wrong use the weapons to fight if there is no option open and the aliens just want to kill you.)

The mere mention of aliens would send the world into panic. They had to keep it secret or all chaos would break out. (like the panic caused by the War of the Worlds radio play) The anti-UN would serve that purpose of being able to be blamed because they were a real enough threat to be a plausible excuse.

Both sides would have to be ignorant of thier role in the grand scheme of course. The people in this group merely "use" either side against each other and watch them both. Not letting one have too much power that they can just wipe the other cleanly off the map. (very similar to the philosophy of the "Gray Witch" character in Record of Lodoss War: neither good nor evil. Just adding enough chaos in the world by trying to balance each side to make people scared to fight against each other, ..as a way to ensure peace. If you've seen it, you'll find that the gray witch doesn't really care who she used as pawns as to her it was a matter of balance: someone has to suffer in order for another to gain. If you can't destroy it,(evil) maybe try to tame it and direct it for a positive outcome.)

Edited June 26, 2006 by 1/1 LowViz Lurker

[sketchley]

You do realize that you changed your stance on the Anti-UN 100%, do you? From: both sides fighting for dominance, to one side fighting because they want to get in good with the aliens.

As a personal favor, can you not include references to other productions (or summaries of other productions) - as they muddle the issue on what point you are trying to make exactly - they also make reading and deciphering your posts (specifically what points you are trying to make) nih impossible.

Please & thank you.